Would you get it?

[nihon]

https://www.aoijapan.com/katana：-bizen-koku-tomoyasu-re-tempered-ko-bizennbthk-hozon-tokenconsignment-sale/

Signed ko-bizen piece but it was classified as a re-temper.

[Tohagi]

It's still a fantastic sword for alf the price... I would probably consider it.

 

Best regards,

 

Eric 

[Lewis B]

Personally speaking the retempering would put me off at that price. It's no longer what the original smith intended. I would compare it to an old master that has had large areas overpainted by a second hand. 

 

Sort of related, but when a dealer sells something on consignment does it suggest they are not convinced either for some reason or another. It seems many of the these consignment pieces have a 'story'. 

[Jussi Ekholm]

It is extremely interesting sword, personally I would like to see some verification that NBTHK appraised this as specifically Ko-Bizen Tomoyasu. I know that Aoi state so in their website.

 

I think NBTHK in general is very conservative in their attributions. In all my years of searching I have not been able to find a single sword by Ko-Bizen Tomoyasu, so this would be a first one that I encounter. Given how extremely rare attribution it would be I am curious why so quick sale before the certificate and so low asking price.

 

There are other Tomoyasu smiths from Kamakura period whose work I have found but even they are extremely rare just having found a single signed piece per smith.

[SteveM]

I'm curious about the sayagaki. Anybody know anything about the writer, Sekizan? 

Looks similar to Satō Kanzan's writing. 

[Robert S]

That nakago is... odd.  The portion with the signature appears to have been attached to the sword at some point, yet the portion itself appears to be suriage.  Makes me wonder if this might be a concatenation - a portion of a nakago off of a very old, broken sword attached to a different blade.

[Shugyosha]

I don't think so - given the position of the marks on the tang relative to the mekugi ana, it suggests the sort of wear from habaki that you might see on an old blade - at least you would hope that something so obvious wouldn't get past the NBTHK.

 

For me the key issue (if I were fortunate enough to have the wherewithal to buy it) would be Jussi's point: having to buy blind without sight of the paper. Sekizan seems to be unknown to the internet so the sayagaki doesn't necessarily add anything for those who didn't know him so that doesn't help.

 

It will be very interesting to see how the bidding goes on this - it's possible to speculate that it might be a Juyo candidate or higher based simply on its rarity and historical value.

[nulldevice]

6 minutes ago, Shugyosha said:

I don't think so - given the position of the marks on the tang relative to the mekugi ana, it suggests the sort of wear from habaki that you might see on an old blade - at least you would hope that something so obvious wouldn't get past the NBTHK.

 

For me the key issue (if I were fortunate enough to have the wherewithal to buy it) would be Jussi's point: having to buy blind without sight of the paper. Sekizan seems to be unknown to the internet so the sayagaki doesn't necessarily add anything for those who didn't know him so that doesn't help.

 

It will be very interesting to see how the bidding goes on this - it's possible to speculate that it might be a Juyo candidate or higher based simply on its rarity and historical value.

Are there examples of many re-tempered blades at Juyo+? I'd imagine the much more detailed Juyo papers would have lots of commentary available on the retempering. 

[Shugyosha]

I don't know and I suspect that this is one for Jussi to answer if anyone can. This thread mentions a sai ha Sadamune retempered by Echizen Yasutsugu who is known to have retempered a number of important fire-damaged blades in the 17th century and I would be surprised if there weren't more amongst those blades that made Juyo - but obviously that's opinion not fact.

 

 

[Franco D]

Quote

Would you get it?

 

How would you know without first studying it in hand. 

[Dereks]

19 minutes ago, Franco D said:

 

How would you know without first studying it in hand. 

 

Do you think everyone is flying to Japan to check the swords before ordering from AOI? 

[Schneeds]

Depends on why you want it.

 

The fact that Jussi can't find another example of a Tomoyasu is perhaps the most interesting part about it for me. 

 

If the papers hold up as Aoi claims you'd have a signed Heian blade with an extreeeeeeeemly rare attribution. From a historical perspective alone I'd say that's worth the current bid. 

 

It does beg the question though as Jussi pointed out, why not wait for the papers on hand?  That would almost certainly increase the bids, and i would think command a hefty price.  I too am very curious where the final price ends up. 

[lonely panet]

Just maybe it had older papers, that where suspicious and got lost??

[PNSSHOGUN]

It is rather interesting that despite being Saiha, it still retains Utsuri.

