Shugyosha

Hi Rob, Truthfully, I don't have an answer as I suspect there were a variety of factors at play. A book that you might find interesting is Japanese spears: Polearms and their use in old Japan by Roald Knutsen. Available on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Japanese-Spears-Polearms-Their-Japan/dp/1901903567 Best, John

Hi Bruce, Something to get you going. On the first sheet, first column: 品目 Hinmoku Item 造兵刀 Army sword Production (not sure of this translation) 現代鍛錬刀 Gendai tanren gatana Modern training sword 九五式軍刀 Type 95 gunto 三五年式銃剣 1935 model rifle bayonet 九九式小銃 99 model short rifle 一00式機関短銃 100 model sub machine gun 八九式????筒 89 model grenade launcher 九九式??関銃 99 model light machine gun Along the top, I can't get anything for the first two columns but after that it's a list of months from April to March with 計,Kei = Total in the final column. There are some kanji I can't get and some that Google supplied. If anyone spots any errors, I'm happy for them to be corrected. Kind regards, John

Wow - custom order blade too - usually the smith's best work. Experiencing sword envy right now...

Hi Ben, Chikuzen Ju Minamoto Nobu Kuni... The last two kanji I'm struggling with. The penultimate one I think is kichi - 吉 - lucky but I'm lost on the final one. Hope that gets you going. Best, John

Hi Darius, Are you happy that this is a Japanese blade? I hope I'm wrong, but the chippy and poorly inscribed signature, that the machi are uneven and the overall quality of the work on the tang tend to suggest a Chinese copy to me. I can't make anything sensible out of the signature Mune? saku. Again some randomly chosen kanji is a bit of a pointer towards a Chinese fake but that might be me and someone else might be able to make something out of it. I've no idea what that random carving above might be - it doesn't look like a kanji to me. Best, John

Sir, Very real and very nice. The signature reads 源宗明 - Minamoto Muneaki (second photograph). The first photograph contains the date the sword was made and another inscription that I can't quite make out because of the size of my screen and the lighting on the pic - if no one else can help you might want to re-post a larger photo. The smith might be this guy - he's the only Muneaki using the "Minamoto" in his signature in Markus Sesko's Swordsmiths of Japan: MUNEAKI (宗明), Bunkyū (文久, 1861-1864), Ōshū – “Kubota Muneaki” (久保田宗明), “Minamoto Muneaki” (源宗明), “Ichinoseki-shi Minamoto Muneaki” (一関士源宗明), “Rikuchū Ichinoseki-jū Kubota Muneaki saku” (陸中一関住久保田宗明作), “Rikuchū no Kuni Muneaki” (陸中国宗明), real name Kubota Fumikichi (久保田文吉, the first name can also read Bunkichi), he also bore the first name Mitsumasa (充昌), he was born in the second year of Tenpō (天保, 1831) as oldest son of Kubota Ryōzō (久保田 良蔵) who worked as a gunsmith for the Ichinoseki fief (一関藩) which was ruled by the Tamura family (田村), later Muneaki went to Kyōto and studied there under Koyama Munetsugu (固山宗次), in Ansei four (安政, 1857) he returned to Ichinoseki where he worked both as swordsmith and gunsmith for the fief, he died on the twelfth day of the eighth month Meiji 21 (明治, 1888) at the age of 58, we know blades from the Ansei (安政, 1854-1860) to the Meiji era, dense ko-itame mixed with some masame, the hamon is a gunome-chōji-midare in nioi-deki but can also be tempered in ko-nie-deki, the tip of the tang is a shallow iriyamagata-jiri, the yasurime are sujikai with keshō, he signed also in grass script, chūjō-saku

Cheers Steve! 80)

Sir, Looks like 肥前国忠吉 Hizen Kuni Tadayoshi to me. The second part are the measurements of the blade in the old Japanese units: 七寸 Seven sun, 分 some bu (sorry the number is a bit too cursive for me to read accurately but I can see the kanji for 10 (十) plus another number so something in the teens plus some rin 厘 - again not sure how many. Hope that helps a little. Best, John

What Matt said.

