Meito Kansho: Appreciation of Important Swords
Tokubetsu Juyo Token
Length: 2 shaku 3 sun 3 rin (69.8 cm)
Sori: 8 bu 6 rin (2.6 cm)
Motohaba: 9 bu 7 rin (2.95 cm)
Sakihaba: 6 bu 8 rin (2.05 cm)
Motokasane: 2 bu 6 rin (0.8 cm)
Sakikasane: 1 bu 7 rin (0.5 cm)
Kissaki length: 1 sun 9 rin (3. 3 cm)
Nakago length: 6 sun 1 bu 2 rin (18.55 cm)
Nakago sori: 7 rin (0.2 rin)
This is a shinogi zukuri tachi with an ihorimune. It is wide, and the difference in the widths at the moto and saki are not prominent. It is thick, there is a large koshizori with funbari, and a chu-kissaki. The jigane is ko-itame mixed with mokume and nagare hada, and the fine hada is visible. There are abundant ji-nie, fine chikei, mizukage at the machi, and pale utsuri. The hamon is based on chu-suguha mixed with ko-gunome and ko-choji. there are ko-ashi, and a tight nioiguchi with fine ko-nie. The boshi is a slightly shallow notare. On the omote the point is komaru, and on the ura the point is round, and there is a return. The horimono on the omote and the ura are bo-hi carved through the nakago. The nakago is ubu, and the tip is a shallow ha-agari kurijiri. The yasurime are a strong sujichigai, and there are two mekugi-ana. On the omote above the first mekugi-ana on the center, on the flat area there is a two kanji signature made with slightly thick chisel marks.
The Bitchu Koku Aoe school was prosperous from the end of the Heian period into the Nanbokucho period, and produced many master smiths. Among them, Moritsugu is supposed to have been the son of the Aoe school’s founder Yasutsugu. In the Meikan, there is a list containing multiple Moritsugu smith names, and later, the name was seen often among the school’s smiths. There are several confirmed Moritsugu works from around the end of the Kamakura period to the mid-Nanbokucho period, which are dated in the Bunwa and Enbun eras. We can say that the name is a representative name used in the school, in the same manner as Sadatsugu.
This sword is from around the end of the Kamakura period to the early Nanbokucho period, and is thought to be from the Kenmu (1334-5) era, when several of Moritsugu’s tachi were made. It is wide, and the difference in widths at the moto and saki is not very prominent. There is a chu-kissaki, an ubu nakago, and the shape produces a feeling of power. The thickness and hiraniku are relatively well preserved, and the overall appearance is healthy. The jigane is ko-itame mixed with itame and mokume, and the hada pattern is clear
and we can see a chirimen-hada style. The entire hada is fine and and so we can see the school’s characteristic points.
The hamon is different from many of the usual Ko-Aoe works. There is a tight nioiguchi with a clear appearance, the small ashi and yo hataraki are interesting, and there is great workmanship. The jigane in some places is mixed with large itame hada, and a relatively large amount of mokume hada, and these are Ko-Aoe style characteristic points. This work is a transitional period work. Until the mid-Kamakura period, there was a slightly worn down Ko-Aoe style hamon which evolved into the Nanbokucho period jiba’s (jigane and hamon) clear style. This is a valuable research material to enable us to study Moritsugu’s and the school’s work.
This sword has an ubu nakago with a signature, the jiba is healthy, and this is a dignified tachi. The signature and style are very similar to the Uesugi family’s heirloom Juyo Bunkazai tachi, which is called “Rinpo no tachi”, and also by another name, “Hannya no tachi”. Today there are only two existing swords with the same kind of signature, so this is a really rare example of Moritsugu’s work from this period, and this make it a very valuable example.
Explanation and photo by Ishii Akira
Shijo Kantei To No. 798
The deadline to submit answers for the issue No. 798 Shijo Kantei To is August 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 August 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.
