Shugyosha

Hi Sean, This isn't that uncommon. It happens if a blade has been potentially fatally damaged near the machi but the whole sword can be saved by removing the damaged section by moving the machi up. It also happens with koto blades that were designed to be katate uchi (for use single handed) but when this type of use fell out of fashion the tang is made longer by machi okuri in order to accomodate a longer tsuka. That seems odd on a blade of this age, but different sword schools and individual swordsmen did things their own way - a bit like the difference between pro golfers' clubs perhaps. I'm guessing that these are the reasons: as you say, a simple change of koshirae could be done more easily by drilling another hole. As to value, it's a bit of a moot point - there have been threads on here arguing whether or not machi okuri means that the tang is still ubu or not but I can't remember what the concensus was. I'm sure someone will chip in on this point. Best, John

Love that Kozuka. Could live with other pieces too...

Hi Sean, As regards translating mei, I'd save a bit of cash there for the time being and rely on the free stuff in the Research section above: theres a link to a guide on the JSSUS website which is quite useful and Markus Sesko's Compendium gives a lot of information re kanji for mei, dates and provinces. As regards lists of swordsmiths and signatures, Hawley's Japanese Swordsmiths (lists swordsmiths but not pictures of signatures) and Fujishiro's Nihon Toko Jiten (which has pictures of signatures) are very useful, but neither of them are cheap. Again, Markus Sesko has published a Meikan with pictures of swordsmiths signatures which would be a good starter and also Swordsmiths of Japan which is available as an e book and is roughly an equivalent of Hawleys but perhaps a little less comprehensive. Both of these books are excellent value for money and can be had in an e book version. There are usually discount codes for the publisher (Lulu Books) published on this site so you can get a discount on the hard copy. I don't have any connection to Mr Sesko, but I am an owner of both of these books and would recommend them. For general books on Japanese swords, my current favourite is Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords by Nobuo Nakahara which gives lots of useful information and which I feel does so in a down to earth way. This will bring you up to speed with lots of the terminology and gives a good overview and I would combine a book of this type with the Connoiseurs Book of Japanese Swords by Kokan Nagayama which provides excellent detail on individual sword schools and gives kantei points for them. Hope that gets you going, John

The fittings are a big clue. Even low quality Japanese fittings just aren't that bad normally as a certain pride is taken in the work - the painting, enamel or whatever finish is applied to the metal work on the scabbard of this one is pretty grim. As regards this blade, it looks like an effort has been made to pass this off as an out of polish blade and so the Damascus effect isn't really that obvious (I'm struggling to see an attempt at a faked hada). If you look carefully, however, there is an attempt to create a faint hamon using acid, but again IMHO this is portrayed in such a way as to suggest a blade that needs a polish. There aren't any pictures of the blade with the tsuka off and this is usually where the fakers let themselves down: little or no attention is paid to finishing off the tang in terms of shaping or yasurimei or lining up the machi. Also signatures tend to be a random collection of kanji or something that looks like kanji and they normally make little or no sense in Japanese. That said, the fakes are getting better all of the time and you can often find exceptions to what I've said here. If I can offer some general advice, look at as many genuine swords and fittings as you can ideally in the flesh but also pictures can be helpful (check out the commercial listings on the front page). Ebay and other auction sites tend to be where the sharks hang out and as a beginner you might be better served looking elsewhere... Best regards, John

Hi Greg, It is, and it can be yours for a mere JPY 8m! John

A good example of what Brian is talking about can be found for sale on Touken Komachi at the moment. Sukashi horimono can't add to the structural integrity of the blade and so have to be for art's sake. Blade is first generation Hizen Tadayoshi.

I've had another look at this and would suggest the following as (remote) possibilities: First column, after "toshi" I think I can just about make out 十月日 - logically their should be some continuation of the date but... Further down the first column: could this part incorporate two names? I think I can see 吉昌 and there was a Yamada Asaemon Yoshimasa 山田浅右衛門吉昌 working in Tenpo (from Guido Schiller's list of popular names in saidan mei). But I'm guessing... Second column: First two characters might be tai tai (太々) referring to the test cut across the chest below the armpits. Does 太々試之 equate to "tested this with tai tai"?

