Kencho Katana from the Nanbokucho Period

[Lukrez]

 

I am reaching out to request your valued insight regarding a katana attributed to Kencho, one of Chogi’s most talented students, from the Nanbokucho period.

 

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Gq4PjjbG2COquNmAn3zPD29yWcFiuTZN?usp=sharing

 

Kencho’s work is often difficult to distinguish from that of his master, Chogi, due to the strong similarities in their styles. Indeed, many blades originally attributed to Chogi are believed to have been crafted by Kencho.

 

Kencho’s swords typically exhibit certain features derived from the Soshu tradition, including a broad and powerful sugata, a shallow sori, and a thick kasane with minimal hira-niku. The steel is often soft, composed of an itame-hada mixed with mokume, and exhibits a dense, tight grain with nie forming chikei—a notable feature, particularly given Bizen’s soft steel. In some works, one may observe utsuri, though it is not common. The hamon is usually nioi deki, with pronounced nie, and the ha is often rich in ashi and yō, featuring sunagashi, inazuma, and kinsuji activities in blades with an abundant presence of nie.

 

In light of these characteristics, I would be most grateful for your expert opinions on whether this katana in question can be confidently classified within the typical output of Kencho and Chogi. Does it align with the distinctive features associated with their works, or are there any notable discrepancies that would warrant reconsideration?

 

Additionally, I would appreciate any feedback on the overall condition of the blade and its authenticity based on the details provided. I am eager to learn from the collective expertise of this esteemed community.

 

Thank you very much for your time and insights.

[Brian]

Suggest you convert them from Apple .heic format to regular jpeg.
No-one wants to deal with heic

[Lukrez]

So you can't open them?

[Rivkin]

Applying light from above does not work with nihonto except one specific case which requires significant skill.

Safest procedure is to place light source on the side. Or take a light stick and move it around the blade until you find where it makes the nie sparkle.

The problem is Chogi was not trying to work in one single Soshu (or Bizen) style. He had basic understanding of them all - Norishige's, Sadamune, Hiromitsu.

So there is a lot of variation.

But he also has "typical style". First and foremost there is nothing coarse. Hamon is nie based, but nie never gets above certain size, its very fine grained. sunagashi of almost exactly the same nie particles that are not ko nie, but not large either. 

Same about hada - very bright, filled with ji nie, but very consistent and fine grained itame, can be mixed in with mokume elements. Again, nothing really breaks out - chikei, mokume it sort of blends in.

There is tobiyaki/yubashiri but it does not get to full hitatsura. Depending on polish you can more or less clearly see nioiguchi - not as bright as with Go, but better than many Soshu. The outline of hamon does not follow Mino with its togari or Hasebe, it has a certain Bizen feeling to it but at the same time is much less periodic and the shape of gunome (choji?) is much more varied along the blade but at the same time the hamon is always wide.

Kencho and Chogi can be very similar and attributions sometimes go back and forth.

 

[Hoshi]

Hi fellow Swiss, 

 

Quote

In light of these characteristics, I would be most grateful for your expert opinions on whether this katana in question can be confidently classified within the typical output of Kencho and Chogi. Does it align with the distinctive features associated with their works, or are there any notable discrepancies that would warrant reconsideration?

 

The photos are difficult to interprete, but based on what you have, I'm afraid that they do not conform to Kencho's characteristics in a way that makes me confident in the attribution. 

 

Kencho (And Chogi) for that matter, have a different hamon shape and structure. The nie is likewise too intensively expressed (from what I can discern by squinting) in your photos. I can't make pronouncements on the Boshi, as the photos make it difficult to discern what is the hardened area. There is what appears nie kuzure, and an undelineated nioiguchi composed of blotchy nie. 

 

The simplest way is perhaps to think of Kencho as being more wild than Chogi, with sharper ups and down, and an overall more nervous appearance, whereas Chogi expressed a more wavy-like, more in the alpha frequency band to take a radio analogy. Kencho by contrast, goes into much higher frequencies of ups and downs. Some blades fall in the middle and can go back and forth. Both smiths were probably close to equal in skill.

 

Kencho is one of the unfairly classified smiths by Fujishiro as Jo-Saku. His Tokubetsu Juyo record would point that he is at least Jo-Jo saku, or even close to Sai-jo saku. Now, this is based on the tradition of attribution, in reality we have only three signed works left by him and they do deviate from the canonical Kencho in significant ways. The Honami judges that did issue kiwame to Kencho are also the unreliable ones, so we don't have a lot to go with.

 

Kencho is really a vibe of Soden-Bizen. Some of his works are truly wonderful though, and some even prefer Kencho over Chogi or Kanemitsu. 

 

Regarding the "kizu" folder - the Kirikomi is not what you should be concerned about. There are two Fukure in that blade, one in the ha. This is a signifiant condition issue. 

 

Good luck in your search, I would recommend skipping this one. 

 

A great Kencho attributed sword, however, is a solid path that I would recommend pursuing. For reference, here is a legitimately excellent Kencho: 

 

https://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2025/important-Japanese-swords-and-armour-from-the-paul-l-davidson-collection/a-soden-bizen-school-katana-attributed-to-kanenaga

 

It's one of the great heights of the Nambokucho period's Bizen tradition. 

 

Good luck! 

[Lukrez]

Thank you so much for the detailed and insightful analysis! Your expertise has really helped me gain a much clearer understanding of the differences between Kencho and Chogi, as well as the condition issues with the sword. I truly appreciate the time and effort you've put into providing such a thorough evaluation, and I will certainly take your advice into consideration moving forward.