Length: slightly less than 2 shaku 4 sun 7 bu (74.8 cm)
Sori: slightly less than 7 bu (2.05 cm)
Motohaba: 9.5 bu (2.85 cm)
Sakihaba: slightly less than 7 bu (2.05 cm)
Motokasane: slightly over 2 bu (0.65 cm)
Sakikasane: slightly less than 2 bu (0.5 cm)
Kissaki length: 1 sun 2.5 bu (3.75 cm)
Nakago length: slightly less than 6 sun 6 bu (19.95 cm)
Nakago sori: slight
This is a shinogi zukuri katana with an ihorimune. There is a standard width, and the difference in widths at the moto and saki are not prominent. The blade is thick, there is a slightly large sori, a long chu-kissaki, and a well balanced good shape. The jigane has a ko-itame hada, which is slightly visible, there are abundant ji-nie, fine chikei, and there are some areas of the ji with jifu. The hamon and the boshi are as seen in the picture. The hamon is based on a shallow notare, some areas have ko-gunome and ko-choji. There are frequent small ashi and yo, nie-deki, some nijuba, uchinoke, and small sunagashi, and a bright nioiguchi. The nakago is ubu. The tip is kurijiri and the yasurime are almost kiri. There is one mekugi ana. On the omote, along the mune side there is an eight kanji signature.
Genbu zu (mythical beast design) tsuba
Mei: Nanpo Kiku Hisahide with gold stamp
Kikukawa Nanpo Hisahide was an master smith active in the latter half of the Edo period. He was a student of Kikukawa Muneyoshi, and received permission use the Kikukawa last name. He is supposed to have also studied under Chizuka Hisanori, from whom he took the Hisa kanji, and then used the name Hisahide. In his later years, he wore his hair in the style of a monk and was named Nanpo. His birth and death dates are unknown, but dated Kansei (1789-1800) period work is extant, and from this we can guess when he was active.
On the tsuba omote we see a genbu, and there is a well forged polished iron ground with shakudo and shibuichi with inlay or zogan on the rim, and gold iroe (inlay). The genbu figure is powerful and almost touches the kogai opening, and is carved deeply with a chisel, and demonstrates Nanpo’s skill. On the ura above the center, we see the Big Dipper defined by gold inlay work. This makes a contrasting composition with the genbu.
A genbu is an old Chinese spiritually associated animal, and the shape is that of a turtle entangled with a snake. Genbu is also a god of water.
The four phoenixes, a blue dragon, a white tiger, a red bird of summer, and genbu were supposed be protectors of the four directions, the north, south, east, and west, and the genbu was the protector of the north. The big dipper stars are also visible in the northern sky. The seven stars define a ladle-like shape, and in China, people believed the big dipper along with the north star influenced people’s life, death, and fortune. The constellation is also known as the “military stars”. Since historical times, they belonged to the “28 shuku” (28 stars) which were used for astronomy and astrology, and they have a strong relationship with the four phoenixes.
Besides the seven stars, on this tsuba, an interesting feature is the addition of one small star. This creates an accurate depiction, and from the tip of handle, to the side of the second star Mizar, there is a dark companion star called Alcor. A person with good eyesight can distinguish the two stars by eye, and in Arabia, this was supposed to have been used as a test of vision. In China, Alcor was recognized as a supplemental or assisting star, and in Japan we call it a soe (companion) star.
Stars’ locations change, and these changes take a long time, and eventually the big dipper’s ladle-like shape will change. The tsuba’s big dipper composition comes from star charts several thousand years ago, and the arrangement is slightly different from today. The Tsuba’s bottom half shows a carved smooth water flow, which is not powerful, but is an example of well controlled carving. This is a masterpiece tsuba, and expresses the flow of time.
Explanation by Kugiya Natsuko
June Token Teirei Kansho kai
Date: June 10th (second Saturday of June)
Location: The Token Hakubutsukan auditorium
Lecturer: Takeda Kotaro
Kantei To No. 1: tanto
Mei: Rai Kunimitsu
Length: 9 sun 3.5 bu
Jigane: tight ko-itame hada; there are abundant dense ji-nie; some areas have kawari-gane (differently colored metal), and there are clear bo-utsuri and a clear jigane.
Hamon: shallow notare mixed with ko-gunome; there are ashi, yo, frequent ko-nie, kuichigaiba at the koshimoto, fine kinsuji and sunagashi, and a bright and clear nioiguchi.
Boshi: shallow notarekomi; the tip is sharp and there is a return.
This is a Juyo Token Rai Kunimitsu tanto.
It is wide and long, and there is almost no sori, and from this you can judge this as work from the end of the Kamakura period to the early Nanbokucho period.
The jigane is a tight ko-itame hada, there are abundant dense ji-nie, a clear jigane, and this is apparently Kyoto work judging from the refined forging. There are clear bo-utsuri, and in some areas we see the unique kawari-gane which is Rai school hada, and from this you can judge this tanto as being Rai school work.
