SteveM

Both the dragon (kurikata) and the sanko (tsuruta-san is calling it a dokko) are esoteric buddhist images.

Hello Iain, It doesn't look to me like they were made last week. My guess is vintage mid-to-late 19th century. They just aren't particularly skillfully made (says the anonymous critic). Fans are a common theme in tōsōgu, and there are plenty of examples of very fine work on this theme. The spokes of the fans on these pieces here, for example, don't look to be inlaid. I don't know if they are painted on, as you speculated on the menuki, but it definitely seems to be some simplified method for achieving the inlay effect (on all the pieces, fuchi, kashira, menuki). But I don't think this means they were pumped out in somebody's garage last week. Maybe they were just cheap pieces produced for the tourist trade in Meiji times. Or maybe just inferior work of a minor craftsman or his students. I've seen much, much worse, if that's any consolation.

米澤住宗慶作 Yes, you are right - Muneyoshi. The location is Yonezawa. Compare with this signature here http://www.sanmei.com/contents/media/A74513_S7855_PUP.html

Horimono could be a votive decoration, could be a carving that was done to hide or eliminate a flaw in the steel, and there is a slight chance it could have been done to balance the weight of the sword. While a carving doesn't automatically render a sword "ornamental", it does reduce the structural integrity of the sword (albeit slightly). However for some reason I cringe at the thought of "ornamental" swords - except for exceptional cases. I think the higher the quality of the blade, the less likely it would be for someone to consider taking it with them on the dusty road to a muddy battlefield. But I find it hard to think about ornamental blades vs functional blades. Even in relatively peaceful times (Edo period), there were peasant revolts and civil unrest and banditry, etc... So I think "purely decorational" is a concept that ought to be handled with care. I mean, I would be surprised if gendaitō smiths, who are virtually assured the swords they made this year will never be used in battle, would consider their works as ornamental or decorational. Koshirae and sword furniture are a different story. Common themes of horimono are bonji (sanskrit characters) and kurikara (dragon wrapped around swords, a Buddhist motif), Kanon (Bodhisattva).

Thanks to John above, I think I have the rest figured out right line 天保九歳十月一日於千住山田朝衛吉昌世焠同苗五三郎吉利 Tempō Kyū Nen (using toshi instead of 年)　jū-gatsu tsuitachi Oite Senjū Yamada Asae Yoshimasa niragu/namasu, dōmyō Gosaburō Yoshitoshi 1st October, 1838. Yamada Asae Yoshikichi tempered, same name Gosaburō Yoshitoshi If I'm right about the word niragu/namasu above, then this seems like a collaboration where Yoshikichi performed the cutting test, and Yoshitoshi re-tempered the sword. I'm curious as to why the name is just Yamada Asae without the final 門 (mon) on the end. Note that the date could also be the 2nd of October - I can't exactly tell if the kanji is 一 or 二. I suspect it's October 1st as that seems to me to be a more auspicious day. left line 太々試之速裁断穿土尺余會陽臣浦川氏親負大森氏勝負明察 I will forgo the layman's attempt at translating the kanbun style, but John is correct in that this is a Tai-tai cutting. 速裁断 would be "instantly cut". The others are opaque to me, except for the two names at the end Urakawa and Ōmori, and the final four kanji 勝負明察 (victory judgment). Perhaps there was some wager on this sword between the Urakawas and the Ōmoris, with the Ōmoris winning? Anyway, pure speculation from me. Hopefully someone with a better grasp of saidanmei will chime in. Edit: note that 6th and 7th generation Yamadas (Yoshimasa and Yoshitoshi) used 朝右衛門 instead of 浅右衛門. Both would be pronounced Asaemon. In any event, the mei on this sword is missing the 右 as well as the 門. I think its slightly strange, but considering the length of the saidanmei it seems highly unlikely that someone would go to the trouble to fabricate such an elaborate engraving, and then forget to include two crucial kanji. More likely there is some other explanation for the truncated name.

As Alan said above, it is a tameshigiri mei, or cutting test inscription, dated from Tempō 9 - 1838. This test was carried out in the Senjū area of Tokyo. Sometimes these are also called saidan-mei. The test cutter looks to be from the Yamada lineage, which is the celebrated family line of test cutters. You can find a list of the Yamada group and others at the link here http://www.jssus.org/nkp/tameshigiri.pdf (thanks to Guido). The first/given name of this particular test cutter seems slightly unusual because it has some extra kanji that I wouldn't expect, but this isn't really surprising or particularly suspicious. right line 天保九歳囗囗囗於千住山田朝衛囗囗囗囗囗五三郎吉利 Tempō Kyū Nen (using toshi instead of 年) ? ? ? Oite Senjū Yamada Asae ? ? ? ? ? Gosaburō Yoshitoshi left line There are too many illegible kanji in there for me to make an attempt at translation, but I'll throw this here and perhaps it will inspire somebody to fill in the rest. 囗囗誠次連囗囗断囗土尺人會？陽臣？浦川氏親負人囗氏勝負明察 For the sword itself, I think this is the son, in other words, this would be Inoue Shinkai's mei before he started inscribing as Inoue Shinkai. If I'm not mistaken, the father didn't use 井上 in his mei. So, if genuine, this is a sword from one of the big names of the Shinto Era. Alas, as John says, the more attractive the artist, the greater the temptation to fake the name. If it is a genuine Inoue Shinkai, and the cutting test is genuine, it ought to be a very, very nice artifact to say the least. Would need pics of the sword to tell. It is possible that the sword signature is forged, but the cutting test signature is genuine. I highly doubt it would be the reverse (i.e. a real sword signature with a faked cutting test signature). You can read more about Inoue Shinkai and his father and their signatures here http://www.nihontocraft.com/Izumi_no_Kami_Kunisada_mei.html

Well, I can recognize the "31" The mark on the bottom looks like the kanji 下 (lower, bottom, down, etc..) only it has been reversed. Maybe the photo is reversed? Edit: Actually, I guess if the photo were reversed the numerals would be in reverse also... Hmmm. Maybe just a manufacturing anomaly?