[Franco D]

4 hours ago, Dereks said:

Do you think everyone is flying to Japan to check the swords before ordering from AOI? 

 

You're missing the point.

[nihon]

13 hours ago, Jussi Ekholm said:

It is extremely interesting sword, personally I would like to see some verification that NBTHK appraised this as specifically Ko-Bizen Tomoyasu. I know that Aoi state so in their website.

 

I think NBTHK in general is very conservative in their attributions. In all my years of searching I have not been able to find a single sword by Ko-Bizen Tomoyasu, so this would be a first one that I encounter. Given how extremely rare attribution it would be I am curious why so quick sale before the certificate and so low asking price.

 

There are other Tomoyasu smiths from Kamakura period whose work I have found but even they are extremely rare just having found a single signed piece per smith.

Considering your opinion, makes me want to get it but I agree, we need to see the nbthk papers to make the decision to get it or not

[Bugyotsuji]

From the tone of the Aoi description one gets the impression that they were a little disappointed by the NBTHK Hozon attribution. Did they actually expect it to fare better, and did it force them to start with a lower price?  Do they still entertain the possibility that this blade may be better than the paperwork states?

 

(I checked the original Japanese and it needs some editing as of this moment. Two or three howlers in the description. Editor off sick? See if you can spot them!

時代:平安時代後期1184年 841年前
体配:身幅尋常な重ねしっかりとしており
反りが深くつき、精良な地鉄となる。
地鉄：小板目肌実によく詰んで精良な地鉄となり、りが微かに現れ鎬地は小板目、小杢目肌で柾目が現れず、鎬地にはところどころ焼きが見える。
刃紋：小沸出来直刃うるみ心となり、匂口が深く元々無垢鍛えであった作品です。帽子丸みを帯びた潤み心の作品ですがしっかりとしております。よく再刃は無価値と称する方も多いでですが、3度くらいは現代刀でも刃文は入りますので再刃とは言っても全くダメな刀剣とは申せません。日光にも多くの刀が再刃として保存され、康継が焼き直した作品がかなりあるのです。刀剣博物館では再刃となりましたが、そのことを了解してオークションに参加してください。

葵美術より一言：　備前国友安は友成の子供で、さすがに貫禄のある作品です。本作は刀剣博物館では再刃と鑑定されましたが、地鉄もよく刃紋もよく入り素晴らしい作品です。

時代背景：平安時代、罪名で正真の作品は滅多にでるものではありません。)

 

PS I am off sick, myself!

[nihon]

30 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

From the tone of the Aoi description one gets the impression that they were a little disappointed by the NBTHK Hozon attribution. Did they actually expect it to fare better, and did it force them to start with a lower price?  Do they still entertain the possibility that this blade may be better than the paperwork states?

 

(I checked the original Japanese and it needs some editing as of this moment. Two or three howlers in the description. Editor off sick? See if you can spot them!

時代:平安時代後期1184年 841年前
体配:身幅尋常な重ねしっかりとしており
反りが深くつき、精良な地鉄となる。
地鉄：小板目肌実によく詰んで精良な地鉄となり、りが微かに現れ鎬地は小板目、小杢目肌で柾目が現れず、鎬地にはところどころ焼きが見える。
刃紋：小沸出来直刃うるみ心となり、匂口が深く元々無垢鍛えであった作品です。帽子丸みを帯びた潤み心の作品ですがしっかりとしております。よく再刃は無価値と称する方も多いでですが、3度くらいは現代刀でも刃文は入りますので再刃とは言っても全くダメな刀剣とは申せません。日光にも多くの刀が再刃として保存され、康継が焼き直した作品がかなりあるのです。刀剣博物館では再刃となりましたが、そのことを了解してオークションに参加してください。

葵美術より一言：　備前国友安は友成の子供で、さすがに貫禄のある作品です。本作は刀剣博物館では再刃と鑑定されましたが、地鉄もよく刃紋もよく入り素晴らしい作品です。

時代背景：平安時代、罪名で正真の作品は滅多にでるものではありません。)

 

PS I am off sick, myself!

I think their disappointment is from it being labeled as a saiha

[nihon]

10 hours ago, Schneeds said:

Depends on why you want it.

 

The fact that Jussi can't find another example of a Tomoyasu is perhaps the most interesting part about it for me. 

 

If the papers hold up as Aoi claims you'd have a signed Heian blade with an extreeeeeeeemly rare attribution. From a historical perspective alone I'd say that's worth the current bid. 

