MEITO KANSHO:
EXAMINATION OF IMPORTANT SWORDS
Juyo Bijutsuhin
Type: Katana
Mei: Kuniyasu
Length: 2 shaku 2 sun 4 bu 4 rin (68.0 cm)
Sori: 5 bu 3 rin (1.6 cm)
Motohaba: 1 sun 4 rin (3.15 cm)
Sakihaba: 7 bu 6 rin (2.3 cm)
Motokasane: 2 bu (0.6 cm)
Sakikasane: 1 bu 5 rin (0.45 cm)
Kissaki length: 1 sun 2 bu 9 rin (3.9 cm)
Nakago length: 6 sun 1 bu 2 rin (18.55 cm)
Nakago sori: 3 rin (0.1 rin)
Commentary
This is a shinogi zukuri tachi with an ihorimune. It is slightly wide, and the widths at the moto and saki are not very different. There is a standard thickness, a slightly large sori, and a chu-kissaki. The jigane is itame mixed with mokume, the entire ji is visible, there are ji-nie, frequent chikei, and mizukage at the machi area. The hamon is ko-notare mixed with gunome and angular features. There are ko-gunome and togariba. Around the monouchi the hamon is wide and has a large midare pattern. There are ashi, yo, a dense nioiguchi with abundant slightly uneven nie, and pale muneyaki around the monouchi. The entire hamon has kinsuji, nie-suji, and sunagashi. The boshi has a dense yakiba: the omote is straight with a yakizume style and a small return. The ura is a shallow notare, with a sharp tip, and both sides have hakikake. The nakago is ubu, and the tip is ha-agari kurijiri. The yasurime are a gyaku (reverse) pronounced sujichigai, and there are two mekugi-ana. On the omote under the first mekugi-ana (the original ana) along the mune area there is a large two kanji signature.
Concerning the Horikawa Kunihiro school, the Tanaka family tree lists Kunihiro as the eldest brother, next is Kunimasa, and then Kunitsugu, and Kuniyasu is youngest son, and Kuniyasu’s common name was Saburo Taifu. He has a relatively small number of swords, and the reason may be because his styles, nakago, and signature are all similar to Kunihiro’s work, and conventionally he is supposed to have worked on Kunihiro’s dai-saku and dai-mei swords. From Kuniyasu’s signed highly ranked work, we can see that he was a highly skilled smith in the Horikawa school. His signatures are two kanji signatures, and we see no titles in his mei. His yasurime are gyaku sujichigai or gyaku with a pronounced sujichigai, and these are his characteristic points. His blades are wide with a long kissaki, and a Keicho Shinto shape. He also made some katakiriha style blades too. His jigane are tight and there is a refined ji (especially seen on his wakizashi), but he also has the school’s unique “zanguri” Horikawa hada, with an emphasized hada pattern, and a rough appearance. His characteristic hamon are notare mixed with gunome, and are modeled after Soshu Den master smiths such as Shidzu with his midare hamon, especially around the monouchi area which is mixed with a so-called hakoba style which is wide with slightly angular shaped gunome. There are rough nie mixed with mura, and prominent sunagashi. His hamon are dynamic and distinctive, and have a rustic feeling.
This katana is slightly wide, and the widths at the moto and saki are not very different, and there is a chu-kissaki, and this is an example of his standard shape. The entire jigane has a strong hada pattern and shows a typical “Horikawa hada”, and there is a classic feeling. Also, there is a relaxed feeling in his hamon which has his characteristic angular shaped gunome on the omote and ura around the monouchi area. From the moto to the saki, the jiba (jigane and hamon) has many sunagashi, kinsuji, and niesuji, and in addition there are areas with a wide and narrow nioiguchi, and strong and weak nie, and these are the school’s characteristic points. In the jiba (jigane and hamon) we see really outstanding workmanship, just like we see in Kunihiro’s work, and we can easily understand how Kuniyasu could produce Kunihiro’s dai-saku and dai-mei work. This is a one of his works where we can recognize the high level of skill of the Horikawa school’s Kuniyasu.
The owner of this sword was Mr. Tamari San-nosuke, and in Showa 23 (1948) this sword was classified as Juyo Bijutsuhin, Mr Tamari was an enthusiastic sword lover, and at one point after the war he owned one of the five best blades, the “Doji-giri Yasutuna”. He was Waseda University’s Kendo club instructor, and a kendo enthusiast. In Showa 5 (1930) he demonstrated in the imperial court’s budokan Tairan-shiai (an exhibition hall for the imperial family) at the Sainei Kan on the imperial grounds, and he was known as a master swordsman.