Hi All, I think that this is Yamada [Asaemon] Yoshitoshi who is listed in Markus Sesko's book on the development of tameshigiri on P. 326. The oshigata there is dated Tempo 8 so contemporaneous with this tameshi mei. He also seems to have done a number of tests at Senju... I haven't got time to transcribe the mei now but will have a look in the morning if I can get my head into gear and it might help. Best, John

Hi Boyd, I got the following: 應需刈谷和夫造之 I think that the character for husband is part of the name of the person commissioning the blade: your Kazuo Kariya. The first two characters translate roughly as "reply" and "necessity" and the last two "made this" but I'm having difficulty in coming up with a sensible sentence in English that incorporates everything: "Made in response to the needs of Kazuo Kariya" doesn't seem to quite do it justice... But it definitely seems to be a made to order sword which would normally be the smith's best work, so a nice pick-up. Best, John

Mmm...maybe if everyone takes one kanji...

Hi Chris, I think that some larger and clearer photos of the kanji on side two might help - that and the assistance of one of the native Japanese speakers on the Board. An alternative would be to contact Markus Sesko who has written a number of books on Japanese swords and who offers a translation service: http://markussesko.com/ The signature is one of a number used by two smiths, father and son, both of whom are very well regarded (the second is Inoue Shinkai) but as a result very often faked and a translation of the longer inscription might shed some light on whether or not the signature is genuine. This article might also be of interest: http://www.nihontocraft.com/Izumi_no_Kami_Kunisada_mei.html Best, John

Mike, At that price you've done OK. Lot's of people on here have done worse when starting out and I'm one of them. Best, John

Hi Ken, Maybe it's simply them being prudent with their description: if the specific smith isn't mentioned in the paperwork, then perhaps they are reluctant to make a representation as to which it might be. The kasane suggests that it is very healthy and looking at the pictures there is no suggestion of kitae ware, o hada or shin tetsu showing. The possible detractors are, as you say that it is a little short of the magic 70cm, that it isn't a mainline school (though see Paul's comment on this above) and perhaps that it wasn't passed at one of the early Juyo shinsa... but it is Juyo Token and I would suggest that quality wise it compares very favourably with this Juyo Yamato Shizu blade for around the same money: http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2015/15772-2.jpg John

Hi Ken, The problem is it depends on which Nio Kiyotsuna you're talking about as there are a number of smiths in Suo province using the same name. A further issue is that Aoi's description says "late Kamakura period" and so it also depends on how late is late. This is from Markus Sesko: KIYOTSUNA (清綱), 1st gen., Genkyū (元久, 1204-1206), Suō – “Kiyotsuna” (清綱), called Niō Saburō (二王三郎), according to tradition the son of Kiyozane (清真) and the grandson of Kiyohira (清平), but this does not match with his handed-down active period of Genkyū because Kiyozane worked around Kenchō (建長, 1249-1256) and Kiyohira around Bun´ō (文応, 1260-1261), some sources list Kiyotsuna as actual founder of the Niō school, a legend says that the name of the school goes back to a tachi of Kiyotsuna which was once used at a temple fire in Suō´s Kizakimura (木崎村) to cut the chain which locked-up the gate of the Niō-dō (二王堂) so that the precious Deva statue (Niō-son, 二王尊・仁王尊) could be rescued, but Tanobe Michihiro assumes that the name of the school rather goes back to the Niho fief (仁保) which was located in the Yoshiki district (吉敷) of Suō province, the blades show noticeable Yamato-influence, i.e. a suguha mixed with ko-gunome, hotsure and sunagashi in the style of the Shikkake school in combination with a (not pure) masame-hada and takanoha-yasurime, the subdued and hazy nioiguchi has something in common with Kyūshū-mono, jō-saku ◎ KIYOTSUNA (清綱), 2nd gen., Jōei (貞永, 1232-1233), Suō – “Kiyotsuna” (清綱), first name Ushisaburō (丑三郎), he signed the character for “tsuna” also in the variant (縄), his handed-down active period is doubtful, suguha, ko-gunome KIYOTSUNA (清綱), Bun´ei (文永, 1264-1275), Suō – “Kiyotsuna” (清綱), called Niō Saburō (二王三郎), it is said that he came originally from Chikuzen province, there exists a tachi with the date signature of the second year of Bun´ei (1265), it is likely that this entry refers actually to the 1st gen. Kiyotsune because also the first names match, the mentioned tachi has a koshizori, a thick kasane, a broad shinogi-ji and a high shinogi, the jigane is a dense ko-itame mixed with masame, irregular so-called herakage (箆影) appear, this is a kind of utsuri which runs over the yakigashira into the ji, the hamon is a suguha, a suguha with ko-ashi, hotsure and sunagashi, or a gunome mixed with ko-midare, always in ko-nie-deki, he chiselled the lowermost stroke of the left radical (氵) of the character for “Kiyo” (清) in a perpendicular manner and the first and third strokes of the right radical (青) – i.e. the uppermost horizontal strokes of the upper part – in an interrupted manner, that means chiselled from both sides towards the central vertical stroke, at the character for “tsuna” (綱), the fourth, fifth and sixth strokes – i.e. the lowermost strokes of the left radical (糸) – are all chiselled from bottom to top KIYOTSUNA (清綱), Einin (永仁, 1293-1299), Suō – “Kiyotsuna” (清綱) KIYOTSUNA (清綱), Gentoku (元徳, 1329-1331), Suō – “Kiyotsuna” (清綱), he signed the character for “tsuna” also as (繩), deep sori, chū-kissaki, ko-itame-nagare mixed with masame, suguha with ko-gunome-ashi in ko-nie-deki which tends to a slightly undulating notare KIYOTSUNA (清綱), Kenmu (建武, 1334-1338), Suō – “Kiyotsuna” (清綱), “Bōshū Kuga-jū Kiyotsuna” (防州玖珂住清綱), “Niō Kiyotsuna” (二王清綱), he lived in Kuga (玖珂), there exists a tantō with the date signature of the third year of Kenmu (建武, 1336) There may be something in the paperwork that helps to tie it down but neither my eyesight nor my Japanese is good enough for it to be obvious. Lovely sword though... Best, John P.S. Some info here on Shoshin.com - http://www.sho-shin.com/smiths1c.htm