 

It does beg the question though as Jussi pointed out, why not wait for the papers on hand?  That would almost certainly increase the bids, and i would think command a hefty price.  I too am very curious where the final price ends up. 

It's a consignment sale, that's why they listed is before they received the papers

[Bugyotsuji]

Ah, I had imagined that they had sent it off and that the result had been announced to them. Usually it then takes a couple of months for the final certificate to arrive, so they had simply posted a photo of a generic NBTHK envelope.

[Schneeds]

6 hours ago, nihon said:

It's a consignment sale, that's why they listed is before they received the papers

I would want a specific guarantee on that papered attribution from Aoi before bidding.  A lot of times they state a guarantee in the listing when forth coming. They did not on this one. 

[Lewis B]

8 minutes ago, Schneeds said:

 A lot of times they state a guarantee in the listing when forth coming. They did not on this one. 

Perhaps because its a Consignment piece, in which case the buyer protections go out the window. How would they know it papered Ko Bizen Tomoyasu without having the papers in hand? Word of mouth?

 

7 bids now and price has hit 1mil yen

[Schneeds]

1 hour ago, Lewis B said:

Perhaps because its a Consignment piece, in which case the buyer protections go out the window. How would they know it papered Ko Bizen Tomoyasu without having the papers in hand? Word of mouth?

 

7 bids now and price has hit 1mil yen

Could be. If they had the papers in hand though why wouldn't you just provide a photograph?  Maybe theyre desperate for revenue and can't wait. 

[Shugyosha]

I assume that it's what Piers said: that it has only just been to shinsa and they're waiting on the papers otherwise you would just hand over the papers with the sword wouldn't you? It does seem to be a very odd way to go about things.

[Jussi Ekholm]

I just checked Nihontō Meikan and it lists 3 Bizen Tomoyasu (友安) smiths.

 

1. Ko-Bizen c. 1184-1185 (元暦)

2. Nagashige lineage c. 1362-1368 (貞治)

3. Muromachi smith c. 1457-1460 (長禄)

 

Then Ise Jingū has a tachi from Bizen Tomoyasu that is not among those three, and they state that their sword is from late Kamakura period.

 

I do not know the person writing sayagaki but if I look to me it seems like there is possibly faint 寛弘頃 that would indicate it was appraised c.1004-1012.

 

Also I am not sure if there has actually been characters on the opposite side of the tang too.

 

For me there are lots and lots of questions towards this blade. From the information that Aoi has written I believe the blade has passed recent NBTHK Hozon shinsa. I have never sent in items but I believe you get information about your results little bit after shinsa, and the actual paperwork can take currently quite long time to arrive. I don't care at all the blade being saiha, I am just extremely curious about the attribution NBTHK gave to the blade. However I think we might never actually see the papers as it will be sold at the auction. If it really is a sword by an unicorn smith like the Ko-Bizen one, I am just wondering why this is done in such a hurry, as I feel that blade would be very valuable even as retempered.

 

I have recently gone through lots of old NBTHK magazines, and there were long articles of Echizen Yasutsugu and his copies and retemperings of famous blades. I have also been lucky to visit Nikkō Tōshogū several times as they have had a project where modern top smiths in 1980's have retempered some of their famous burned swords. They are displaying 3 at a time and I have so far seen 6 different ones. As I am not that good on details, I think I would not be able to tell if a sword has been retempered.

[SteveM]

4 hours ago, Jussi Ekholm said:

I do not know the person writing sayagaki but if I look to me it seems like there is possibly faint 寛弘頃 that would indicate it was appraised c.1004-1012.

 

Yes, that is correct. According to Aoi, this Tomoyasu is the son of Tomonari (友成), who is supposed to have been the origin of the Ko Bizen school (c. 987). Which would place his son (Tomoyasu) around the 1000s (Kanko era, as indicated on the sayagaki). But this leads us down a little rabbit hole, as there is a divergence of opinion about Tomonari. 

 

Anyway, without getting into those details, I can only repeat what Jussi says; a blade that appears to be from the early 1000s, that has a plausible signature from Tomoyasu, would be interesting from a historical perspective even if it were retempered. A real unicorn. 

 

 

 

 

[nihon]

Base on nihontoclob.com, there seems to be 2 ko-bizen tomoyasu. Aoi seems to think the sword is form the juei era

[nihon]

https://www.kinghous...-kodachi-by-tomoyasu

Another tomoyasu tachi I found but it seems like a gimei sword