Leaderboard

I thought I'd post this here for the exposure, then it can be moved to the Fake Sword thread. Found at this Western Trading Post auction (Invaluable) At first, I thought it was legit, but with wrong saya. But red flags: 1. No dimples in the tsuka diamonds 2. Wrong curvature of latch 3. A zero in the front of the serial number "02353". 4. Wrong ending of the bohi Patina to the tsuka is shockingly good and stamps are pretty darn close, however the center "TO" is too big. I'll post their photos and what it should look like right next to them: FAKE REAL

I am currently on train so I cannot write too long post. However as the sword seems to be 49 cm in current form and would seem to have long portion of the mei intact, I would guess it would have been under 60 cm blade originally.

Good eye, Bruce. I agree. We will have to keep a keen eye out for these. Thank you for sharing. To add, the habaki on copper hilt Type 95 swords should have a cutout on the mune (like the Nihonto habaki we are familiar with). The subsequent aluminum hilt variations did away with the habaki cutout. Also factory original copper hilt swords were made without a mekugi. Instead they are secured to the hilt only by the grommet screw at the kobutogane. Example of the habaki on a genuine sword:

This sword has its Mei on the Sashiomote side (usually seen on Uchigatana and Wakizashi, with many, many exceptions), and Hachou (length of the blade part) being undoubtedly under 60cm originally, makes this very likely a Katateuchi (if this is Muromachi) or a Wakizashi, not in any way a Tachi, unfortunately. (Kodachi's Hachou are usually originally under 60cm, but again have their Mei on the Hakiomote, though there are exceptions, too, like this Norifusa.) Being very ignorant in Kantei Kanshou to begin with, my two cents are this is more Muromachi, if that, than Nanbokuchou. Ookissaki alone may not be enough.

Hi Lewis, I am not sure what translation AI workflow you are using but please exercise care. If it doesn't sound like the NBHTK, it is likely contaminated by hallucinations. I will endeavor to bring back accurate translations this summer to NW. The appropriate translation of the setsumei: Explanation Among the students of Shintōgo Kunimitsu, the three smiths Yukimitsu, Norishige, and Masamune further emphasized chikei, kinsuji, and nie within the Sōshū tradition established by Kunimitsu, and in so doing led it toward completion. Masamune in particular mastered the subtle handling of several kinds of steel with differing carbon content, and brought the expressive potential of nie to its highest refinement, thereby contributing greatly to the elevation of the artistic character of the Japanese sword. This katana is an ō-suriage and originally mumei blade that was appraised as Masamune by Hon’ami Kojun who then applied a gold-inlaid attribution. The forging shows itame with mixed mokume, with thickly formed ji-nie and plentiful chikei, yielding a well-refined surface texture. The hamon is a notare-based pattern mixed with gunome, well covered in nie and displaying varied activities; in both ji and ha it demonstrates the fascinating nuances of transformation within nie. Kojun's appraisal to Masamune is persuasive; the sword is kenzen (sound and well-preserved), and its vividly clear (saeru) ji and ha are especially worthy of attention. A few points to note: Hon'ami Kojun's kiwame are suspect by default, we are late into the Hon'ami era and the pressure exercised upon the house by the corrupt Shogunal Councilor. Here, it is persuasive. If it was not, the NBHTK would have simply added Kinzogan ga aru. Another point: "fascinating nuances of transformation within nie" is a lexicon associated almost exclusively with Norishige, which says something regarding the direction of the work. It was indeed a lucky day for someone back in 2008, and also for the dealer: it is a rare privilege to be able to intermediate in the sales of such a special piece. It made him proud, and he left at the top of his website for the past 18 years. This speaks volume. Best, Hoshi

Thanks Sam! Just for the record, you can find legitimate coppers with a screw. It is believed they were factory repaired jobs. With the mismatched saya, this one could be pretending to be one, if all the other things were right…. But even the paint on the saya is clearly new.