Explanation by Ishii Akira and photo by Imoto Yuki.
Shijo Kantei To No. 799
The deadline to submit answers for the issue No. 799 Shijo Kantei To is September 5, 2023. Each person may submit one vote. Submissions should contain your name and address and be sent to the NBTHK Shijo Kantei. You can use the Shijo Kantei card which is attached in this magazine. Votes postmarked on or before September 5, 2023 will be accepted. If there are sword smiths with the same name in different schools, please write the school or prefecture, and if the sword smith was active for more than one generation, please indicate a specific generation.
Information
Type: Katana
Length: 2 shaku 4 sun 4.5 bu (74.1 cm)
Sori: slightly less than 5 bu ( 1. 45 cm)
Motohaba: slightly less than 1 sun (2.95 cm)
Sakihaba: 6.5 bu (2.0 cm)
Motokasane: slightly over 2 bu (0.65 cm)
Sakikasane: 1.5 bu (0.45 cm)
Kissaki length: 1 sun 1.5 bu (3.55 cm)
Nakago length: slightly over 7 sun (21.4 cm)
Nakago sori: slight
This is a shinogi zukuri katana with an ihorimune. There is a standard width, and the difference in the widths at the moto and saki is slight. The blade is thick, there is a shallow sori, and a chu-kissaki. The jigane is ko-itame hada, with a slightly visible zanguri hada. There are abundant ji-nie, fine chikei, and a dark colored ji. The hamon and the boshi are as seen in the picture. There is a slightly dense nioiguchi, ko-nie, small hotsure and basake, some kinsuji, and a worn down nioiguchi. The nakago is ubu. The tip is kurijiri and the yasurime are a slightly deep katte sagari. The nakago mune is angled.There are two mekugi ana. On the ura, above the mekugi ana there is a kiku-mon, and under the mekugi ana, slightly towards the mune side there is a seven kanji official title. This smith also has mei on the ura side on shinogi-zukuri wakizashi.
2023 Gendai Tosoku Ten Engraving Category:
The Kanzan Award.
Koharu zu (early autumn design) tsuba
Mei: Yanagawa Seiji saku with kao
Gakuko (reflects historical work) U (year of rabbit)
5 nen
This Tsuba’s maker is Yanagawa Seiji. He is a mukansa sword polisher, and also works at engraving. His first contest entry was in Showa 60 (1985), and since then, he entered and exhibited in these competitions over a long period and has received many awards. Last year, he entered an Umetada Myoju utsushi kashiwa-gi zu tsuba and received the Kanzan award. This year he received another special prize.
This year’s award-winning work is Yanagawa’s Araki Tomei utsushi tsuba. On the shakudo-nanako ground, he carved awabo (millet), kamakiri (praying mantis), and chrysanthemums using takabori inlay iroe (engraved colored inlay). In carving the awabo (millet), each grain was carved using a fine tagane (chisel), the stems and leaf veins exhibit abundant detailed work. The composition is continuous from the omote to the ura, and the awabo on the mimi (rim) are connected to the omote and ura. On the mimi, the stems are shown using takabori, and this brings our perspective to the ura side. On the upright straight stems, the grain heads are tilted down, there is an elegant and graceful appearance, and the stems overlap with each other, and this is something in common with Araki Tomei’s work. We can understand how much time the artist must have spent examining and studying Tomei’s work, and this tsuba can properly be called a gakuko work (reflecting or very similar to historical or earlier work).
Likely, Yanagawa has spent a lot of time studying older or historical tsuba. As a result, we can see this tsuba, and undoubtedly, next year he will be entering something even better. I am looking forward to seeing his work again next year.
Explanation by Takeda Kotaro
June Token Teirei Kansho Kai
Date: July 8 (second Saturday of July)
Location: The Token Hakubutsukan auditorium
Lecture: Imoto Yuki
Kantei To No. 1: Tachi
Mei: Masatsune
Length: slightly over 2 shaku 3 sun 3 bu
Sori: 8 bu
Style: shinogi zukuri
Mune: ihorimune
Jigane: itame mixed with mokume and nagare hada; the entire ji is well forged and tight. There are ji-nie and pale jifu utsuri.
Hamon: suguha style, mixed with ko-midare, and some ko-choji. There are ashi and abundant nie inside of the hamon; there are some hotsure, kuichigaiba, kinsuji, sunagashi and a bright nioiguchi.
