Lee Bray

Thanks, Chris... I found this: Tanaka Kiyotoshi (Japanese, 1804-1876) Also known as * 田中淸壽　（竜叟法眼） * Ryuso Hogen * Ikkashi * Kiyotoshi Tanaka :so I think Moriyama San has it correct. Thanks guys. I melted my eyeballs with Self & Hirose on this one...

Does this read Nara Tsuneshige?

Nobuyoshi it is, though no idea which one.

Certainly not out of line. If the gentleman cannot identify the age and school or maker of the blade then how can he know how to restore it to its proper state? Obviously he can't. No doubt a good bladesmith and craftsman but not the qualifications needed for Nihonto restoration. It's restoration, not putting a shiny finish on a blade. But argue with the wind. You'll get just as far.

:D Good information, George, thanks. From what I'm finding, Noriyuki II had a few earlier names; age 14 - Matsujiro, age 17 - Masakata, age 25 - Noriyuki. Masakata...Norimasa...Noriyuki? Edit - It seems Itoryuken was a name used by his teacher and his teacher's teacher on occasion.

Good stuff, thanks guys. Toryuken would have been his first name? George - it's a mei of a kodzuka I'm thinking of buying from a dealer. His information was - "Norinobu. Later became Noriyuki II." So it purports to be the early mei of Hamano Noriyuki II (1771 - 1852) All examples I can find of his mei are signed with his Noriyuki mei. The work is very good but seems to be lacking the quality of his later pieces. So I am unsure. :D

Is it allowable to show a picture of the book page? I wrote most of the text from the page in my previous post. Robert Haynes also refers to the design as the kanji Dai.

Using 'Self & Hirose' and far too much time, I think this reads Sho Ryu Ken Nori Nobu - Shoryuken Norinobu. Not sure about the first kanji but fairly confident on the rest. Could I please get a correction or confirmation?

Ah, I overlooked Mr.Rose's comment on the burn mark and bend and stand corrected.

Page 167 of the above book. As Thierry described above, cast iron plate made by a tetsubin-shi - caster of iron tea kettles. "It has an inscription: Tosa Kuni Ju Myochin Munetoshi, and was taken from his original work." "Unfortunately the example by Munetoshi has not been recorded so far." Apparently casting was very expensive due to the amount of charcoal needed. It goes on to say, "Not enough attention has been paid to cast iron fittings. This is one of the best examples found so far."

Whilst John's opinion is a valuable tool and a great resource(seriously - no condescension on my part), I'd have to say that one picture of a stain on the monouchi taken from a distance should not dismiss the sword. It may be heat, it may be rust, it may be some muppet decided to try and cold blue the blade and had second thoughts. I just noticed the admin crop of the pics so maybe the details were viewable earlier but I wouldn't write it off just yet because of that.

A table and soft cloth or paper would be better for taking pictures. Next time... Looking more at the shape of the nakago, perhaps it was altered to fit later police or military sword mounts. The mark/character on your tang maybe an identifier whilst in the armoury to keep blade and fittings together while being worked on. Pure speculation on my part - the tang shape reminded me of this thread - viewtopic.php?f=15&t=10246&p=85747&hilit=police#p85747 Even if this were the case and you have a traditional blade altered to fit military/police fittings, I still don't think the blade looks worthy of major restoration. The kissaki geometry looks altered, the cutting edge seems wavy - indicating bad polishing, the nakago is, sorry to be frank, unsightly... I still think you're looking at the top section of a katana, so at the least you probably have a traditionally made blade and not a modern fake.

It looks like a very crude shortened wakizashi, made either from a broken katana or longer wakizashi. You're not going to be able to judge school, smith, etc from the blade in its current condition. The blade itself is not worth restoring, in my opinion. If this sword means a lot to you, and, as you say, you've been trying hard to study and read up on the subject, I suggest you don't hang it upside down from a steel nail on your wall.

Yes, sorry, should have clarified...18k was the highest price that one had sold for.

A polished and papered Tadatsuna wakizashi sold for 18k through Shibata so I hope those fittings are worth a heck of a lot. 17k on a gamble which won't pay off even if it's good...weird...

I suggest if you're going to have someone look at your sword objectively then don't use the guy who sold it in the first place.

My Cantonese friend says the mei means 'jewelery' or 'pearl'.

George, they should name a terrier after you... The design seems to me to be humourous. A wandering, itinerant monk scratching his name, Tou, onto a sign post or similar. The original graffiti artist. To me, this is a humourous dedication to Tou with perhaps a slight poke at artists signing gimei.

That Mutsu no Kami Tadayoshi naginata is great...I've been looking at it since it was posted and drooling. A high price for a naginata but very reasonable compared to his other works - Tsuruta-san would have to remove a couple of zero's from the tag before I could buy it, though. I've handled a Shodai Tadayoshi naginata and it is a very intimidating weapon.

More than likely no. I have a similar Meiji period police tanto/dirk and the tang is more or less identical except for the markings which are probably just assembly numbers. The blade is not traditionally made and is through hardened as opposed to differentially hardened(hamon).

The offset teeth and smaller serrations are seen on saw blades, such as this one on a Leatherman multitool. As for cutting ropes, that type of double edge and offset teeth jam up in rope. A single row like the one below cuts a lot easier. I own both and use the second for rigging, my occupation. I'd say neither the wakizashi nor kogatana serrations were designed primarily for cutting rope. I don't know anything about Japanese saws of the period to comment whether they utilised this serration pattern at the time but given the carpenters tools inlaid on the saya, I'd think the wakizashi serrations are made as a wood saw. Maybe a gift for a retired carpenter?

Isn't everything we post here 'in our opinion'? At least unless we explicitly state the source from where it came. I think some are reading too much authority into peoples words and perhaps reacting to it. We all write here with our personal opinions and we all judge each others writings based on our opinions of the words and writer. As to gimei, I see it as black and white. Which do you prefer? Some one, some the other. Both are valid and without either there wouldn't be the accompanying shades of gray in between. I see the argument for mumei blades of high quality and I see the reason why mei are important to some. I see no real reason to draw lines between the two. KM - if you read that book an hour a day, try looking at the title in more depth... Humour...

Thanks for taking the time to document your sword, Ron, and explaining the appraisal.

As to the goofy gimei aspect, would the information that is known on signatures today have been prevalent back in the early days of making gimei? I can understand that after sword appraisal became popular(mid/late Koto?), more information became condensed into the books of the time and therefore later gimei artists had something to work from and so create more believable signatures, but earlier? Would a 12th/13th century gimei artist know how Munechika signed? Would his clients?

Possible kesho yasurimei on the last picture? Blade looks big and no taper. Either Koto(Nambokucho ?), as Keith suggests or maybe ShinShinto copy. It looks in reasonable condition if Nambokucho but just pure conjecture on my part based on my impression of size from the pics. Can we get some measurements of the sword, please? http://www.shibuiswords.com/terms1.htm - scroll down a little and there is a guide to measurements.