Hi Folks, is anybody else here attending this year´s event in Utrecht? Bought my Early Bird Tickets today. https://www.japanartfair.com/

Hey all! After about 2 months of waiting, my Tanto finally arrived today. It is my second ever Nihonto and was a bit of an impulsive buy (not really proud of that fact). While browsing sellers for Kamakura/ Nambokucho pieces, this little guy caught my eye and I was immediatly fascinated by it. Skip a few days, and lots of pieces from my wishlist sold out one after another, so I decided to go for it and got it. It is a pretty thick Tanto for its size, not sure if it is quite Yoroi-Doshi territory yet. Some stats first: Nagasa: 21.2cm (7 Sun) Sori: 0 Mekugi-ana: 1 Motohaba: 20.8mm Motokasane: 8.4mm (Pretty thick!) Jitetsu: Itame with Masame Hamon: No clue what to call it, but some big Midare? It has little islands of Hamon that could be Tobiyaki? Boshi: Was described as Midare-komi Kaen Nakago is Ubu and Suguta is Hira-zukuri. The Mune is in the Iorimune shape To finally get to the reason for this post: The Mei. This piece is signed Kanemitsu, but 包光 with 包 as the Kane Kanji. Now, from the signature alone it reminds me of Tegai/Sue Tegai with the niji mei and the choice of the Kane 包, as many smiths in that school seemed to use that particular Kane. However, in my eyes and especially after reading Tanobe Michihiros Book on the Yamato tradition, which a friend borrowed me, the worksmanship does not fit at all. On a side not, I should probably pick up the other books from the Gokaden series. Now, I initially wanted to ignore the Mei completely and enjoy the piece for what it is, but it has Hozon papers. Please correct me if I am wrong on that, but that basically rules out gimei? The certificate states that the region is unkown, though that it is a late Muromachi era piece. My best guess currently is, that it is some unregistered Mino smith, where there was not enough references to nail it down with certainty. Nonetheless, I found some hints for this theory: 1. Left of the MITSU Kanji are faint Higaki file marks visible. 2.I have seen some wild Midare hamons on Mino during my last Japan trip. 3. While this is a little far fetched, but according to the Nihontoclub Mei search, there have been smiths in Mino during that time frame, that did use the 包 Kanji for Kane. There is also a Kanemitsu listed for Mino (KAN137) but there seems to be not much info on him. I did shoot some pictures of the blade with my Macro lens, there will be some added below. Another cool thing is that it was registered on March 16th 1951 in Aichi, which is very early. It has what seems to be matching Koshirae with a three star like Kamon on the habaki and on the Saya (On the side I forgot to take a picture off, of course). It might not help much, but it is still interesting. If someone has any clues on where the smith could have come from, I would be most thankful. But all feedback to this little sword is welcome. All the Best Erik

Still, a tachi from Nambokucho would've been significantly longer. The sugata of that time was mostly impressive in size. Tachi were regularly exceeding 90cm. Even if a tachi was on the very lower end of 70cm nagase: you Waki has 63.5 cm total length now. You have to deduct I guess 5 or 6 cm for mei, another 3 or 4 cm for the habaki. So there is no chance that even in theory, your sword ever was a tachi or katana. Well, only if the smith signed his work as horimono, way before the munemachi. Just kidding. So if you want to learn about swords; you maybe want to change your direction on this particular piece a little bit. And I agree, it's a beautiful and interesting piece. Best, Alex

Yeap, that's Edo period. Don't want to judge whether this is the listed Soshu Hisayoshi, but it can be shinshinto soshu.

Hisayoshi is an ingenious suggestion! Thanks Bugyotsuji. My thoughts are that the blade came from a Nanbokucho tachi, I am reading that two Soshu-den Hisayoshi’s worked in the Muromachi, and later Shinto eras. So, chronologically it might not fit, unless I’m wrong about the Nanbokucho tachi. Hence my focus is on Nanbokucho smiths. Thank you very much for taking the time to share your thoughts though

相模国住人久義 Have you considered? (Totally off the wall but simply looking at those strokes…)

Yes I have searched and thus far never seen a CONVEX LENS shaped guard - it is not oval or egg shaped - perhaps it represents a grain of rice?