Boshi: straight; the tip has some hakikake; the point is round and there is a return.
This is a Juyo Bijutsuhin Ko-Bizen Masatsune tachi. There is some funbari at the habaki moto, a narrow tachi shape, a large koshizori, a shallower sori going towards the point, and a small kissaki. From the shape, you can judge this as work from the end of the Kamakura period to the early Nambokucho period and this is a classic tachi shape. The jigane is a well forged itame, the entire ji is very tight, and there is a bright iron color. However, the utsuri is not as prominent as usual, and this was a confusing point. But in looking at the koshimoto, there are clearly jifu utsuri with dark areas extending to near the shinogi. Also, the suguha style hamon has abundant nie inside of the hamon, it is a mainly ko-midare hamon, and considering this along with the shape, you can judge this as being work from no later than the early half of the Kamakura period. There is a refined jigane, an itame hada with frequent ji-nie, frequent nie inside of the hamon, and the jiba (jigane and hamon) is bright, so this is conceivably Ko-Bizen work.
Ko-Bizen’s two best master smiths are Tomonari and Masatsune, and they are often compared with each other. Tomonari has many jigane with dark colors, pale utsuri or no utsuri, no ko-choji hamon elements, and a classic style. On the other hand, Masatsune’s jigane is very tight with clear utsuri, the hamon is mixed with ko-choji, and he has a sophisticated style.
This sword has almost no prominent utsuri, as I explained above, and a primarily komidare hamon, there are many hataraki inside of the hamon such as sunagashi, kinsuji, hotsure and kuichigaiba, and there is a very classic style. In voting, many people voted for Masatsune and Ko-Bizen work and that was impressive.
Kantei To No.2: Wakizashi
Mei: Nobukuni (Saemonjo)
Length: 1 shaku 1 bu
Sori: slight
Style: hirazukuri
Mune: mitsumune
Jigane: tight ko-itame hada mixed with some nagare hada towards the hamon side; there are frequent ji-nie, chikei, and a bright jigane.
Hamon: gunome mixed with yahazu shape choji; it is ko-notare, and there are ko-gunome. There are ashi, and yo, it is nioi-deki, there are some yubashiri, tobiyaki, muneyaki, kinsuji sunagashi, and a bright nioiguchi.
Boshi: midarekomi; the tip has a togari shape and there is a long return.
Horimono: on the omote and ura there are katana-hi with marudome,. inside of a frame there are two bonji. Under these, on the omote there is a long bonji and rendai, and on the ura there is a long bonji.
The shodai Nobukuni worked in the Enbun (1356-60) period, and at the end of the Nanbokucho period, the generation is supposed to have changed. Starting in the Oei (1394-1427) period, there are two smiths with the titles Shikibujo and Saemonjo who were active as the school’s main smiths.
This wakizashi has a standard width, is long, and very thick for the width, and this kind of shape is seen in the early Muromachi period, especially around the Oei period. In addition, the tip has a slight sori, which is a Muromachi period shape. Nobukuni’s style started with the Rai school’s traditional suguha and Sadamune’s influence with a primarily notare style, and at the end of the Nanbokucho period, a mainly gunome midare hamon style also begins to be seen.
Saemonjo was active in the Oei period, and many of his works have suguha and gunome midare hamon. They are different and a contrast from work with a tight nioiguchi suguha hamon. His characteristic gunome midare hamon has abundant nie, nie kuzure, sunagashi, and a somewhat prominent Soshu Den style. Also, in the hamon, one should pay attention to the large and small gunome and continuous yahazu gunome, and the low width konotare areas with a characteristic rhythm which connect the midare hamon areas. A major characteristic point is that this kind of hamon is a mixture of styles everywhere or only in some areas. Also, the school is good at producing horimono since the Shodai’s time, and the hormono includes simple hi and gomabashi. In fact, most of the school’s work has horimono. This wakizashi’s shape, jiba, horimono, and all of the elements exhibit Oei Nobukuni’s typical characteristic points.
Kantei To No. 3: Katana
Mumei: Motoshige
Length: slightly less than 2 shaku 3 sun 3 bu
Sori: 5.5 bu
Style: shinogi zukuri
Mune: ihorimune
Jigane: itame hada mixed with mokume hada; on the Omote’s upper half there is nagare and masame hada; the hada is slightly visible. There are abundant large ji-nie, frequent chikei, some jifu, and midare utsuri.
Hamon: suguha mixed with kaku-gunome, kataochi-gunome, ko-gunome, and some togariba. There are ashi, yo, some saka-ashi; the hamon is a nioiguchi style and there is a slightly worn down nioiguchi.