Hi Mr Billion, I don't particularly have a problem with the patina on the tang as the lighting can make a difference to how dark it looks, but for me the nakago jiri is shaped differently to those included in Fujishiro and to this example on Shoshin.com: http://www.sho-shin.com/sukehiro.htm So I'm a bit dubious, particularly as this is a rather big name but I'm not any kind of authority. If you can post some pictures of the blade people may chime in with some other views. Also, and sorry to be picky, but there is a forum rule about board members using our real names as opposed to our handles - there is the facility to set a signature up in the settings. Kind regards, John

Hi Dave, Is that a Kindjal to the left of the targe? A lovely looking blade. Best, John

John and Stephen, I like your reading of the name better than mine. I'm not sure that this is heading in the right direction, but this similar style signature is from Markus Sesko's Swordsmiths of Japan: NOBUKUNI (信国), Genroku (元禄, 1688-1704), Ōshū – “So jūdai-me Minamoto Nobukuni” (祖拾代目源信国, “10th gen. Minamoto Nobukuni after the founder of the school”), “Chikuzen no Kuni-jū Minamoto Nobukuni Yoshihiro saku” (筑前国住源信国吉寛作), “Ōshū Morioka-jū Minamoto Nobukuni” (奥州盛岡住源信国), real name Shindō Heibei (新藤平兵衛), he came originally from Chikuzen´s Fukuoka (福岡) and was the second son of Nobukuni Suketsugu (信国助次), he counted himself as 10th gen. Nobukuni, he moved first from Fukuoka to Kurume (久留米) and then during the Tenna era (天和, 1681-1684) via Edo to the northern Morioka (盛岡), in earlier years he had also signed with Yoshihiro (吉寛), after the move to Morioka he dropped this name and signed just with Nobukuni, he died on the 21st day of the first month Genroku twelve (1699) If this is relevant, presumably the guy who signed the sword in Stephen's OP was the ninth generation, the father of this entry...but I have had a couple of beers now and my judgement may be impaired... Best, John

Hi Stephen, I've had a bit of a punt at this but I could use some help. I think that it ends Minamoto Nobuyori (原信目) but I can't tie down a couple of kanji from the start and so can't get the whole thing to make sense. It goes something like: 祖 - ancestor/ founder 九 nine / ninth 代 generation Then I lose the next couple of kanji. The first one looks a bit like it could be 之 but I can't be sure. The next one looks clear enough but I can't find a kanji that looks sufficiently similar. Perhaps someone can bail me out... I hope that has helped a bit. Best, John

