Shugyosha

So yes Dave, you're probably right.

It might be a long shot but could this be an example of Satsuma Age? http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/13303-satsuma-age/ Best, John

I think that Jussi is correct as the Itsukushima shrine is at Hiroshima and that gives a connection to this wartime smith (from Markus Sesko): MORITOSHI (盛俊), 4th gen., 2nd gen. Koshimizu Shōwa (昭和, 1926-1989), Hiroshima – “Geishū-jū Sōryūshi Moritoshi” (芸州住蒼龍子盛俊), real name Koshimizu Tsukasa (越水司), gō Sōryūshi (蒼龍子), he worked as guntō smith during World War II, kihin-jōi (Akihide), First Seat at the 6th Shinsaku Nihontō Denrankai (新作日本刀展覧会, 1941) Best, John

Hi Laszlo, The remainder of the ura side reads: 仲秋 mid autumn. I'm not very confident that I have this correct as I'm struggling to find exact matches for some of the characters on the omote but I'll post what I've come up with and hope that someone with greater knowledge will correct me if I've screwed up: 於巌嶋 Oite Iwaoshima - at Iwaoshima 盛俊造之 Moritoshi tsukuru kore - Moritoshi made this. Kind regards, John

Thanks Steve - there's always something new to learn on here! Best, John

Hi Maximillian, I'm sorry but I can't find the mei on the second paper and perhaps someone else can chime in. The rest is as follows: 杢目文様図大小鐔 Mokume mon pattern theme dai sho tsuba 大小銘 ?? (花押) Dai sho Mei ?? (kao) 木瓜形 Mokko gata 鉄鍛目地 Tetsu kitaeru me ji - forged iron ground 打返耳 Tsuchi kaeru mimi (hammered back rim) Best, John

Hi Maximillian, The first paper reads as follows: 杢目図鐔 Mokume theme tsuba 銘武州住正次 Mei Bushu (Muzashi) ju Masa tsugu 延享五年 Fifth year of Enkyo (1748) 木瓜形 Mokko gata 鉄鍛目地 Tetsu kitaeru me ji? Forged iron ground - I'm not entirely sure of the reading of this bit but I think the translation works. 小透 Ko sukashi 角耳小肉 Kaku mimi koniku (slightly rounded square rim) Kind regards, John

Hi Molk, You're being too kind - a copy and paste from Markus Sesko's E Swordsmiths of Japan. I hope it helps though. Best, John

Perhaps one of these? KANETANE (兼植), 1st gen., Keichō (慶長, 1596-1615), Echizen – “Echizen no Kuni-jū Kanetane” (越前国住兼植), “Echizen no Kuni Kita no Shō-jū Kanetane” (越前国北庄内住兼植), student of Echizen Kanenori (兼法), priest name Dōhon (道本), he lived in Ichijōdani (一乗谷), Echizen-Seki school, he is counted as 1st gen. Echizen-Kanetane, other sources see the Tenbun-era Kanetane who moved from Mino to Echizen as 1st gen., anyway, this Keichō-era Kanetane died in the 14th year of Kan´ei (寛永, 1637) at the age of 68, notare mixed with gunome-chōji or also a hiro-suguha, ryō-wazamono, chūjō-saku KANETANE (兼植), 2nd gen., Kan´ei (寛永, 1624-1644), Echizen – “Echizen-jū Kanetane” (越前住兼植), “Kanetane” (兼植), Echizen-Seki school KANETANE (兼植), 3rd gen., Enpō (延宝, 1673-1681), Echizen – “Echizen no Kuni-jū Hitachi no Kami Kanetane” (越前国住常陸守兼植), “Echi no zen-shū-jū Kanetane” (越之前州住兼植), “Kanetane” (兼植), he bore the honorary title Hitachi no Kami, Echizen-Seki school, chūjō-saku KANETANE (兼植), 4th gen., Genroku (元禄, 1688-1704), Echizen – “Echizen no Kuni-jū Kanetane” (越前国住兼植), “Kanetane” (兼植), he signed in a rather large manner, Echizen-Seki school Best, John

Hi Kory, I think it's this guy, but I can't work out exactly what is written in the attribution (from Markus Sesko): YUKIKAGE (幸景), 3rd gen., Eikyō (永享, 1429-1441), Bizen – “Bishū Osafune Yukikage” (備州長船幸景), gunome-chōji-midare, suguha On the work sheet first line in the box is Bizen Osafune then a couple of characters that I can't read and Yukikage. Underneath that Eikyoo goro (around Eikyoo) and I think 75 points, so a pretty decent sword. Unfortunately the rest of the detail is a bit beyond me to translate. Best, John

Hi Michael, You have the translated the mei correctly. Unfortunately, there were 10 generations of smiths who signed this way and I don't know enough to add anything further. Good luck with your search. Best, John

Hi Alex, This one might be of interest: a case where suriage/ machi okuri has occurred and the hamon has been removed from the nakago. http://www.aoijapan.com/katana-yamashiro-kami-nimura-sakon-fujiwara-toshinaga Best, John

Hi Brian, I think that there is a difference between having a non-mainstream theory and deliberately posting some BS in the hope that someone will bite and, therefore, allow the OP to traduce them as being a "hater" for producing concrete academic references as to why the theory is, indeed, BS. Isn't this what has just happened with Darcy (again)? This to me is trolling and its purpose is to waste everyone's time and, IMHO, it dumbs down the forum if it is allowed to continue, but that's your prerogative. Furthermore, if KPS's last post isn't rude then I don't know is... Anyhow, I've taken your advice and I've found and used the ignore feature so it won't be problem that I'll experience in future.

