Ubu Yoshimasa Tachi from the early kamakura period

[ChrisM]

My photography journey continues, this time with a Macro lens added in for some fun. For this, I wanted to start bringing in the fine details. From an interest viewpoint:

 

1. I find the rust on the Tang very visually interesting, especially as it transitions from the tang into the habaki area. 
2. The kissaki, of course, is always fascinating to look at in great detail. 
3. That little spot of rust right near the kissaki is interesting - and it got some extra oil tonight as I put things away! 

 

From a visual interest viewpoint, with just macro shots I found the overall image quite dull. I had to bring in the blade and the sayagaki to give me enough visual context to tell what's going on, at which point the image become more interesting. 

 

The hardest part here, now that I've got basic lighting tamed, is figuring out what NOT to show. Each of the macro shots has fantastic detail that only gets more interesting as one zooms in. 

 

The tachi shown here is an Ubu Yoshimasa from the early kamakura period with Tokubetsu Hozon papers. Tenobe-san's sayagaki, translated via Markus Sesko, says:

Quote

Yoshimasa from Yamato Province
[This blade has an] ubu-nakago and bears an old-looking and unpretentious two-character signature. The smith is not listed in the meikan records, but the jiba reflects the characteristic features of the Tegai School. The blade is of a simple and unadorned interpretation and is full of delicate nuances.

 

和刕吉正
生茎ニ古拙ナ二字銘ヲ有シ銘鑑ニハ漏レルト雖モ地刃ニハ手掻派ノ特色ガ窺ヒ知ラレ古朴而滋
味豊也
刃⻑弐尺壱寸八分半
時在癸卯歴如月
探山識「花押」

 

Washū Yoshimasa
Ubu-nakago ni kosetsu na niji-mei o yūshi meikan ni wa moreru to iedomo jiba ni wa Tegai-ha no
tokushoku ga ukagai shirare koboku shkamo jimi yutaka nari.
Hachō ni-shaku issun hachi-bu han
Jizai mizunoto-usagidoshi kisaragi
Tanzan shirusu + kaō

 

 

 

[Rivkin]

It is interesting if the papers mention early Kamakura as the description suggests about 1300-1330... or maybe as late as 1500.

Also an interesting nakago end for something ubu.

[ChrisM]

@Rivkin What makes you think the range is 1300s? I don't know enough here to have any historical opinion and am pretty much just parroting what people more educated than I have told me. Please, tell me more about what you see! 

 

Via Markus Sesko, who has forgotten more than I will even know, I got this:

Quote

As for the age, it is difficult to tell without a clear shot of the sugata, and I think that the now slightly smaller than original kissaki make it appear older. My impression is that early Kamakura could be correct. Looking at the Jūyō data, the NBTHK appears to be very careful as to date anything back to Heian. Most of the early Senju’in works they also only go as for as to say “at least early Kamakura.” The only Jūyō that I can find where they go out of the way and clearly say Heian is labelled with Ko-Senju’in (110280021). So, with them issuing the paper without Ko, I tend to think that it is not Heian.

[Rivkin]

There is some discrepancy on when Tegai had began, but generally the range is between 1280 and 1310-1320. If its Tegai-related its no earlier than that.

It can be that its Senjuin that looks like Tegai... Is it mentioned in papers as Senjuin?

Still generally the earliest Senjuin goes by ko Senjuin. Whether this is Heian or later is debatable, it can still be early Kamakura even with ko.

The worst case scenario: as of now there is no identification in papers or sayagaki of school which is certain to be Kamakura, no mentioning of the period explicitly, no reference to Kamakura smith. There is reference to Tegai which is generally a late school.

 

How the blade looks like:

Sugata of this type is a difficult thing to say the least. Koshizori with fumbari by itself can be early, late Kamakura, can be 1400s.

The kissaki is small compared to the blade, but that's not definitive for many reasons. The blade appears to be a bit too wide for the period, but again its really hard to be definitive without the exact measurements.

 

What is certain is that its short at 2 shaku plus a bit, with a short nakago. This not at all common for early examples especially Yamato which did not do some fancy Yamashiro kodachi that often.

Nakago is not heian by profile. There are just no Heian (i.e. Munechika and the likes) features here - how shinogi behaves, overall profile. Its very interesting whether its end is original or was altered.

The work itself is a rough Yamato style. Usually early Senjuin is a bit more interesting, but maybe its just tired etc. etc.

 

So its hard to be definitive but I am at loss whether any papers/sayagaki actually hint towards such early origin (I don't see it) or whether there is any particular feature here that is 100% early Kamakura. If there would be jifu utsuri or something like that it would have made to sayagaki. 

 

[ROKUJURO]

Chris,

unfortunately, the photos are not as clear and sharp as my old eyes would like to see them. I am sure there is still some room for improvement with your new equipment!

In arranging the photos, you should not show the NAKAGO upside-down. That is not the way they are looked at.

[Jussi Ekholm]

Congratulations on the sword and thank you for posting it.

 

I must confess I was wishing I could have afforded that particular sword, as I felt it was a great deal. Back then it was with Hozon paper to den Senjuin (伝千手院) and no sayagaki. So it is super interesting to see Tanobe mentioning Tegai features. I had put it on my files as Kamakura without more specifications, I know the Japanese seller mentioned Late Heian - Early Kamakura but I have found the datings by the dealer being bit optimistic in many cases.

 

Signed and ubu Yamato tachi from Kamakura period is in my books a super find. Yes the smith is unknown and length is short but you can't have everything. I am happy this went to a good home of fellow NMB member.

[Franco D]

One thing to keep in mind is that the earliest swords began being copied even in early times. Which then begs the question as we analyze, kantei, a sword further, "is it live or is it memorex?" Now, the other thing to keep in mind at this point is that there are some things that smiths were very good at copying, but almost inevitably there will be details that give away the copy. This is not to say that the copy isn't an excellent sword on its own, it's just not the original.

 

Regards,

[ChrisM]

 

On 11/28/2023 at 9:50 AM, Jussi Ekholm said:

It is super interesting to see Tanobe mentioning Tegai features.

 

For sure - I had already purchased it before Tanobe had seen it and was really interested to see what he said. Especially the "Ubu" part was a surprise to my uneducated brain. 

 

On 11/28/2023 at 9:50 AM, Jussi Ekholm said:

Yes the smith is unknown and length is short but you can't have everything.

 

I am happy this went to a good home of fellow NMB member.

 

If your ever find yourself in the Greater Seattle area, give me a shout. Happy to do some show and tell!

[Spunjer]

which school is older, Senjuin or Tegai? sorry, just learning

[Lewis B]

On 2/26/2024 at 11:24 PM, Spunjer said:

which school is older, Senjuin or Tegai? sorry, just learning

Senjuin is considered the oldest of the 5 Yamato schools.