Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/14/2021 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Yes i will be selling more. The next to be listed will be The Tsukamoto Okimasa in Shingunto Koshirae. It will be going back up for sale at a reduced price from what it was advertised for some 12 months or more ago. Doug
  2. 2 points
    This was a fine sword, right out of Neil's Treasure cave. Neil thanks god that i'm not an australien resident. I would constantly annoy you for looking on your swords
  3. 2 points
    We are indeed, and it never came across as a "look what I have" Often, no comment is needed, it is just nice to see a steady flow of nice items. Like you say...a virtual exhibition. Please keep them coming. Each one has been viewed and appreciated. We don't always have to discuss. Sometimes we can just admire and enjoy.
  4. 2 points
    日本刀一振南満州鉄道株式会社 所有主 阿部文雄 Nihontō hitofuri Minami Manshū Tetsudō Kabushikikaisha Shoyūnushi Abe Fumio Japanese sword (one) South Manchurian Railway Corporation Owner: Fumio ABE The cloth tags also belong to Fumio Abe, and give his address and the name of a neighborhood association (presumably near where he lived). The address is Motobuto in Urawa (close to Tokyo). Urawa is a fairly major town. The section of Motobuto is still there, but the address system changed, so you'd have to find an old map to pinpoint the location.
  5. 2 points
    Just a few observations on ' A series of fittings ...etc ' Having just posted item No. 25 , I wanted to mention that this is a similar quantity to what I would take and show at a Token of GB outreach meeting , and this in part is the idea of the thread. As we have all been in various stages of lockdown , for probably a year or so , for most people , I thought that I would put my fittings on the NMB instead and give a wider access to those who are interested. The main difference is that the entire collection will be displayed , albeit one at a time , over the coming months . Of course this may be regarded as a ' look what I've got' vanity project , but that is not the intent - as I have stated in an earlier post , the good , bad, and indifferent will all be shown. I have numbered up all fittings and then generated a random sequence of them so that , with the exception of a few favourites which I am keeping to the end , any quality or type of fitting could appear next. No. 26 will be posted tomorrow ( Wednesday )....
  6. 1 point
    A very well made fake Mantetsu. As i looked on it i thought wow. But the mukden stamp is missing and mukden was engraved. If you look on the place and signature engraving the place and size is not correct. And the whole shape of the sword is not that a mantetsu should look like. I see this now after reading the topic! And this is what i learned. But overall it makes fear, with the fittings and the box how much criminal energy is there to blame people. Good to have so highly trained members here with John, Trystan, Bruce, Steve and others. Alex my compliment to show it here. I'm not sure i think if the price where low i had bought it and get blamed.
  7. 1 point
    There is no doubt in my mind this is a fake. This group takes original Gunto and adds various Mei of valuable smiths and makers, they come up for auction on Yahoo.jp very often.
  8. 1 point
    Bruce I thought you might be interested in this, a friend of mine in China just found this Mantetsu sewer cover still in use in Fu Shun 撫順.
  9. 1 point
    This sword is no longer for sale.
  10. 1 point
    Iron, with very faint traces of gold (?) zogan. Mumei. Not maru-gata, so... Aori-gata? 8.5 cm x 8.0 cm, any central thickness being lost towards the mimi. Picked this up hidden in a box of bits and pieces, with a length of dark indigo armour lacing tightly wound into the three central openings. The design seems to be... Kishobu yellow iris, 黄菖蒲 Kishobu, (水菖蒲 Mizu-Shobu?) or アヤメ Ayame? with 八つ橋 Yatsuhashi, in some kind of Takabori relief. Questions for our learned scholars. Can anyone elucidate the relief carving process? Do the symmetrical 擬宝珠 Giboshi-shaped Hitsu-ana indicate anything in particular, like ability to date? Further constructive comments always welcome. (And no, I do not think you can crush my enthusiasm!) Photos to follow...
  11. 1 point
  12. 1 point
    Dear Bob, let me second Barry... I'm sure that everyone is enjoying the eye candy - please keep it up!
  13. 1 point
    Hi Alex, Please tell whoever it is with the sword to wipe the blade where he is holding it in your 2nd to last picture. Acid in his sweat is slowly but surely etching his fingerprints into the surface. Never touch the polished portion of the blade. Grey
  14. 1 point
    Thanks for sharing Bob. I'm sure that many of us wish that they were for sale rather than show.
  15. 1 point
    SOLD............. Thank you to the buyer and to all those who who shown interest. Kind regards Doug
  16. 1 point
    This is the only known 42nd series Mantetsu reported so far. I guess that makes it one of a kind! シ三〇四 = SHI 304. 興亞一心 = Kōa Isshin. 満鐵作 = Mantetsu saku = Made by SMR. 昭和癸未春 = Spring 1943.
  17. 1 point
    BIG, you need a "Gold Tier Membership" (GTM) to see who reacted to a post of yours. If you are not a GTM, then you only see the reaction and not the person who reacted. Subscriptions
  18. 1 point
    As others above I would not think this to be Magoroku work but I would think it could be some late Muromachi to early Edo period Kanemoto.
  19. 1 point
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    金華山麓 – The base of Kinkazan (Mt. Kinka) 於濃州長良川邊 – at the riverside of Noshu Nagaragawa 藤原清長 – Fujiwara Kiyonaga
  22. 1 point
    Now I am not sure if my assumption is correct but I thought for those cutting tests on Koyama Munetsugu swords NBTHK did not add Kiritsuke-mei in brackets, so I assumed they were originally signed like that. Just noticed my error as I had by mistake added the 2 Kiyomaro swords in Jūyō 25 in wrong order. The one with cutting test was made in 1854 and not 1849, sorry for my mistake. So the correct line would be - Katana – Kiyomaro (1854) - 源清麿 / 嘉永七年正月日 [Kiritsuke 切手山田源蔵 / 安政三年十月廿三日於千住太々土壇払, I will attach the picture of it. Unfortunately I don't have the knowledge to judge cutting tests so I would see what NBTHK states in the Tokubetsu Hozon paper and if they have (Kiritsuke) in regards the cutting test. I think Markus Sesko has probably done the most research about Yamada family in the West and he would know the best what documentation has survived to this day.