Brian, I know that it's your house and your rules, but do you really want to allow such obvious trolling on the forum? Kind regards, John

I've just sent the wife out to shake her money maker. Hope no one's in a rush to buy it...

Hi Alex, My understanding is that yakidashi is usually taken as a kantei point that suggests a shinto blade. Looking at Aoi Art's website, however, there are clearly shinto blades that don't have it and where the hamon continues under the habaki area and to some extent it is going to be dependent on school - Osaka and Kyoto schools were famous for it. I think that a hamon continuing into the nakago is a flag that might suggest machi okuri but it might also depend on the type of blade - a longer blade needing to be more resilient than a tanto. Here's a precis of what Nakahara sensei says, apologies if my precis and choice of words has altered the sense - to be honest, I'm not sure I totally understand it but here goes: 1. In suriage blades the surface of the nakago will be uneven from being filed on one side, if not then try to find a reason to doubt that there was a genuine suriage and not an ubu nakago made to look suriage to create the illusion of age. 2. Look at the nakago sori and be able to spot where this may be unnatural. 3. A "proper" suriage will attempt to preserve the niku oki, mei and patina as far as possible. 4. In a "proper" suriage the mei section is never filed. 5. Depending on the shape and wear of the handle and blade at the time of suriage the above may not apply (helpful!!). 6. If there are several mekugi ana investigate thoroughly as they are often added for deceptive reasons. 7. If a hi ends in exactly the same place on both sides of the tang [presumably in a suriage blade], consider whether this was added later and if the yasurimei have the same angle, [again on both sides of the blade?] it may be an ubu blade made to look suriage. Another thing I've noticed is that where there is a section of old ha in the tang, it can make the blade quite uncomfortable to hold as the edge is narrower than that of a normal tang, but you need the blade in hand for that. So, really, take each case on its own merits. Hope this helps, John

Further to the post above, in Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords by Nobuo Nakahara at page 99 he deals with the question of suriage, the reasons for it (real or in order to deceive) and whether or not it was properly executed and says that a properly done suriage necessitates the removal of the hamon in the nakago by heating. Unfortunately he doesn't say why this is done beyond "the effects that this can cause", but as it makes the process considerably more tricky than just cutting and filing, I would suggest that there is some functional purpose to it but again I haven't quite nailed it down. John

I presume that form followed function and had always assumed that yakidashi became prevalent in shinto times because the steel used was less resilient (more brittle) compared to that of koto blades. The area closest to the tang will suffer greater stress when striking a target and I had assumed that having less of the hardened steel of the hamon in this area would make it less prone to breaking. I think this is linked to the observations of Suishinshi Masahide who noticed that the blades that were most prone to breakage were those where the hamon crept close to the shinogi. Here's a link to an article on Nihontocraft: http://www.nihontocraft.com/Suishinshi_Masahide.html I had also assumed that this was the reason for funbari in older swords: more metal in this area meaning that they were less prone to breakage. Of course most of this is deduction and guess work and I don't have anything to back it up, so please give it appropriate weight. Best, John

Mr Hatrance, Welcome to the forum, it looks like you might have an interesting sword there. Unfortunately, the glare from the flash obscures some of the characters and it would be helpful if you could post some more pictures including a close up of the tang and of the whole sword showing it's shape overall. The more you can post the better the information you receive will be. Kind regards, John

+1

I received the above tsuba this morning. Many thanks to Grev for a lovely tsuba at a great price and for getting it out to me so quickly. An excellent service all round. Kind regards, John

It will be interesting to see how far the price gets bid up by the end of the auction.

Johnno, Don't feed the troll. Best, John

Hi Roman, 武蔵國昭富造之 Muzashi Kuni Akitomi tsukuru kore. In the province of Muzashi, Akitomi made this. 昭和十八年四月日 Showa Ju hachi nen yon gatsu hi. A day in the 4th month of the 18th year of Showa (1943). Best, John

With the help of Google translate - the torokusho was registered in the name of a daimyo (former daimyo): Hiro Aimasaru of the Tosa Yamanouchi clan. The sword was a special order (no sh!t Sherlock) being the only one of its kind in the world and that the crescent moon shape symbolises new beginnings and that the sword being dated the 3rd day of the 11th month ties in with this as it was known that a new moon would usually appear on this day. I'm assuming, therefore, that it had no particular use but was ordered to comemmorate some significant event.