Boshi: small midarekomi, and the tip is sharp.
Horimono: on the omote and ura there are bo-hi carved through the nakago.
Kaku-gunome and kataochi-gunome hamon were originated by Osafune Nagamitsu and further established by his son Kagemitsu. However, Kagemitsu does not have a tachi on which the entire hamon from moto to saki has this style of hamon. The next generation Kanemitsu has not only tanto, but also tachi on which the entire hamon is composed of kaku-gunome and kataochi-gunome. The mainstream Osafune school originated and established this hamon style and it is seen in branch schools too, and one branch school is the Hatakeda school. We can confirm that Moriie has tanto from around the Koan (1278-87) and Einin (1293-98) periods in which the hamon show mixed styles like those of Nagamitsu with kaku gunome and kataochi gunome. His son Morishige has a dated Showa 5 (1316) work which is the same as the mainstream school’s Kagemitsu hamon, and his son is supposed to be Motoshige.
This katana is wide with a long kissaki and Nanbokucho shape. The itame hada in the jigane changes in places abruptly with nagare hada. Some places have different color jifu areas, and this is their characteristic jigane. The hamon is mixed with kaku-gunome, kataochi-gunome, ko-gunome, and some togariba, and the midare pattern has a saka shape or orientation. Also, it is hard to recognize kaku-gunome areas in the upper half of the hamon, which are slightly high, and this is a major element to judge work as being Motoshige’s. I was impressed that many people accurately recognized the jigane and the midare hamon composition, and voted for Motoshige,
Besides the correct and proper answer, some people voted for Aoe work. There are common features, such as the jigane shows a chirimen effect, the slightly visible hada, the midare hamon has saka-ashi, and the boshi is sharp. But Aoe work has very few hamon with so many different hamon elements mixed with a midare hamon. Also, in the same period, many suguha style hamon have straight dan-utsuri along the hamon’s edge.
Kantei To No. 4 Kotachi
Mei: Fujishima Tomoshige
Length: slightly less than 2 shaku 1 bu
Sori: slightly less than 7 bu
Style: shinogi zukuri
Mune: ihorimune
Jigane: tight ko-itame hada; at the koshimoto, the itame hada is visible; there are ji nie, chikei, a dark colored jigane and midare utsuri.
Hamon: mainly horn-like features are seen in the yakiba mixed with angular shaped features. There are open bottom gunome, sharp shaped elements, and gunome. There are ashi, yo, the hamon is nioi-deki; in places there are yubashiri, tobiyaki, some muneyaki, and frequent fine sunagashi.
Boshi: midarekomi; there are hakikake; the tip is round, and on the ura there is a long return connected to muneyaki.
This kotachi has a standard width, is thick, and the widths at the moto and saki are different. There is a large koshizori, the tip has sori, and this is an early Muromachi period (around the Oei period) Fujishima Tomoshige kotachi. An example of an earlier generation Tomoshige’s work is in Atsuta shrine and is a tachi from around the end of Kamakura period to the early Nanbokucho period. This tachi has a high shinogi, and a continuous gunome hamon with sunagashi, and these details suggest Yamato Shikkake school work, and it is a possibility that the school originated in Yamato.Subsequently, many of their works were identified from the Muromachi period. Around the Oei period, the work has a tight jigane, just like this kotachi, but many of the works have a visible itame hada mixed with mokume and nagare hada. In addition, the jigane has a dark color, and sometimes we see a clear midare utsuri.
The hamon contains open bottom gunome, sharp shaped features, and angular features. People seem to have noted the sharp shaped features and voted for Mino work, and some people recognized the open the bottom gunome and utsuri and voted for Bizen work. Concerning the school, even historical sword books pointed out that it is difficult to confirm the origin as being either Mino Den and Bizen Den, Yamato Den, or a combination of Mino Den and Bizen Den, and a mixture of styles is a characteristic point.
Because of all of these details, each vote was convincing. In examining the Fujishima Tomoshige style, one difficult point is the hamon with angular features. On this kotachi, the main part of the hamon has angular features on both sides, and projecting angular shapes which resemble a demon’s horn, and are called “Fujishima’s horn yakiba” and this is Tomoshige’s major characteristic point. Also, there are many types of hataraki such as thick ha-nie, some areas with rough nie, frequent sunagashi, and the boshi has hakikake, and these features are pointed out as being Northern country work as well as being Fujishima Tomoshige’s characteristic points. The jiba (jigane and hamon) shows many of his typical characteristic points. However, it appears that people are not familiar with the “horn-like yakiba”. I hope people will remember Fujishima Tomoshige’s style from this opportunity.