  23. 1 point
    Jan, There is NO way anyone here can easily say the mei compares well with genuine Nobuyoshi blades. You would need to read up and study gimei for years before understanding what is involved. It is not like gimei is only identified by obvious differences. You need to becomes somewhat of a handwriting analyst and be able to detect subtle pressure changes and stroke angles and the way the mei is carved fluently to even begin to understand gimei. I've only been studying Nihonto for about 18 years, and I wouldn't even attempt to make that call. Perhaps someone here will post a pic or 2 of the chapter on gimei from the Nihonto Koza volume, showing how tiny the differences are. The average person is incapable of just comparing 2 signatures and saying they look the same. I won't make a call on whether yours is shoshin or not. But I can say that I regard any sword with a biggish name without papers to be gimei and treat it as mumei until proven otherwise. Remember there are supposedly more gimei swords out there than real ones. If I were you, I would focus on the sword and not the signature. You are never going to know if it is right or not anyways, since neither you nor I will likely have $4000+ to polish and send any of our swords for papers. So I learn to focus on everything else and not the signature. You cannot be certain of age either, and any guesses are going to be just that...guesses. Without confirmation ever. Suffice to say it has a few hundred years on it, and that should be enough to enjoy. We all like to put things into neat little boxes, but one of the first things to learn when collecting or studying Japanese swords at an entry or low-mid level is that you likely will never know for sure and it shouldn't affect your enjoyment.
  24. 1 point
    Adding in my thanks for a great thread here as well. Learning a lot through you all!
  25. 1 point
    Have very much enjoyed the above presentations. Hoping someone can clarify my offering. Purchased here at NMB just over a year ago from Mark who was very generous to me after being given something of a barracking from one, maybe more spectators on the "For Sale' sidelines. A Kwaiken, a concealable women's knife, great condition, about 16.8cm blade, originally a Kikutchi Yari cut down to make a small tanto in 1897 as per inscription on reformed tang. The maker's name is more obscure ?-Kane ? Koto period ? Actually it was Mark then BaZZa who put me in some of the picture. It is a lovely Kwaiken in my opinion. Thank you.
  26. 1 point
    Dear All Thank you to all those who took the trouble to have a go at this exercise. It wasn’t intended as a competition it was an attempt to get people thinking about what we are told and how we apply it. Two things virtually all books tell us: Shape indicates age. Look and understand the shape before you look at anything else. In a perfect world these represent good advice, however once a sword is modified looking at the shape is not enough. I was impressed that nearly everyone was hovering around the right answers, some slightly better than others. If I was awarding prizes (which I am not) I think it would have to go to Arnold who was pretty well there or there abouts on all counts. The answers: Shin-Shinto (1860s) Momoyama more specifically Tensho (1578-1590) Late Kamakura (1320-1330) Early to mid Kamakura (1215-1220) Explanation: An ubu Mumei Katana papered to Hosakawa Tadamasa of the 1860s. It is a Yamashiro/Enju lookalike with beautiful jigane and a ko-nie hamon. Without the luxury of the paper my first guess on this would have been Hizen based on an ageless elegant shape and the tight hada. The NTHK papered it but to be honest I am still trying to understand the attribution to the Hosakawa school although I can understand the dating. An O-suriage katana attributed to O-Kanemichi (Dai-Do) and dated to Tensho. The original shape would have been considerably longer slim and elegant. The hada and hamon clearly show the Mino roots. I have had this sword for many years but to be honest have studied everything but the shape so have taken the papers at face value. If after further research this doesn’t seem right I will come back to you. An O-suriage tachi attribute to Aoe Tsunetsugu and dated to the late Kamakura. I also thought Nambokucho when I first saw it. It is a large sword with an extended chu-kissaki so the nambokucho dating was understandable. However as an Aoe sword if it did date to Nambokucho it would be even bigger ,with an O-kissaki. More importantly the hamon would be nioi based, a lot more flamboyant and there would be shirrake utsuri. In this case the blade has a ko-nie deki hamon a huge amount of ji-nie and jifu (I know you can’t see it in the images but bear with me) The other real clincher is the turn back on the boshi is very sharp and according to the papers this is a strong indicator of Kamakura period Aoe workmanship. A Kamakura period Tachi attributed to the Awataguchi smith Norikuni who was working circa 1215-1222 so depending on where you choose to draw the line early or mid Kamakura. This is a classic early Yamashiro shape or would have been prior to shortening. Even in its shortened state there is evidence of slight fumbari and it is just koshi-zori. Equally important and indicative of very early swords is the straightness almost appearing as uchi-zori in the last 10-20cm of the blade. I have seen this feature on a high proportion of older blades and personally think it is a good indicator of age when the more obvious features at the other end have been removed. I think if there is any conclusion to be drawn from this small exercise it is that looking at one element of a sword is never enough you have to look at it as a whole and reach a conclusion on how the different elements work together. Having said that the results here also indicate that starting with the shape can put you very close to where you want to be and can at least reduce the search a little. Unfortunately it is one feature of the blade that we are inclined to ignore as we search hungrily for details of hamon and hada to determine who made something and when.
  27. 0 points
    Theres a que chen, and your behind me hahahaha. But whos in front of me
  • Create New...