Possible to date this blade?

[Logan09]

Picked this blade up. It is signed "Osafune Tadamitsu" which I believe to be Gimei. The Mune near the kissaki is poorly lined up with other side as well which I wouldn't expect.

 

Blade is 24-1/8inches

Overall 30-7/8 inches

Sori is 1"

[Rivkin]

Without looking at the signature, it kind of feels early Edo or maybe Momoyama.

 

Kirill R.

[Logan09]

Picture of Mei. I'm not one to date swords but I was thinking Edo(closer to 1700s)

[Rivkin]

Possible, but a few things:

Very few swords were made beginning with 1700 due to economic collapse.

Nakago condition and the lack of well defined filing more consistent with earlier date

Lots of ware and other issues is also not that common in Kambun and later swords.

I personally would not discard 1550 as possiblity.

 

Kirill R.

[Jean]

Osafune Tadamitsu

[Blazeaglory]

If legit, it's pre 1600 but honestly Mei looks a little off from the brief searches I've done.

 

But, as they say, you can't really get an answer by comparing a few known legit Mei for discrepancy.

 

Also, was Tadamitsu known for that style of hada, hamon and sori? I can't say but I'm sure the pro's will chime in soon

 

Good luck! Either way, legit Mei or not, it appears to be a genuine Nihonto.

[Logan09]

Thanks for the replies.

 

Just going off what I see, it appears to be Itame with what also looks like Mokume Hada(hard to make out now) Chu-Suguha hamon I'm guessing.

 

So far I'm just hoping the timeframe is within 1500s. I still don't think it is a true Tadamitsu.

[Peter Bleed]

I think you can assume that this is NOT a gimei.  Likewise, I think you can just assume that it dates from the 1500s. Why not, and what else is it gonna be? This looks like a working sword of the Sendgoku-jida. It is not in bad shape so I think it could be put into a shirasaya and "collected." If it were submitted to shinsa I doubt that it would be bounced - simply - as a gimei. The fact that it looks like it has a big section of the shinogi-ji ready to fall off seems more serious.

This is a real sword IMHO.

Peter

[Ray Singer]

Unfortunately I would lean on the other side towards this blade being gimei. That is both based on the appearance of the mei itself and also having a very uncharacteristic mei format (I cannot recall any authentic Sue-Bizen with a four character mei of Osafune + smith name). The Tadamitsu were considered among the best of Sue-Bizen, and were a target for gimei.

 

I agree with the thoughts above pointing to Sue-koto as the time period.

[Vermithrax16]

Agree with Ray on the mei aspect. I can find no reference to this signage for Tadamitsu. Era most certainly Sue-Koto.

 

A better question is what are you looking for in this purchase Logan? What were your ideas or buy parameters for this item?

[Logan09]

Once again I very much appreciate the replies.

 

I already purchased the blade. I had a strong feeling the blade was gimei. I was more curious about the age. I thought being Gimei it would be a much later timeframe. It's definitely not an "Art" sword but I like the fact that these were made for one purpose in mind.

[Rivkin]

The signature is strange indeed as Ray mentioned in the way Bishu ju is omitted; also my personal feeling would be that Tadamitsu tend to fall into slightly earlier sugata - either long blades with long nakago and slight saki-zori or dating to 1500-1520 uchi-gatana with short-wide nakago. A personal feeling - this one seems slightly later.  It certainly falls into uchi-gatana dimension size-wise, but the proportions are different.

 

This being said, with multi-generation smiths from Sengaku deviations in signatures and work style, but seldom both simultaneously, are often accepted. I had little known smith with work sort of typical for the school, but the signature included names he was never known to have - and it papered, no one will argue that among the many generations there was not one who did not have these names, even if they are not in the books and even look very strange (wrong clan name). Slightly different story than here though.

 

Kirill R.

[Peter Bleed]

Well, gee.

I took a dismissive hipshot at a sword that on the surface is NOT worth deep thought or careful consideration. When  this sword was made, swords were deeply needed and quickly used. It doesn't matter! It is obviously a mass produced weapon. And it is all right for us to dismiss it. In fact the name Tadamitsu seems to have been used by a bunch of smiths - some of whom were skilled. Simply looking at this sword should let us see that this ain't in that category.

Thinking deeply about swords like this is not a good use of our time.

I should have followed my own advice and stayed out of the conversation. Please forgive me.

Peter