Sorry here's some photos of it overall:

Photos of the Mei:

Well thanks for catching it so quickly. It was a lucky day for someone. Sounds like a rare opportunity to acquire an authenticated Masamune in exceptional condition. Appraisal and Description of the Blade The three masters—Yukimitsu, Norishige, and Masamune—who studied under Shintōgo Kunimitsu, further accentuated chikei (dark lines of martensite), kinsuji (golden lines), and nie (bright crystals) within the Sōshū tradition founded by Kunimitsu, successfully bringing the style to its ultimate perfection. Masamune, in particular, masterfully manipulated several types of steel with varying carbon contents and pushed the aesthetic beauty of nie to its absolute zenith, contributing monumentally to elevating the Japanese sword into a realm of pure art. This specific blade is an ō-suriage (greatly shortened) unsigned specimen that Hon’ami Kōjun appraised as the work of Masamune, affixing a kin-zōgan (gold inlay) attribution. The grain (kitae) exhibits itame (wood grain) mixed with mokume (burl grain), covered in a thick layer of ji-nie, with prominent chikei coming through to present a well-kneaded, refined texture (nereta hadai). The temper line (hamon) is a notare (wavy) variation interspersed with gunome (undulating semicircles), heavily laden with nie that manifest various activities (hataraki). Both the steel topology (ji) and the cutting edge (ha) display an exquisite mastery of shifting nie dynamics. Kōjun’s attribution to Masamune is entirely convincing; the blade is in a superb state of health (kenzen), and the clear, radiant clarity (sae) across both the ji and ha deserves special commendation. (Excerpted from the Jūyō Tōken Zufu / Important Sword Masterpieces Registry) Structural Characteristics and Workmanship Shape (Sugata): Shinogi-zukuri (ridged style). Standard width (mihaba) with a moderate curve (sori), leading into a chū-kissaki (medium point) that is slightly extended (nobi-gokoro). Steel topology (Jitetsu): Itame mixed with mokume grain. The entire surface is densely blanketed with a thick coating of ji-nie, accompanied by striking, well-defined chikei. Temper Line (Hamon): Notare style intermingled with gunome and ko-ashi (small vertical activities). It is heavily laden with glittering nie, featuring patches of coarser nie (arame-no-nie) throughout. Active sunagashi (stream-like patterns) appear continuously alongside kinsuji and tobiyaki (detached spots of temper). The sections exhibiting fierce activity evoke a profound, ethereal elegance (yūgen), while the quieter, lower-burned sections actively interweave yubashiri (blurs of nie). The overall composition represents the absolute ideal of Masamune's tempering technique. Notably, the exceptional brilliance and luster of each individual grain of nie is extraordinary, standing out significantly even when compared to other works by the same smith. Tip (Bōshi): Richly swept (hakikake), taking on a fiery kaen (flame) appearance. Tang (Nakago): Ō-suriage (greatly shortened). Features a gold inlay attribution (kin-zōgan mei) reading "Masamune" on the obverse (omote) and "Hon'ami" on the reverse (ura). Appraiser's Commentary Perhaps due to his forging technique of blending multiple types of steel with differing carbon contents, one frequently encounters Masamune blades where the texture appears coarse, or where the steel is genuinely rough. This tendency is notably more pronounced in long swords (katana) than in short daggers (tantō). Compounded by the scarce number of surviving long blades, finding a Masamune that is completely flawless, perfectly preserved, and crafted with superior workmanship is an exceedingly rare privilege. The piece at hand is not only a textbook archetype of Masamune’s style, but it also remains in exemplary condition. It conveys the absolute essence of the Sōshū tradition—the sublime beauty of nie—without omission. A vast array of characteristics historically attributed to Masamune present themselves vividly across the blade. It is a masterpiece where his true prowess is fully unleashed and concentrated; a blade that serves as the ultimate textbook for understanding the very nature of Masamune's craft. Among the works of Masamune—who stands at the absolute pinnacle of Japanese swordsmithing—this blade indubitably merits the designation of a masterpiece. It is a sublime treasure of such high caliber that its current Jūyō Tōken (Important Sword) status feels like an understatement of its true worth.