The hamon is notare mixed with gunome, and there is a bright and clear hamon. The boshi is tsukiage, and forms a togari shape. There is midare hamon, showing Rai Kunimitsu’s characteristic points very well. Kunimitsu tanto hamon, besides being the Rai school’s characteristic suguha, can be midare, and in the case of a midare hamon, sometimes his hamon have togari shapes, just like meibutsu swords (notable swords) such as the Shiokawa Rai and the Yurakurai.
In voting, many people observed the Tanto’s characteristic points, and voted for either Rai Kunimitsu or Kunitsugu. Kunitsugu’s jiba (jigane and hamon) has more prominent hataraki such as nie, and often a strong Soshu Den style. But Kunitsugu does have work similar to this tanto, so this is a reasonable vote, and was treated as a correct answer.
Besides the correct answer, some people voted for Dai-Sa and Sa Yasuyoshi. The Dai-Sa vote probably derived from the refined forging and a bright and clear hamon. But his tanto are shorter than this one, and are thin, and do not have uchizori. Yasuyoshi’s tanto are usually larger than Sa’s, and thinner than this one, and there is a shallow sori, and we can see an Enbun-Joji shape.
Kantei To No. 2: Tachi
Mei: Bizen Osafune Moromitsu
Eiwa 2 nen (1376) 6 gatsu
Length: 2 shaku 4 sun 1.5 bu
Sori: 6.5 bu
Style: shinogi zukuri
Jigane: itame hada mixed with mokume hada, and the entire ji has a fine visible hada; there are jifu, ji-nie, chikei, suji (line-like) utsuri and and a dark color ji.
Hamon: ko-gunome and togariba mixed with ko-notare; there are ko-ashi and yo, the entire hamon is small, and there are ko-nie, and sunagashi.
Boshi: midarekomi; the tip is sharp, and there are hakikake.
This is a Juyo Token Osafune Morimitsu tachi dated Eiwa 2 nen (1376). From the end of the Nanbokucho to the early Muromachi period in Bizen, the Kosori style represented by Morimitsu is different from the Osafune mainstream style represented by smiths such as Kanemitsu and by branch school smiths such as Chogi, Morikage and Motoshige, and the Kosori school does not have a clear line or listing of the smiths names. This Tachi’s funbari at the koshimoto is gone, and from this, you can guess that this tachi is suriage. There is a slightly wide shape, the widths at the moto and saki are different, and there is a slightly long chu-kissaki. From this you can decide that this is a transitional period work, going from the peak Nanbokucho period’s Enbun-Joji shape to an early Muromachi period shape, and the date from the Eiwa period agrees with this.
Typically, the Kosori jigane is itame mixed with mokume and nagare hada with a large pattern hada. The hada is visible, and there is a slightly irregular appearance in the forging. The hamon are gunome mixed with all kinds of features such as togariba and square shaped features, and there is an irregular midare hamon. The hamon width is narrow, and is small. Also, this tachi’s forging is itame mixed with mokume, the entire ji is fine and visible, and there are utsuri. The entire hamon has small sized ko-gunome and togariba, which shows the school’s charecteristic points very well.
From these details, many people voted for Kosori smiths’ names. Some people recognized the Nanbokucho period Bizen work, and they voted for Motomitsu, Chogi, and Morikage. These vote likely resulted from the dynamic tachi shape. But if it were Motomitsu’s work, there would be many square shaped gunome in the hamon. If it were work by Chogi and Morikage, which would suggest a Soshu Den style, there would be strong nie, and there would be more hataraki in the hamon. A few people voted for Fujishima Tomoshige. This guess resulted from the dark jigane and togariba. Fujishima has some Bizen Den style work, but there are more sunagashi inside of the hamon, and his togariba have a unique shape.
The tachi has been handed down in Yamagata prefecture in the Sakai family, and is listed in the Kozan Oshigata book.
Kantei To No. 3: Katana
Mei: ju (inhabitant of) To-Eizan Shinobugaoka hen Nakasone Kotetsu saku
Length: 2 shaku 3 sun
Sori: slightly over 6 bu
Style: shinogi zukuri
Jigane: tight ko-itame hada; some areas are mixed with itame hada; there are abundant dense ji-nie and frequent fine chikei.
