（Token Bijutsu No.552）

Nihon Koto Shi

(History of Koto)

By Dr. Honma Junji

(6)

(P.34)

4. Ko-Bizen

The term ‘Ko-Bizen’ has meant Bizen smiths who were active and swords that were made in Bizen Province up to the Genryaku Era (1181). Bizen Province has produced the largest number of fine swordsmiths throughout the history of the Japanese sword and overwhelmed other provinces between the middle of the Heian and the Kamakura Periods. General workmanship of Bizen swords is as follows; their sugata looks somewhat less elegant than that of Yamashiro swords but more powerful. Blades occasionally have a wide mi-haba and a less tapering sugata. I have seen just one tanto of those times by a Bizen smith and the blade has short ha-watari as tanto, uchi-zori and furisode-nakago. The jigane looks more powerful than that of Yamashiro swords. The itame and ko-itame-hada of Bizen swords are a little rougher than those of Yamashiro swords but finer than that of Hoki swords. Though, they occasionally produce fine jihada like Yamashiro smiths or rough jihada like Hoki smiths in accompanied by ji-nie, chikei and midare-utsuri is sometimes seen on the ji. Utsuri is one of important features of Bizen swords and becomes conspicuous on their works from the middle of the Kamakura Period. They temper ko-midare in ko-nie-deki accompanied with thick nioi-guchi and their hamon in nioi-deki is never seen. They favour carving bo-hi on the blade which normally has kaki-nagashi end but occasionally a square end. Also there are some extant works with su-ken in the groove.

The classic workmanship mentioned above was still demonstrated by Ko-Bizen smiths even after the beginning of the Kamakura Period. It must be remembered that some of their smith names and workmanship had been succeeded for a long time. For instance, there is a tachi by Tomonari with the date of Katei Era (1235-1237) and there is no doubt that it is much later work than ‘Hotaru-maru Tomonari’ of the Imperial sword collection and a Tomonari tachi owned by the Yamamoto family. Also there is an extant work of Tsunemitsu (belonging to the Masatsune family) with the date of Shoan Era (1299-1301) and the blade still maintains the old workmanship of the Ko-Bizen school. In addition Yoshikane signs in two different styles and one of his tachi, with mei in large characters, has a date of the Kencho Era (1249-1255). I think that we should reset the active term of Ko-Bizen smiths and get rid of the later limit of the Genryaku Era. The active period of famous Ko-Bizen smiths has yet to be studied too.

(Reference oshigata)

‘MASATSUNE’

‘MASATSUNE’

‘TOMONARI’

‘BIZEN (NO) KUNI TOMONARI’

‘BIZEN (NO) KUNI TOMONARI’

‘MASATSUNE’

‘MASATSUNE’

(P.35)

Tomonari, Masatsune, Nobufusa and Kanehira are representative swordsmiths of the Ko-Bizen school of which extant works have been confirmed. Amongst them, Tomonari of the Eien Era demonstrates the most classic and dignified workmanship. It has been said from old times that there are three generations of Masatsune and the theory can be accepted inferring from various styles of his mei and many extant works, but it is very difficult to classify each generation from their workmanships. Generally speaking, amongst Ko-Bizen smiths, Tomonari is the most skilful smith in making sugata and Masatsune in forging jigane. In every way, Tomonari and Masatsune are the best two smiths of the Ko-Bizen school. There is a smith called Sanetsune who appears to belongs to the Masatsune family and left a fine tachi which has very long ha-watari of about 90 cm. and is owned by the Toshogu Shrine of Mt. Kuno. There a few more extant works of Sanetsune but they are of mediocre quality.