Kantei To No.5: Katana
Mei: Kanesada (early Nosada mei)
Length: 6 sun 8.5 bu
Sori: uchisori
Style: hirazukuri
Mune: ihorimune
Jigane: tight ko-itame hada; there are ji-nie and shirake utsuri.
Hamon: chu suguha; there is a tight nioiguchi, nioi-deki with ko-nie, and some kinsuji.
Boshi: straight, and falls down towards the hamon’s edge; the tip is round and there is a long return.
Among the the tanto mass produced in the Muromachi period in Mino, we see what are called “Rai utsushi” work or work made in the style of Rai tanto. These are different from work which was produced in the latter half of the Muromachi period which have a large size and a prominent sakisori tanto shape. The utsushi tanto have a standard width, thickness, and length with an uchizori shape. The jitetsu are a tight itame with ji-nie, the hamon are a clear suguha with nie, and the boshi tip is round and there is a return. The style is just like those from the latter half of the Kamakura period’s master smiths such as Rai Kunitoshi, Awataguchi Yoshimitsu, Shintogo Kunimitsu, and most of the Sue Seki smiths copied those styles.
Among these smiths, Izumi no kami Kanesada was good at this. The tanto was evaluated as one of the “Rai utsushi” works, and in voting, some people voted for some of the above Kamakura period smiths. But looking at the tanto carefully, it is thick for the width, and there is a poor fukura shape. The jigane is definitely a tight itame, but there are fewer ji-nie, the blade makes a weak impression, and there is shirake utsuri.
Also, the ha-nie hataraki inside of the hamon are too gentle, and the major characteristic point is that the boshi drops down toward the hamon edge, and the round fukura shape is awkward, and we can point out that these details indicate a lower rank for the work. Some knowledgeable people recognized the style’s characteristic points, the rank or level of the work, and voted for Kanesada in the first vote which was very good.
Shijo Kantei To No. 797 in the June, 2023 issue
The answer for the Shijo Kantei To is a tanto by Rai Kunitoshi.
This tanto has a standard length and thickness, good balance, is uchizori, and there is an elegant hirazukuri shape, and you can judge this as work from the latter half of the Kamakura period from the Tanto’s shape. In addition, the period’s tanto with mitsumune often have a wider central ridge.
The hamon extends below the machi, and around the machi area, the hamon is slightly elevated or raised toward the mune. This kind of hamon feature is seen in many of Rai Kunitoshi’s blades.In addition, we can see this particular detail in the work of Ryokai, Rai Kunimitsu, Awataguchi Yoshimitsu, and Shintogo Kunimitsu. There are also a few examples of this feature in the work of smiths from the latter half of the Kamakura period such as Hosho Sadaoki and Teigai Kanetsugu. Consequently, it is better not to decide this is Rai Kunitoshi’s work, just from this detail. Of course, among Rai Kunitoshi’s tanto from this period, we can see many examples, and this is an important detail along with other details in these tanto.
Looking at the forging, there is a tight ko-itame hada with abundant dense ji-nie and a bright ji, and there is a beautiful jigane. Furthermore, there are nie utsuri, and from this, at first, you can think about Yamashiro work which produced good suguha, such as the Rai school and the Awataguchi school. Also, in places, there are visible areas in the jigane which are called Rai hada. In addition, there is some nagare hada, but we see slightly less of this in Awataguchi school work. From these details, you can narrow this work down to Rai school work.
The hamon is a bright suguha with a tight nioiguchi. This is different from what is often seen in later work where there is a strong and rough nioiguchi. The nioiguchi is narrow with ko-nie, and is gentle looking. There are fine hotsure and sunagashi. In this tanto these features form nijuba and uchinoke, and there are subtle changes in the nioiguchi, and there is a dignified feeling.
The Boshi’s shape is nearly straight from the fukura to the kissaki, and the tip is komaru with a return. If the boshi return were longer or wider, it would be called a “Rai Kunitoshi Mount Fuji shaped boshi”. Therefore, we cannot say this is a typical “Mt. Fuji shaped boshi”. The hamon is slightly above the fukura, and the hamon width becomes slightly wider going towards the point. There is a slight increase in the space between the top of the kissaki to the tip or top of the boshi, so the hamon’s width is somewhat wide when compared with Yoshimitsu and Shitogo Kunimitsu.