Hamon: small yakidashi at the moto; ko-notare mixed with ko-gunome and gunome. There are thick ashi, a dense nioiguchi, nie deki, some sunagashi, and a bright and clear nioiguchi.
Boshi: the boshi is yakikomi and straight; the tip is komaru.
This blade is slightly wide, and the widths at the moto and saki are different and there is a short chu-kissaki. From this, you can judge this as a Kanbun Shinto shape with a slight sori. The jigane is a tight ko-itame, there is refined forging, and the shinogi ji has masame hada. From this, you can narrow this down to Edo Shinto work. Looking at the hamon, there is a short yakidashi at the moto, the hamon is ko-notare mixed with gunome, and there are thick ashi everywhere. The boshi has a yakikomi at the yokote which is called a Kotetsu boshi. The jiba (jigane and hamon) is bright and clear, and this is clearly the work of a a highly skilled smith, and you can arrive at the name of Kotetsu.
People caught these characteristic points very well, and a majority of people voted for Kotetsu. Some people voted for a different tora kanji (non-tiger kanji) Kotetsu. But if this was a Hane-Tora (tiger) period Kotetsu work, it would have a longer yakidashi than this one, the high and low variations in the width of the hamon, it would be a ko-notare mixed with large and small gunome fused together, called a Hyotan-ba. His styles were different in different times, and in voting, please pay attention to this. From the shape with a slight sori, some people voted for Okimasa. I think Okimasa has come close to Kotetsu’s work, and it is a justifiable answer. If this were Okimasa’s work, his characteristic hamon show two gunome fused together, and a continuous pattern of these fused gunome. Many of them have a rough nioiguchi containing nie, and the jiba are never as good as this, and I wish people had voted for Kotetsu (written without the tiger kanji) at this time. Some people voted for Kaneshige. But if it were his work, we would see a one, two, and one, two continuous hamon pattern.
Kantei To No. 4: Tanto
Mei: Hizen Kuni Tadayoshi
Length: 9 sun 2 bu
Sori: slightly uchizori
Style: hira zukuri
Jigane: tight ko-itame hada, there are abundant dense ji-nie, and chikei.
Hamon: notare mixed with ko-gunome; there are ko-ashi, a dense nioiguchi, frequent ko-nie, kinsuji, sunagashi, and a bright and clear nioiguchi.
Boshi: shallow notare, the tip has hakikake and is round.
Horimono: on the omote inside of a frame there are bonji and a Fudomyo-o relief; the ura has bonji and katana-hi with soe-hi carved through the nakago.
This is a Shodai Tadayoshi tanto with a Munenaga horimono. This is wide, long, and thick, which is a Keicho Shinto period tanto shape. The jigane is a tight ko-itame hada. There are abundant dense ji-nie and refined forging. The hamon is notare with a bright and clear nioiguchi. Looking at the notare hamon valleys, there are abundant nie, and you can see a Hizen characteristic point.
In voting, from these characteristics and the detailed Fudomyo-o carving on the omote, a majority of people voted for Tadayoshi and his teacher Myoju. They have a teacher-student relationship, and both have horimono, so from this, the answer is understandable. But the hamon valleys have abundant nie, so a vote for Tadayoshi is preferable. A few people voted for Yasutsugu who worked in the same period and was good at horimono. If it were Yasutsugu’s work, his jigane have itame mixed with mokume, a dark colored ji, and many of his boshi have a long return, and these are important details.
However, this tanto’s highlight would be the Fudomyo-o relief by Munenaga. Munenaga studied with the Myoju school along with the Shodai Tadayoshi. Tadayoshi studied sword making, and Munenaga studied carving horimono on swords, and the Myoju school’s Fudomyo-o has a specific pattern. The fudo holds a ken in his right hand, and his elbow is held in a right angle or square-like configuration. He has raised eyes and eyebrows, and the flame behind his head is moving in a counterclockwise direction, and this work shows exactly the same carving details, and in his left hand, the rope cable's design is delicately carved. Also the Myo-o is slightly twisted at the waist, and this is seen in many Buddha statues. We can see he was influenced by work in Kyoto where there are many Fudomyo-o examples available. Munenaga’s active time is supposed to have been from Keicho 15 to Genna 8 (1610 - 22). After Genna 10 (1624), during the Musashi Daijo Tadayoshi period, we no longer see Munenaga’s horimono, and his sword’s horimono are made by Yoshinaga.