Takahira, Sukehira and Kanehira used to be recognised as master smiths and Bizen San-Hira who are equal to Tomonari in quality in old days. But no extant work of Takahira has been confirmed, there are a few extant works of Sukehira (their mei have yet to be studied) and Kanehira has gained a reputation because of the existence of ‘O-Kanehira’ The o-dachi by Kanehira has a very wide mi-haba, and grand and less tapering sugata with ikubi-kissaki. There is a 0-dach by Sukemura similar to O-Kanehira and Sanetsune of the Toshogu Shrine of Mt. Kuno. This sugata is normally seen from the middle of the Kamakura Period. It must be noticed that this kind of o-dachi is already seen in the works of the Ko-Bizen school and similar swords with wide mi-haba and long ha-watari of the Shoso-in Depository like muso-to. The jihada of O-Kanehira is dense ko-itame-hada with ji-nie and midare-utsuri appears on the ji. The hamon is ko-midare mixed with ko-choji in ko-nie-deki then many ashi and yo are seen inside the hamon. The boshi is midare-komi then turns back with short kaeri. The skill of Kanehira who made this tachi shows him to be a formidable smith and no inferior to Tomonari and Masatsune in skill. There is no doubt about the authenticity of the mei ‘Bizen no Kuni Kanehira Saku’ as the chiselling style corresponds to that of other Ko-Bizen smiths. This o-dachi must be a work of Kanehira who is one of the Bizen San-Hira. There is a smith who signs ‘Kanehira’ but in different style. He appears to be one of Ko-Bizen smiths but a different Kanehira.

Nobufusa is a Ko-Bizen smith but there is also a smith called Nobufusa in the Ichimonji school of the very early Kamakura Period. The details of Nobufusa who belongs to the Ichimonji school will be described later. Actually, it is very difficult to differentiate the workmanships of Ko-Bizen of the late Heian Period and Ichimonji smiths of the very early Kamakura Period. Tachi by Nobufusa owned by the Anpuku-ji Temple and the Sakai family of the Shonai clan are to be the works of the late Heian Period. There seems to be no extant work of Nobufusa that is attributed to a smith of the late Heian Period. Therefore, there is a possibility that the name of Nobufusa was overlapped in the lists of the ko-Bizen and Ichimonji Schools. He is superior to Masatsune in forming sugata and nie is more emphasised.

(Reference oshigata)

“KANEHIRA” ‘BIZEN (NO) KUNI SUKEHIRA” “SANETSUNE”

(Toshogu Shrine of Mt. Kuno)

“BIZEN SUKEMURA” “TSUNEMITSU”

(Orikaeshi-mei)

“YOSHIKANE” “NOBUFUSA SAKU” “BIZEN (NO) KUNI KANEHIRA SAKU”

“YOSHIKANE” (Meibutsu ‘O-Kanehira”)

(Mei around the Keicho Era)

(P.36)

There are tachi by Yosikane with mei in smaller characters apart from his tachi with the date of Kencho Era. The sugata of the former looks better and the latter and is superior in the hataraki of the hamon. The former appears to be a little earlier work than the latter. There is a Ko-Bizen smith called Sukekane who is equal to Yoshikane in skill. There are several Sukekane in the Heian and the Kamakura Periods. Sukekane with the mei in large characters used to be believed to belong to the Ko-Bizen school but I conclude that Sukekane with the mei in middle sized characters are Ko-Bizen smiths and the ones with mei in small characters are Ichimonji smiths. In addition, there is a Ko-Bizen smith called Yukihide and he tempers hamon in a slanted pattern. Mitsutada is a famous smith who belongs to the Ko-Osafune school but I discovered a smith who uses the smith name of Mitsutada also existed in the Ko-Bizen school. This smith is not seen in any swordsmith directories though he is a smith who is equal to Yoshikane and Sukekane in skill.

(Reference oshigata)

“MITSUTADA” “YUKIHIDE” “ SUKEKANE” “BIZEN (NO) KUNI “SUKEKANE”

(Ichimonji) SUKEKANE SAKU” (Ko-Bizen)

(Ko-Bizen?)

“MITSUTADA” “SUKEKANE”

(Osafune) (Ichimonji)

(P.37)

(Reference photos)

National Treasure : Tachi Mei “MASATSUNE” (77.6 cm.)

Imperial Collection : Tachi Mei “BIZEN (NO) KUNI TOMONARI”

(Meibutsu ‘Hotaru-maru owned by the Imperial House Hold Agency)

(P.38）

National Treasure : Tachi Mei “SANETSUNE” (Owned by the Toshogu Shrine of Mt. Kuno)