Wakizashi smith tracking

[cofor22]

I just bought a short but relatively heavy wakizashi. 390 gram 39.5 cm cutting edge. It is signed Shigetaka but mei looks wrong to me which makes me guess gimei. Some research made before deciding to go for it gave me a hunch it could be legit anyway. Am I completely lost? The image is put together in Photoshop. Center one is what I bought, left is second generation and right is first generation. In my untrained eyes it seems close. What do you say? Can it be Echizen work of, let's say, ok beginners quality?

https://gemology.se/files/Comparison.jpg

 

Conny Forsberg

[ROKUJURO]

Welcome to the NM board, Conny!

I cannot open the photos to full length; just the KISSAKI is visible. 

[cofor22]

Right that is only what is in the image. Time is well past midnight here, will add a couple of more images tomorrow. Even more when my blade arrives.

 

Conny F

[Ken-Hawaii]

First, please buy the blade, not the mei! Many, many blades are gimei, but may still be worth owning. The photos show the continuation of the hamon pattern into the boshi, which usually indicates a Koto blade, but we need to see more shots to determine tradition, school, & smith.

 

While you're awaiting delivery, you might want to browse through NMB posts to get some ideas on how best to photograph Nihonto.

[cofor22]

Thanks for your input Ken.

A few more images uploaded. I certainly did not buy the signature. The blade shape was what caught my eye and I early suspected gimei. That will not bother me at all as long as I get a nice piece to study.

Anyone like to comment on the images, please let me know what can be seen in terms of age and overall quality (as much as can be told by an image).

https://gemology.se/files/waki/full.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/left_01.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/left_02.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/right_01.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/right_02.jpg

 

Conny F

[Jussi Ekholm]

Perhaps you could post a better picture of the signature?

 

From the latest pics I am guessing 播磨大掾藤原 / 越前住 - Harima no Daijō Fujiwara / Echizen jū

 

Granted really the only smith that the mei would fit is Shigetaka but it is missing the last 2 characters. As the picture does not show mei well it is very difficult to say anything but I think the signatures on both sides look different based on that one picture.

 

As you are in Sweden I think you could also contact Scandinavian NBTHK branch for some help. I know they'd be happy to help you with all the questions you have. And of course we will help here at NMB as much as we can too.

[cofor22]

Thanks Jussi!

Besides the mei, what can be said about blade?

Yes I am in Sweden.

 

Conny F

[Ken-Hawaii]

The ubu blade looks to be in good shape, Conny, & the sugata points towards Kanbun Shinto. From NMB member Markus Sesko's kantei on wakizashi:

 

Wakizashi from that time feature like their katana counterparts a Kanbun-shintô sugata,
that means they have a nagasa of about 45~50 cm, taper noticeably, and
end in a compact chû-kissaki. All schools of that time made such wakizashi and it
is hard to name any representative smith.

 

I'd like to point to Sesko's excellent https://markussesko.com/kantei/- he provides a university-level course on understanding the Japanese sword. What I referenced is in #8.

 

Hard to tell much about the hamon because of the heavy hadori polish.

[cofor22]

Thanks, I have read a lot of Marcus excellent information. The nagasa of this blade is just 39.5 cm. I will try to get images of true hamon when blade arrives. Also some microscope images of steel and hamon.

 

Conny F

[cofor22]

Got the blade and have done some measuring and shot some images.

Nagasa: 39.5 cm

Sori: 1.1 cm

Moto-haba: 31.12 mm

Saki-haba: 22.6 mm

Kasane: 6.5mm tapering to 4.8 mm

 

What can be said about hamon and hada from the images linked below? I find it difficult, as a newbie, to describe.

 

https://gemology.se/files/waki/hada_02.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/hamon_02.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/hamon_03.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/hamon_closeup_01.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/hamon_closeup_02.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/boshi_02_daylight.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/boshi_03_daylight.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/boshi_04.jpg

 

Conny F

[SteveM]

The sword looks very nice. No problems with the sword. As for the signature, you have a few generations of Shigetaka to choose from, so it would be good if you could get it in front of someone who has some familiarity with the various idiosyncrasies of the generations. But from what I can see from the very good close-ups, it looks like a nice wakizashi. 

[cofor22]

Thanks Steve,

The worst fault in the blade can be seen in the first image. Below a couple of images of small irregularities in the steel. Otherwise it is very even quality. Looks very sharp and is "meaty" as it is nicely convex from shinogi to ha. Can Ji-Hada be described as ko-itame and do I see some masame in Shinogi-ji?

 

https://gemology.se/files/waki/biggest_ware.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/biggest_ware_daylight.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/ware_01.jpg

https://gemology.se/files/waki/ware-hada-nie.jpg

 

Conny F

[cofor22]

Are the images not good enough to say something about hada? I can not categorize myself. Find it hard. The true hamon is easier and I call it gunome-midare.

[Ken-Hawaii]

The last two shots have enough illumination to be able to say something about the hada, Conny, which is primarily itame. (Big hint: ALL blades have some itame hada!)

 

I don't see much midare in the hamon, although I do see a gentle notare with ashi. But what I see as notare, you may see as gunome.

[cofor22]

Thanks, as a beginner I would not argue. It could be described as notare with ashi. It is not easy to separat all nuances.

 

Conny F