Now that's a pretty thing. I'd much rather own that than the dragon tsuba that went for an arm and a leg, but what do I know.

Hi Bryant, Unfortunately it's not unusual for some dealers to assemble koshirae from items that were not original to the sword and which accounts for the sloppy fit of the tsuba. Likewise the photographs chosen to sell the sword tend to emphasise the good parts rather than reveal factors that might put off a buyer but kitae ware are weird things and can show up differently depending on the light - I've expressed reservations about an issue that really stood out in a photograph only to find it insignifcant when viewed in person. Anyhow, I'm glad you like your new sword and hope that you continue to enjoy your new obsession hobby. Best, John

I think Gunome has nailed it.

Hi Darius, Definitely something Yuki then maybe saku but I'm on my phone so it's not too clear. I don't think it's mori - as in to guard or protect but can't offer anything better right now - can't see the "man on the roof" and there's a floating stroke on the right that doesn't match. Wouldn't argue to hard though...;0)

Bryant, You shouldn't receive the registration card as that stays in Japan. You should be able to contact the NBTHK to verify the papers - they have a unique number. If the sword wasn't de-registered it's not really a problem for you of itself. Check out the Nihonto Craft website as there's a guide to how the papers should look.

There's a Korean helmet with a similar post on top in tha armour section on Nihonto.com.

I like mine with tonic water and a twist of lime.

Hi Michael, If you don't have any luck with this one, there's a similar one for sale on Aoi Art at the moment: http://www.aoijapan.com/katana-katana-higo-no-kuni-akamatsu-tarou-kanehiro-utsushi-kiyomaro Best, John

Bruno, If you got anything from that you should have a medal. Good going!!

Hi Stephen, I think Hatsushinsai: 發心済 ...though the kanji "sai" on yours is quite stylised it might be right. Haynes says see H03871 Masachika so my guess is he signed under more than one name. Dewa Akita Shoami group. Best, John

Tim, I'd bite Shamsey's hand off - it looks like a very nice blade. Best, John

Hi Grev, The kanji in the centre are: 高見澤版 - Taka mi zawa ban. Takamizawa Edition. From Wikipedia: Ukiyo-e prints often went through multiple editions, sometimes with changes made to the blocks in later editions. Editions made from recut woodblocks also circulate, such as legitimate later reproductions, as well as pirate editions and other fakes. Takamizawa Enji (1870–1927), a producer of ukiyo-e reproductions, developed a method of recutting woodblocks to print fresh colour on faded originals, over which he used tobacco ash to make the fresh ink seem aged. These refreshed prints he resold as original printings. Amongst the defrauded collectors was American architect Frank Lloyd Wright, who brought 1,500 Takamizawa prints with him from Japan to the US, some of which he had sold before the truth was discovered. I hope this isn't bad news for your friend. I'm struggling with the hiragana around the outside as the first one is unclear to me and hopefully someone else can pitch in: ?と (?to) on the left and むん (mun) on the right. Best, John

Hi Andreas, Don't sweat it. There are lots of nice swords out there in this price range and you could easily do better than this one. Best, John

How does Ford sign his work - does he use an artist's name?

It sounds like an overstatement of the cost of shinsa but sending the sword to Japan plus agent's fees and registration costs on top of shinsa fees might add a chunk to what had already been spent. That said, the sword may not have been sent for authentication because this isn't an important smith and so not worth the effort of faking. If you are looking for an investment then Japanese swords are not likely to yield a return and you may easily do better elsewhere. As someone said above, check out the sales section and you will see good stuff at better prices than this sword.

Hi James, Apologies, you're absolutely right. Here's an example of one of his blades - picture number 3. https://markussesko.com/2015/11/09/shogunal-support-program/ According to Markus Sesko's Swordsmiths of Japan he was granted the right to use the mon shown in the picture in the same year as he received the Shume no kami title. I can't quite make out from the photo whether or not the mon is there but it would be suspicious if the title is included in the mei but not the mon. Best, John