The “Kokon Meizukushi’s” comment about this tanto says that “the boshi is sharp and there is a long return”, and this is supposed to mean there is a “Mt Fuji shaped boshi”. But Rai Kunitoshi’s sharp boshi tips are not seen often, so probably “shape” is supposed to refer not only to the tip, but also to how the entire boshi shape appears.
The nakago tip is shortened 1-2 rin, but has the same appearance as an ubu kurijiri nakago. The yasurime are kiri, and under the mekugiana on the center there is a large two kanji signature made with a fine chisel, and these are Rai Kunitoshi’s characteristic points.
At this time, a majority of people voted for Rai Kunitoshi. A few people voted for Rai Kunimitsu and Rai Kunitsugu. Both smiths have some similar work and it can be difficult to distinguish between them. So at this time, we treated both smiths’ names as correct answers.
However, these two smiths have fewer examples of tanto with this shape. Many of their tanto are wider and slightly longer and thicker, and there is no prominent sori, or wide, long, and thin blades with sori. Notably, in Rai Kunitsugu’s work in the latter half of the Kamakura period, a standard tanto shape with a suguha hamon is very rare, and we should remember this.
For other proper answers, some people voted for Rai Kuniyuki and Ryokai. But Rai Kuniyuki’s short length work is slightly over 1 shaku, and only one work is known, so one should remember this.
If this were Ryokai’s work, the nagare hada in the forging work would be more prominent, and his jigane are whitish, and we see soft areas in his hamon. In the Meikan, his signatures have three kanji and are “Ryokai saku”, but most examples we see have two kanji signatures.
Besides the correct and proper answer, people voted for Awataguchi Yoshimitsu, Shintogo Kunimitsu and Kunihiro. Yoshimitsu’s work does not have as much clear nagare hada and Rai hada, and his hamon have ko-gunome at the koshimoto. Around the monouchi the hamon width becomes narrow, and many of his boshi tips have nie no kuisagari (nie flowing into the ji).
If this were work by Shintogo Kuniyuki or Kunihiro, the jigane would have frequent chikei, the jiba (jigane and hamon) would have frequent nie and kinsuji, and a strong Shoshu Den style. In particular, Shintogo Kunihiro’s boshi tip has what is called an “old man’s beard”, that is nie overflowing into the ji, which is similar to Yoshimitsu’s nie, and many of them have a short return. Also, Shintogo Kunimitsu has only a few existing examples, and most of them have horimono.
Explanation by Ooi Gaku.
NBTHK 75th Anniversary
Tatara 45th Anniversary
NBTHK 3rd National Convention
Information:
We will hold the 3rd national convention as described below.
We are looking forward to the participation of many people who appreciate Japanese swords.
Date: Reiwa 5 nen, November 25 (Saturday)-26 (Sunday)
Meeting place: Token Museum
1-12-9 Yokoami Sumidaku, Tokyo
Tel: 03-6284-1000
Members fee: Plan A: 32,000 yen
Includes Kanshokai fee, Token Museum 2 day pass Social gathering
at the Dai-ichi Hotel Ryogoku Meeting souvenir
Plan A cost for a companion: 21,000 yen
Includes Token Museum 2 day free pass and the social gathering
Companions are not eligible for the Kanshokai or kantei bid
Plan B: 17,000 yen
Token Museum 2 day pass and meeting souvenir Not eligible for
social gathering or kantei bid
Registration to attend: Please register to attend by using the application at the end
of the Token Bijutsu Journal’s August issue
Deadline to apply for the 3rd national convention: Friday, October 20th 2023
Convention schedule:
November 25 ( Saturday): all events are at the Dai-ichi Hotel, Ryogoku
Reception: 12:00-16:00
Token Kansho: 12:00- 16:00
Gendai smith exhibition: 12:00-16:00
One time appraisal bid: 12:00-16:00
Celebration ceremony: 17:00-18:00
Celebration gathering: 18:00-20:00
Token Museum special exhibition: 9:30-16:00 at the Token Museum
November 26 (Sunday): all events are at the Dai-ichi Hotel, Ryogoku
Token Kansho : 9:00-14:00
Gendai smith exhibition: 9:00-14:00
Cooperating organization representatives meeting: 11:00-13:00
Token Museum special exhibition: 9:30-14:00 at the Token Museum
Notes:
· Fees are subject to change due to unplanned or unexpected circumstances
· Seating at the gathering will be in order of arrival
· Please make your own hotel arrangements
· At the Token Kansho, please follow the venue staff’s instructions