Kantei To No.5: Katana
Length: 2 shaku 5.5 bu
Sori slightly over 5 bu
Style: shinogi zukuri
Jigane: itame hada with some areas showing nagare hada; there are whitish areas and ji-nie.
Hamon: yakidashi at the moto; above this there are gunome mixed with togariba and square shaped features; these hamon features form groups, and are connected with a low narrow width hamon. There are ashi, frequent ko-nie, the entire nioiguchi is worn down; there are muneyaki.
Boshi: slight notarekomi; on the omote the point is komaru; the ura point is round; both sides have some hakikake.
This is a Muramasa katana, the Eastern governor general, prince Arisugawa Tokehito carried this during the Boshi war (1868-67). Later, the imperial Takamatsu family who inherited the Arisugawa family’s imperial title, donated it to the NBTHK.
This katana has a standard width, a short length, is sakisori, and has a katateuchi shape. From the shape, you can judge this as being from the latter half of the Muromachi period. The hamon has gunome and square shaped features which form groups, and are connected by a narrow low width hamon. The height of the midare hamon valleys become lower as they approach the tip of the hamon, and show characteristics of Senju school smiths such as Muramasa and Masashige very well. Also, the omote and the ura hamon are exactly same, and you can’t miss the worn down nioiguchi, and these are elements to help judge this as Muramasa’s work.
In voting, besides Muramasa, some people voted for Masashige and we judged that as a correct answer. But compared with Muramasa, Masashige’s work has visible hada, nie kuzure and a rustic feeling which is supposed to be his characteristic point. So it would be better to have voted for Muramasa. Also, a few people voted for Heianjo Nagayoshi. If it were Nagayoshi’s work, many of his jigane are tight, and even if they are simple, he has some horimono. A relatively large number of votes were for Osaka Shinto work. Those guesses were based on the presence of a yakidashi. The shapes are different, Osaka Shinto forging is a tight ko-itame hada, and the jiba is brighter when compared with Muramasa’s work, and these are important details.
Shijo Kantei To No.796 in the May, 2023 issue
The answer for the Shijo Kantei To is a tachi by Aoe Saemon jo Hidetsugu
This tachi is dated Karyaku 2 nen (1327), and it was clearly made at the end of the Kamakura period. This is suriage, so the the sori is shallow, but from the hints about the koshizori, you can imagine the original shape had a large degree of sori. In addition, it is wide, and the widths at the moto and saki are not very different, the tip has sori, and there is a chu kissaki, and this is a shape from the end of the Kamakura period. This shape was used and carried over to the early half of the Nanbokucho period, and until a large kissaki became popular in the Enbun-Joji period, this was a mainstream shape.
The Aoe school’s work is divided into periods and described as Ko-Aoe, Chu-Aoe, and Sue-Aoe, but there are gaps in this classification when examined by knowledgeable experts. Ko-Aoe is work from around the mid-Kamakura period, and Chu-Aoe work is from after the latter half of the Kamakura period. In discussing Sue-Aoe work, some people consider this as being after the Nanbochucho period, while others consider it a being from the mid-Nanbokucho period or the Oei (1394-1427) period. The identification of the style or period is supposed to depend primarily on the shape.
When classifying work based primarily on the jiba (jigane and hamon), it is difficult to draw a line by examining work from some smiths who were active in the latter half of the Kamakura period, the Nanbokucho period, and the Oei period. So using this criteria, Aoe work is just divided into two classes, “Ko-Aoe” and “Aoe” work from the mid-Kamakura period and from the latter half of the Kamakura period. For example, in discussing “Aoe” work from the shape, if you can judge the period, we do not use the terms “mid-” and “end-”. Today in judging Aoe work at the NBTHK, we just use the two terms Ko-Aoe and Aoe.
At this time, because this is not a typical Nanbokucho Enbun-Joji shape, and is from the latter half of the Kamakura period into the Nanbokucho period, a number of Aoe school smiths’ names were treated as a correct answer,
The Aoe jigane is itame hada mixed with ko-mokume hada, and there is a fine visible hada. Ko-Aoe’s Chirimen hada is famous. After the latter half of the Kamakura period we see few of these, and see primarily a tight ko-itame hada, and in addition, some midare utsuri and suji-utsuri together with dan-utsuri.
