runagmc

Impressive as usual

I wonder if genuine mei are found right on top of the solder seam like that?

Seems like someone posted 2 silver ones by Natsuo sometime back... but I could be wrong...

Hi Edward, Here are the definitions I have... Kinzogan mei (gold inlayed signature) was done at the time of Osuriage to replace a mei. Kinpun mei is a gold lacquer attribution on a suriage sword. Shinpun mei is a red lacquer attribution on a sword with ubu nakago. As far as your tanto, we probably need better pics to say much... Also the measurements blade length, width, and thickness...

Who is this? I don't have info on him... signing 1862... he's not in any of my Osaka Gassan info... or is this just an alternate mei of someone?

I know Nobuhide did both, but for some reason I was thinking Yoshitane specialized in horimono. I'll have to go back and read about him again. Maybe the best horimono-shi ever... although Yanagimura sensei is right there as well, from what I've seen. Both amazing... I don't know if I've seen a sword by Yoshitane...

Did Yoshitane make swords? I don't remember ever hearing that... maybe I forgot...

My understanding is also that nioi and nie are characterized by collectors by the visible size of the "particle". I'm sure the "frozen" crystal structures have endless variablity depending on many factors, as Micha has explained... but none of that is easily determinable by looking at a hamon with the naked eye (for most anyway). It's hard enough just to get to the point where you can be comfortable categorizing what you see by size of particles. Nioi and nie are simplified terms it seems... or, I also like clouds and stars... :D

I'm no help on mei, but I wish I owned the kogatana :D I wouldn't be surprised if the maker is known by the tosogu students...

I also wonder about the the shape of the sword. The mune looks like it has been polished way down or something (weird sori, barely any mune-machi left). The shitaji-togi (foundation polish) is pretty bad looking... meaning that the edges (shinogi-ji, etc,) look rolled over and not straight. Also the way the shinogi-ji goes into the nakago looks off. These are just things you can examine yourself, and compare with higher level swords (or pics/oshigata) you see. It's hard to tell a whole lot about the sword from what I have seen, but I would not worry much about the signatures, and look at condition and quality. From the shape and lines, it was either not very well made or it has been altered from polishing... or whatever... You do have a hamon that looks like displays some activities, if you learn to view it correctly (let the light from a light bulb reflect off the face of the sword, and move it around to see what you can see)... Anyway... kazuuchimono- very possible... Muromachi jidai- almost surely ---pretty much just agreeing with what the others have told you already. Just FYI- some VERY good swords were made in the Muromachi period, but a lot of low quality ones were too... All just my opinions that you can use to help form your own...

Got it... so the edge of the body would be the part you grab on these that Piers showed. Looks like you can see where the patina is rubbed away from people's fingers.

God... you gotta love traditional Japanese architecture and landscaping... Also, are these hikite flat?... and how would they mount?

Iron/steel parts can be inlayed the same as the soft metals...

Soshu Masamune (the most famous smith of all time) is maybe the most common gimei found... so when you see this mei, it should always be considered gimei until verified by one of the sword societies...

On the page you linked, a part says it could be either Magoroku, or his younger brother... maybe they just think if it's not him, it has to at least be another Kanemoto who worked with him closely in the time frame of the early 1500s... Maybe this could be the one listed as the son of Kanesada... Sorry, not son of Kanesada. This should be the one... although, it sounds like there is some questions about him...