Oh, I could have actually read the original message. It has papers. If it says province unknown, means unlisted smith but most likely the signature is genuine. With this style and this name there are not too many options, especially with such yasurime. Zenjo, Kanabo, some other Yamato-Mino lineage, and its not exactly what Zenjo is typically associated with, hitatsura.

I can't really see the first kanji, but I assume it was read by someone with much better command of Japanese. With Kanemitsu written this way it is most likely unlisted smith from Mino of Tegai descent, probably of Kanabo lineage. The style is Soshu, hitatsura, which is not that uncommon with some Mino tanto circa 1520+. But its not the mainline Soshu work.

Was thinking about the legend that Daruma's intense stare bored holes in the wall of the cave...

Granules of silver melted onto the base metal - just hot enough to pool the silver without it running off. Rare because getting the temperature correct is extremely difficult. Technique found here in:: https://ia801304.us.archive.org/2/items/arsorientalisar111979univ/arsorientalisar111979univ.pdf ARS ORIENTALIS THE TECHNIQUES OF THE Japanese TSUBA-MAKER By ELAINE I. SAVAGE* and CYRIL STANLEY SMITH** VOL . 11 FREER GALLERY OF ART, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION DEPARTMENT OF THE HISTORY OF ART, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Copyright © 1979 " An interesting variation is the use of silver in the effect called gama-hada , “toad-skin” surface. In this, convex drops of silver are attached to an iron surface to yield interesting contrasts of shape, texture and color (fig. 35). For rather subtle reasons dependent on the balance of inter-atomic forces at the interfaces between the iron, the silver, and the air, the molten metal does not spread out over the surface, but remains as drops with a well-defined angle of contact (fig. 36)." The technique does sometimes [mostly?] fail, I have an example of such.

Frank, I'm not a nihonto guy, but there are many blades with 1 fuller on one side and 2 on the other. It's a nice style, if you ask me. Also, the guys will no doubt want to know some measurements like:

I am sorry for the bad news, but this is not authentic nor Japanese. https://www.jssus.org/nkp/fake_japanese_swords.html

城州住国重 – Kunishige living in Joshu The first two kanji must be 城州 (Joshu). 城州 (Joshu) is another name of 山城國 (Yamashiro province). The first kanji on the tang may not look like 城, but it must be a variation of 城 character. Ref. 「城」（U+57CE） | 日本古典籍くずし字データセット

The inscription reads: 城州 住 國重 Which translates to: Joshu Ju Kunishige Which basically means: Kunishige made this in Joshu (or maybe in Chikuzen. Or perhaps in Chin-shu wherever that is). If my interpretation of the above is at all incorrect, I’m sure someone will correct me; and for Franks sake I encourage anyone to do so. You might think this would be enough for some detailed info, but unfortunately, nothing in Nihonto is that simple. There were many swordsmiths who signed “Kunishige” over the centuries, and unfortunately your blade does not appear to be dated (if it were dated, there would likely be an inscription on the other side of the tang). All hope is not lost though… Your sword looks interesting to me. We might be able to help narrow down a date range, but for that we’d need a lot of good photos. Primarily of the entire blade profile without fittings and the tip, both sides, and also both sides of the nakago up close. See my little photo guide below. All that said, even with perfect pictures, judging swords via photos is far from ideal. To get a really good idea of what you have, we always recommend getting it into the hands of a respected expert or togishi. -Sam

Posting the nakago from the sale:

The Birmingham Arms Fair is coming up (14th June) so here are some poor images of assorted kozuka that I will be taking (Table 81) Mei include Goto, Hamano, Issando Joi, Hirata (the incredibly rare enamelled tigers) etc. Quality ranges from “OK” to very fine (imo🙂) Hope to see some of you there. All the best. Colin

This JAF fair edition is something special for the Japanese Armor Society. For the very first time, a shinsa will take place outside Japan. 3 Japanese NKBKHK shinsa members will come over to evaluate armor related items. The team will be in contact with the Japanese jury during the evaluation. Unfortunately, the session is fully booked, I hope we can do this again in the future. For the record, since last Year the NKBKHK is recognised by the Japanese Governement.

Well technically, Ford may not have been entirely correct at the time. The Japanese smith Kazunari Nariki clearly rediscovered the technique and became quite proficient at it. It was more along the lines of the smoother Kanyama and Ohno type tekkotsu, but not the more extreme "explosions" or "volcanic craters" such as the ones in the Yamakichibei Low-Crossbar smith's work I posted above. Unfortunately that potential for gaining information is now gone because Kazunari Nariki passed away in 2022. He was dedicated to sourcing sand iron from the specific regions where certain types of tsuba were made in order to achieve the different look of let's say a smooth black iron finish from Higo or the melty-looking lumpy surface of Kanayama-esque tekkotsu. Utsushi of a Higo tsuba: Utsushi of Yamakichibei with an otafuku-shaped guruma motif: Utsushi of an early Hoan style irregularly spaced rays motif (a variant from the more typical guruma motif): So that seems to hint at getting back to the idea of material composition as a significant contributing factor for the outcome. I have a strong suspicion that the effect will not be effectively achieved by using modern produced mono-steels with fairly even distribution of component materials in the alloys. i suspect using the right grade of steel from the right type of sand iron formed in a tatara will be a critical key to unraveling it all... but we shall see... i hope

Found it... 1- straight line guide on a practice plate 2- Wavy line guide on a tsuba in progress

Thats very generous and a great opportunity for someone who can make the show. Might be worth mentioning which days are covered. The tickets are personal so it is probably necessary to contact the organisers to transfer the new attendees name prior to the Show. Not long now. Can't wait.

Will be there for the third time… There are several hotels in the proximity of the venue, but you have to book early! Carel V is the most convenient, but quite expensive… Guess I know this collector, Brian

There is a Inntel Hotel in the centre of Utrecht https://www.inntelhotels.nl/utrechtcentre/. They give a reduction in price when you have a JAF ticket. It is next to the Utrecht Central Station, a 15 minute stroll from the Karel V. Pierre

No, I'm sending my collector half instead

I’ll be there. 3rd year.

Note that I did say that these were the photos I had to work from i.e. they were provided by the auction house,sorry if you misunderstood,is English your 1st language? charles.

Good afternoon Raouf, What you have is a perfect study piece for you at your stage in the great game. What you have paid is what is often referred to as "School Fees" in the Antiques Trade. Now you need to get to see as much of the best quality as you can, either physically at museums or using Google Museum search etc, and compare it to what you have, in a positive, take it on the chin and move on manner. I can remember my first purchase of an armour, way back, it cost me £20, an absolute fortune in those days, when woke meant something to do with the interim betwixt sleep and awake and Nihonto were dumped into old Tea Chests at the back of the Antiques shop with a standard price of £4 Ten shillings for a Wakizashi and £ 5 Ten shillings for a Katana. (As you are in the Americas, I think that would probably equate with a Burger and Fries for the wakizashi and a Burger and Fries and a Milk shake for the Katana....... and a slap up table for two at Dennys for the armour. But to a 12 year old, Fledgling Katchubunny, I thought it was amazing, and I was absolutely sure that Toshiro Mifune had worn it at the Battle of Sekigahara......... I looked at it so closely, every rivet, every delamination of the Urushi, every rust hole and fraying of the Blue odoshi, that it became like a road map. So, have the courage to fail old chum.