SteveM

The three kanji (after 寅 - tora) are 旧節旬, which I'm sure is an allusion to a date on the old lunar calendar, but I don't know what date it would refer to. 節句 (Sekku) would be one a few specific dates on the calendar, for example Tango no Sekku would be May 5th), but this writing says 節旬 (slight variation in the kanji). This word doesn't show up in any search. My guess is that it is a spelling error by the person who wrote it, and it should be 節句. But that assumption still doesn't tell me which date it is.

To me it looks more like Yoshihiro (吉廣) of which there are seven metalsmiths using that name. There is a late Edo metalsmith with the name Yoshihide (吉英), but the second kanji on this mei doesn't look like 英 to me. And in late Edo, I don't think you'll find too many swordsmiths forging tsuba. It was mostly the domain of metalworkers, by this time, with maybe a few notable exceptions.

志号足立マ　？ The last three might be a name. Adachi something (Masashi, Masatoshi, Masayoshi, etc.). Not sure what the first two might signify, other than a part number, or assembler's number.

Yes, the signature in Jay's post and the signature on the tsuba in the Worthpoint auction are both 正美 . Different guy from the 正義 who made the tsuba in Robert's thread. But both are pronounced the same.

Wakayama lists 4 smiths using 正美 (Masayoshi), but none of them are linked with the Mito school. That calalogue entry from Worthpoint might be mistaken.

The two items I linked to have signatures like yours. This is the signature from the bronze box. Its identical to yours. (紹美製) Jomi-sei (made by Jomi) This is the signature from the bottom of the vase, and is a bit dark. It says Jomi (紹美) without the "sei" kanji on the left side. in a slightly different style, but still recognizable as Jomi. Here is another example like the first (and like yours). Jomi-sei. It is from the lidded jar at this site: https://www.kyoto-yakata.net/sale/57781/ Here's one from a vase at Sotheby's. Same as yours. https://www.sothebys...39-1899-meiji-period There are a lot on the web. These are kind of the easy pickings when I searched using google images.

Very unique way of writing 伊 (the first character of "Iga no kami"). I can't find any other examples where its written like this. That makes me suspicious. Mind you, I just took a quick look around in Fujishiro and on the internet. I haven't looked too deep. But also bear in mind that typically it is the sword that validates the mei. In other words, if the sword looks exactly like an "Iga-no-kami Kinmichi" sword, then the authenticators will deem the mei to be valid (assuming it, too, is within a reasonable variance to other authenticated mei). This is why collectors like to see the sword itself, rather than just a close-up of the mei.

主水正正清　Mondo-no-shō Masakiyo (this is the swordsmith's title and name) 享保六年八月日　Kyōhō 6 (1721) August

I'm afraid I'll be no use to you on this question. From the sound of it, his name was used as a sort of "brand name" for the works produced in those 81 workshops. So your tea box may not be an actual item produced by the hand of Jomi Eisuke. Actually this kind of thing is common in the sword world as well. Tsuba signed with Sōten, or Seiryūken might be considered "genre" works - items of a certain style produced by workshops under the direction of the workshop founders or their descendants. Nevertheless, the works seem to be well-regarded. For reference https://www.freemans...an-arts-1673/lot/186 https://www.bonhams....2-late-19th-century/

You might have better luck searching under the name "Jomi Eisuke" (or Jōmi Eisuke, although I don't think the macron over the "o" makes much of a difference when searching). Your item is signed Jōmi-sei (紹美製), "made by Jōmi". https://cefiro.main....Japanese_Makers.html

Also politicians. They are still used today. Current Prime Minister's is on the far right. Some more info https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huaya

Wrestled with this a while but couldn't complete it 江戸　美（全）的姿？　馬 5 Edo beauties. I don't know what the event is. Just sitting around a table eating? Or is it a new year's meal of some kind. Or some other celebration? The character alone at the bottom is 馬, which may or may not be shortened version of the artist's name, and that artist might be Teisai Hokuba (蹄斎北馬) and he is just signing with the final character of his name.

Top: 松山 Matsuyama Middle: as Jean says, 正光 Masamitsu Bottom: 玉昇 Gyokushō

Another. Again, it goes without saying that they could all be mistaken.

Here are two sources saying Yoshitada was Kunisada 3rd. Of course, both of these sources could be mistaken. https://www.touken-w...ctory/inoue-shinkai/ https://meitou.info/index.php/井上真改

No. It is against the law, unless it is a "replica sword" made from aluminum or something that doesn't have an edge that can be sharpened. Even then, you may be subject to the caprice of the customs inspectors, and it could be impounded.