Hi Rodriguez, The last one: 相模国住人 (?次) 廣 Sagami Kuni Ju Nin ? Hiro. The kanji before last is difficult to read and I'm not sure but I'd guess Tsugu . "Tsuguhiro a person living in the province of sagami". Best, John

Hi James, Yes - you have one part of a two part habaki. This, the thickness of the tsuba and perhaps some metal washers called seppa used to snuggle everything down tightly account for the difference between where the tsuka comes to and the hamachi and munemachi. If you google "two part habaki" you'll get the picture. Best, John

Hi James, Based on the shape as it is - fairly straight and a smallish point I would be tempted to guess somewhere around 1660 - it looks like a Kanbun sugata but it may not be in its original form i.e. with a re-worked point and so it's hard to be definitive. The jigane looks quite dark in colour (though this might be the photography rather than the blade) and that might give a clue as to it's origins but it might not be possible to tie it down more closely than to a particular region. A quick Google on this kantei point led me to Markus Sesko's Encyclopaedia of Japanese swords which suggests that swords from the Hokkoku region, (the northern provinces), have this kind of jigane so: Wakasa, Echizen, Etchuu, Echigo, Noto, Kaga and Sado. Anyway, I hope that helps to get a discussion going. KInd regards, John

Hi Ken, Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Aoi Art and have bought from there in the past and will probably do so in future; after all it's my daily source of fresh sword porn. However, a lot of the descriptions for the swords on Aoi Art are cut and paste jobs so words (and typos) used in a description of an earlier sword get regurgitated, most likely due to the fact that whoever is working the web site is not a native English speaker. "High ranking polisher" appears frequently. Also, as you will appreciate, there is a certain amount of fishing going on and "possible juyo candidate" is the bait in this case. Aoi would be amongst the best placed to know the difference between TH and juyo and have easy access to juyo shinsha, yet have opted not to put their money where their mouth is, so a pinch of salt is required I feel. That said, it's a longer than average blade and in decent condition given its age and it will be interesting to see what it sells for. Best, John

Hi Robert, There's a sayagaki by Kanzan Sato here: http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2015/15808-3.jpg Sorry, my IT skills aren't up to doing a side by side shot, I'm struggling with flicking back and forth between pictures but at first glance it certainly looks like you might have a winner. Nice sword! Best, John

I don't know whether it's Tsuruta san's photography or the swords themselves, but they often do have a "dead" look to them and I think this one falls into that category for me. It might be great to look at in hand but the picture doesn't do a great deal to sell it - when I'm lucky enough to own a kamakura era piece I'll want it to look like it came from the golden age of Japanese sword production and this one doesn't. An example from the same period: http://www.aoijapan.com/wakizashi-mumei-aoe-2 Half the (starting) price and with more going on. Best, John

If it was my money I was spending I would be looking at other items: Re 45: I'd want to have a closer look at this one to see how bad the rust was. According to Markus Sessko's book the first two generations signing “Yamashiro no Daijō Fujiwara Kunikiyo” (山城大掾藤原国清), were ranked jo saku and the third chu saku so perhaps a good sword there at a decent price if no-one bids it up too much. The first two generations were permitted to carve the chrysanthemum with their signature so probably one of these smiths but the third generation made dai saku swords for the second. 48 is the pick of the bunch for me, though I feel that the starting price is a bit on the high side. It's an interesting shape, it's in reasonable fittings, in polish and signed and it looks like a very thick blade. Also, probably not a sufficiently famous smith to make it worth the trouble of forging a signature. Again from Sessko: UJIYOSHI (氏善), Kanbun (寛文, 1661-1673), Owari – “Wakasa no Kami Fujiwara Ujiyoshi” (若狭守藤原氏善), “Wakasa no Kami Fujiwara Ujiyoshi” (若狭守藤原氏良), “Bishū-jū Fujiwara Ujiyoshi” (尾州住藤原氏良), “Ujiyoshi” (氏良), he signed his name with the characters (氏良) and (氏善) whereas it is assumed that (氏善) was the earlier variant, before he settled in Owari´s Narumi (鳴海) he worked in Mino province, mokume mixed with masame, mostly a midareba. Best regards, John