The comment “some places show a unique dark hada” is a reference to what we sometimes see in Aoe school forging called ”Sumihada”. In the Honnami book “Hiden-sho” (or “Kuchusai Hiden-sho”) it explains that “sometimes, just like Bizen utsuri on a blue ground, in places we see a different dark iron color, and if you look carefully, and examine that area, you can see that the dark area is not mokume hada, and actually appears clear”. Or in the other words, in the whitish bright utsuri, in places, there are dark black or dark areas (jifu), and this is different from the appearance of the shingane steel. These areas are also called “ Namazu-hada”, and this “Sumihada” resembles catfish skin, and the term seems to come from this.
However, when there is a suguha hamon with a tight nioichi and saka-ashi, it is seen as Ko-Aoe work, but there are abundant nie and a worn down nioiguchi. Work from the latter half of the Kamakura period can have less nie and a stronger nioiguchi, and is recognisable as nioiguchi-deki. Furthermore, in the Nanbokucho period, many of them are nioiguchi-deki.
However, there are sugaha hamon with a tight nioiguchi and saka-ashi and these are seen as Ko-Aoe work, but they have a lot of nie and a worn down nioiguchi. In the latter half of the Kamakura period there is less nie, and a more prominent nioiguchi, and these are described as nioiguchi work. Furthermore, in the Nanbokucho period, a majority of these swords are described as nioiguchi work. Also, there are fewer komidare hamon, there are tight nioiguchi which are bright and clear, and sometimes inside of the hamon we can see nijuba style hataraki. The boshi is sharp, and there is a slightly long return. In case of suguha work, this seen often in Nanbokucho period work. In the latter half of the Kamakura period, the boshi are either komaru or a prominent togari style.
Looking at the nakago, the yasurime in traditional Ko-Aoe work are o-suji chigai. The smith's signature on the majority of Ko-Aoe work is on the ura side (i.e. they are katana mei), this one is on the omote side (i.e. it is a tachi mei), and also is not a two kanji mei but is a long kanji signature, and considering the style, this is not Ko-Aoe work.
Tachi mei are seen from Ko-Aoe period smiths such as Moritsugu and Shigetsugu. But after the Showa (1312-16) period, more long kanji signatures are seen, and the majority of them are tachi-mei. Among these, some smiths wrote the name of the area they lived in and their official titles. Since then, except on naginata, there are very few long swords with katana-mei.
Among tachi, long kanji signatures inscribed along the nakago center are seen on many works from the end of the Kamakura period from the Enkyo to Gen-o eras (1308-20), and that period’s smiths include Suetsugu, Yoshitsugu, and Saemon jo Tsunetsugu. After this period up until the Bunwa period (1352), long signatures are only seen sporadically. Hidetsugu’s dated work is very rare. The location of the mei are along the mune side of the nakago, along the center, or written in a single continuous line.
Naotsugu’s Gentoku (1331) and Kenmu (1334-5) dated works are signed as katana-mei and dated along the side, and this is unusual. Besides this, Naotsugu has dated Enbun (1356-60) period work.
Around the Ryakuo period, in a complete change, many smiths signed along the mune side. Naotsugu, Tsugiyoshi, Taugunao, and Osumi gonosuke Sadatsugu are famous. Among them, Tsuguyoshi and Tsugunao have many dates written under the katana mei along the nakago center to make a long single line kanji signature.
Also, most Aoe tanto and wakizashi signatures are signed on the center of the nakago. If you recognize these nakago characteristic points, it is possible, not only from the shape, but also from a signature’s location to judge a sword’s period and a specific sword smith name.
For names of smiths with work similar to Aoe smiths, some people voted for Osafune Motoshige, Unjo and Unji.
If it were Motoshige’s work, his jigane are mixed with masame and utsuri would be midare utsuri. His hamon are based on suguha, and mixed with angular shaped features such as kaku-gunome, and his midare hamon would be more prominent.
If it were Unrui’s work, there are dark utsuri patches which have shapes which look like they are finger prints. His hamon resemble this, but there are frequent nie, abundant yo, and there are slightly less hataraki in the upper half of the hamon, and his boshi tips would have a large round style.
Explanation by Ooi Gaku.
NBTHK 75th Anniversary
Tatara 45th Anniversary
NBTHK 3rd National Convention
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
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 July issue
Deadline to apply for the 3rd national convention: Friday, October 20th 2023
November 25 ( Saturday): all events are at the Dai-ichi Hotel, Ryogoku
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
· 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