There is some debate about Inoue Shinkai's son, and whether Kihō (aka Yoshitada, aka Dan'emon - spelled alternatively either 弾右衛門 or 団右衛門) is the first son or second son, or maybe he's the second but he's the first from another mother, etc.. Anyway, the point is there is a little bit of confusion as to Kihō's position. He was born too late to have studied under his grandfather. I wish there were an authenticated blade of his signed with Izumi-no-kami Kunisada, but I haven't found one yet.

I don't think that one is from the same series. Its from the same time, but it isn't one of the "Four Great Clans" series. It looks like its mislabeled. The last one should be a print depicting something representing the Taira clan, and it should have the same red cartouche device with the same/similar words as 四姓ノ内 with the word 平 (Taira) in it somewhere. I looked for it today, but I couldn't find it. There are a lot of mislabeled prints in various online collections. We've got Minamoto, Fujiwara, and Tachibana. Just missing Taira. And I was wrong about the sword in the first print (Minamoto). It is indeed supposed to be the Kogarasu-maru (it says so on the print).

I am cheating with the second one (the armor), because a transcription is already available on the internet. The armor print represents the Tachibana clan. 床にさく梅ハかふとの鉢うゑにかさる鎧の裡もかをれり Something like: The plums that bloom in the flower pot, impart their scent, to the lining of the armor draped over it. The third one (jewel print) represents the Fuji (Fujiwara) clan. The print posted above must be a later reproduction, because it is missing the info indicating it is for the Fuji clan, and it is also missing a second poem on the left. Here is the original. These will take a bit of brain power that I might not have. The first poem is about the "first dream" (初夢).

Inoue Shinkai did have a son who was a swordsmith, and funnily enough there was a sword by this smith posted just a few days ago. It is an unusual coincidence because Shinkai's son didn't make very many swords. But, I agree with the posters above, namely: the papers from this group are not very authoritative, and, a sword with the inscription Izumi No Kami Kunisada has to be scrutinized very carefully. I don't think Shinkai's son ever signed this way. And also, regardless of the signature it is a decent, typical, wakizashi from the mid-to-late 1600s, possibly later. I just have some doubts about the signature/attribution. An authentic Kunisada (1st OR 2nd generation) would be worth a fair amount of money if it had NBTHK authentication papers.

I have been trying to decipher this, but it is proving elusive 志ののめ能 暮囗の 囗やうの 囗囗き 霞の囗爾 むるる小烏 The beginning and ending is close to your translation, but in slightly different order due to Japanese syntax. In the morning dawn and The little crows gather The title of the piece is: "The Four Great Clans of Japan: The Minamoto" as if to indicate this is one of a series. The kanji for Minamoto is 源, which is alternatively pronounced "Gen" (as in The House of Genji"). So there should be some allusion to this clan in the poem, but I can't get enough to figure it out. The sword may just be a regular tachi (and not intended to be kogarasu-maru), because the kogarasu-maru is associated with the Taira clan (the rivals to the Minamoto). But here too, there may be some wordplay that I am missing.

It's a male and female dragon. The male has a sword for a tail, the female doesn't. It is a common theme, but right now when I search for other examples I can only pull up images from dodgy auction sites and Pinterest.

Oh, my mistake. I thought it was a blade that was already in your possession. If you are considering purchasing an unpapered blade, you should know that there is a huge amount of risk that the blade is fake, or flawed. Its extremely difficult to judge the authenticity over the internet. You'd want macro images of the whole blade to make sure there aren't cracks or welding flaws that have been filled in or otherwise cosmetically altered. The hamon pictures look bright and clear, but as Jean says, sometimes acid is used to make this area "pop", which ultimately disfigures the hamon and requires professional restoration at some point - so you'd want to examine the hamon closely. You'd want to check out the area where the tang transitions to the cutting edge, to see if the blade has been shortened. There are a lot of pitfalls in the sword world. If the seller is a respected dealer in Japanese swords with some kind of history and reputation in the sword world, you might feel somewhat more confident in making the purchase, but if its some random dude trying to sell you a blade, I would be extremely cautious.

Yes, it says Dewa Daijō Fujiwara Kunimichi. As far as the signature goes, the execution of the signature looks good. As always, the quality of the blade will validate the signature - but it looks promising. Is there nothing inscribed on the opposite side? And, I'm guessing it came with no authentication papers?

This one is a Takeyasu 武泰, not Toyosuke.