現代日本刀の精華 Gendai Nihontō no Seika The Quintessence of the Gendai (Modern) Japanese Sword

I would say yes, it could very well be. Of the many Masamitsus, Hayashi Masamitsu was from the Aizu area. He seems to be the most likely candidate for the artist of this piece in therms of location and subject matter. There are about twelve other Masamitsus. Four or five of them are from Tokyo, but only Hayashi is from the Aizu region specifically (Iwashiro), and he produced works of nature in high relief. So I'd say yes - but I'm just going from the reference book. I am not a tsuba expert.

Yes, Rōgetsutei works for me. The rest remains an enigma. I would expect that the line ending in 住 represents the location of the artist, but 加（か）義川遥住 doesn't sound like any location one usually sees on swords or fittings. The kanji on the opposite site are equally (or perhaps even more) of a mystery. Perhaps a kanbun poem? I don't think any of this points to a date. Edit: Must be 加（賀）茂川 (Kamogawa) The name of the upper part of the 鴨川 (Kamogawa) river, which is the river that runs through Kyoto.

兼直 Kanenao

撫角形鉄地 小透高彫色絵 無銘会津家 ?? 寒山誌（花押） Nadekakukei tetsuji Kozukashi takabori iroe Mumei Aizu-ke ?? Kanzan Shi(?) (Kao) I'm not 100% sure of the kanji below 寒山. I would expect 誌, but the kanji on the box doesn't quite match my expectation. And I have no idea about that 4th line. Beautiful piece, though.

Far left mei of the first picture is 朗月亭造 Rōtsuki tei zō (tsukuru) Artisan's name. I'm away from my reference books now. I'll take another crack at the rest of this tonight if nobody else chimes in.

It is a name (or something purporting to be a name) 松本囗囗郎 Matsumoto something something rō I can't tell what the kanji in the two boxes are supposed to be. Could be that critical bits are worn away. It's kind of strange that the Matsumoto should be legibly engraved, while the first kanji of the given name should be so cryptically engraved. If I had to take a guess I would say it looks something like 之二郎 (Yukijirō), but it is a very wild guess. In any event, the smith's name is almost invariably engraved/chiseled on the tang. The owner of the sword would not carve his name into the sword blade. It makes your blade a bit problematic.

Yes, unfortunately I have to agree. The talcum powder is distracting because it hasn't been applied evenly, and I'm afraid it has obscured the kanji strokes.

It's possible, but too hard for me to tell. Maybe if you had a close-up of just the bottom left corner it might help. Could also be a name.

箙 = Ebira, basket-like quiver. Ebira 矢籠 = Shiko (lit: arrow basket). Alternatively rendered as 矢壺 or 尻籠 shiko Typically come with family crest on the (leather, etc...) pouch/basket. The one in your collection has the family crest consisting of a stylized version of the kanji 古 (old) in a circle. See the site here. Look for number 2190. 弓台 = Yumi dai (lit: bow-stand). The yumi dai can be affixed to the shiko. Nowadays most people would think of a yumi dai as a lacquer stand for a bow, like the one here More detail here. I'm fairly sure that what you have is more or less the shiko without the top bit. Regarding the tsuka to the wakizashi, nearly all tsukas use same (shark/ray skin). The tsuka for the sword in the far right picture has had its silk wrapping removed (or perhaps it deteriorated, as happens). In addition, it is missing the kashira (and I would assume it probably had menuki at some point as well). The quiver and the wakizashi are very typical items of an edo-period samurai. As Brian says the blade will need to be removed from the tsuka in order to see if there are any engravings on the tang itself. The bare tsuka to this piece is more or less a write-off, with no outstanding aesthetic value and negligible value as a historical artifact. I'm not recommending it should be destroyed, but it will need to be removed in order to determine if there is any signature on the tang. I would also be sparing of the use of the word "ceremonial", as these weapons were made to be used if/when the need arose. Koshirae could also be fashion statements, but that doesn't mean the swords they held weren't real swords.

兼若　Kanewaka, would be my guess. There are a several generations of Kanewaka. I couldn't tell you which one this is.

From Right to Left 元師 Marshall 海軍大将 Admiral of the Fleet 東郷平八郎 Tōgō Heihachirō (can't read the smaller bits after that)

正永 Real name Itō. Also known as Jingoemon. Also signed as 政永 (Masanaga). Latter part of Edo period.

I think maybe 日向国住善盛作 Hyūga Kuni-jū Yoshimori saku It could also be 善秀 (Yoshihide). In fact, I rather suspect its Yoshihide, but I've looked at other Yoshihide signatures on the net and they don't look like this one.

@Nobody (Moriyama-san), any chance of you taking a look at the script on the reverse of the Emperor Gentoku kozuka? Also, any idea of the theme of Gojōhashi and the Oni with the bell? Is it related to Benkei?

The Kanenagas on p145~ are 兼永. The Kanenagas of this tanto (包永) start on page 194.

武州住包永　- 　Bushū-jū Kanenaga Edit: There are a few Kanenagas, but none of them from 武州, according to my references. Makes me a bit nervous of this signature. The signature on the tsuba looks like 利政　Toshimasa

The more I look at it, the more I like it. The effect of the moon through the clouds, and the deer...beautiful. And the marks to the right of the nakago ana, they look like another signature, but very faint. Possible to get a close-up of this so I can have a crack at it?