SteveM

Hello Jason, The envelopes are standard NBTHK envelopes. The writing on the envelope just states that the envelope contains a "Tokubetsu Hozon" certificate, and they give the address of the NBTHK on the reverse side. In pencil it notes Esshū Mitsuyuki. (Its common for dealers and collectors to write the smith's name on the outside of the envelope). The paper inside is the explanatory notes for a Mitsuyuki tantō that received a Jūyō classification in Shōwa 54 (1979). It notes that Mitsuyuki blades with inscriptions on them are rare, and that this particular tantō (the one submitted in 1979) was an important reference work since it was signed and had a date inscribed on it. The date on the tantō was Kakei-era (the exact year is illegible). However, the Kakei era was only three years long, from 1387-1389, so that tantō was very likely either 1388 or 1389. My guess is that the smith is so obscure, the person included a copy of this entry from the 1979 Jūyō classification as a reference. Note that Esshū is the proper way to translate what Aoi calls "Etsushu". Aoi Art knows a lot about swords, but their translations are often very bad.

OK, I'm doing a crappy job of this. Let me try another way: The blade in the original post could be Kansei, and therefore could plausibly be shōshin Masahide (1st generation). The blade in the original post could be Bunsei, and therefore could plausibly be shōshin Masahide 2nd. I'm not clever enough to proclaim it gimei based on the few photos posted here. It would be best to look at the blade itself rather than the signature. But I suspect Sebastien has already given up on this sword and moved on.

OK - try this one. From Markus's site. Anyway, now the possibility exists that the sword in the original post could be from either 1st or 2nd generation Masahide. I'm not arguing that the possibility of this being shōshin Masahide is high, I'm arguing that the sword ought to be judged rather than the signature.

↑ Yes that is what we are talking about. Specifically I was speculating that Masahide may have continued to use "Masahide" even after he began to use Amahide. In other words, I was suggesting that he could have used both signatures for a while, and that (as always) we ought to try judge the sword first and not the signature. In my example above, I was attempting to show that there were extant, verified signatures of "Masahide" after Bunsei 2, but Piers was right and the sword I linked to was actually "Amahide". But it didn't take me too long to find another Masahide exampe (this time from Bunsei 5). https://toyuukai.com/2012/05/水心子白熊入道正秀（刻印）　文政五年二月日/

The inscription is top picture 昭和十四年九月吉日 Shōwa jyūyonnen kugatsu kichijitu (a lucky day in September, 1939). The first character is unreadable, but we can infer it from the context. bottom picture 越後住貞清 Echigo-jū Sadakiyo (Made by "Sadakiyo" of Echigo province). Here too, the first characters are almost illegible, but we can infer them from the name of the swordmaker. It's a sword made for Japan's imperial army.

Sorry for the necropost, I was looking at various Jakushi signatures for that other, recent post, and I came across this one. Not a lot of new info, just wanted to fill in the missing blanks. 長崎若芝作 Nagasaki Jakushi-saku 鐵雲龍鐔 Tetsu Unryū tsuba 鉄地丸形角耳 Tetsu-ji, maru gata, kado mimi 雲龍肉彫 Unryū nikubori 金布目象嵌 Kin nuno-me zōgan 銘若芝享保頃　Mei "Jakushi" Kyōhō-koro (1716-1736) 昭和三十七年七月川口陟識 July, 1962, Kawaguchi Noboru (shirusu)

When I saw the signature I first thought of Jakushi, but this isn't Jakushi. However, the second kanji looks amazingly like the sōsho version of Jaku (若). I can't read the first character. I'm wondering if anyone knows of a smith whose second syllable/character is jaku/waka? 囗若　（花押）

It says 贈相京大佐殿 大西上等兵 To Colonel Aikyō From Ōnishi PVC There actually was a Colonel Masao Aikyō in Borneo at the end of WW2.

Jean is right 1. 濃州関住服部正廣作 Nōshū Seki-jū Hattori Masahiro Saku. 2. 濃州住三品義明 Nōshū-jū Mishina Yoshiaki. David beat me to it. (And David is right also).

I think this smith is Ittōsai Masakiyo (一刀斎正清) whose real name was Kobayashi Kiyoharu (小林清晴). In Shōwa 17 he entered the Nihontō Tōshin Seiren-jo (日本刀東神精錬所). My guess is that he used the name Masaharu during this time, but later changed to Masakiyo. https://tokka.biz/sword/masakiyo.html

Deja Vu

光山　Kōzan (light mountain, not to be confused with Kinkōzan, who is another, unrelated maker) Maybe Meiji? https://gotheborg.com/marks/satsuma.shtml

And yet, we have papered examples of the Masahide mei from Bunsei 3. Anyway, I'm just interesting in seeing more of the year, and not very keen on going down into the rabbit hole of authentication. Not yet, anyway.

It looks very much like a typical shinto wakizashi to me. I don't think that hamon is strong evidence of it being an older sword, particularly when the shape and curve are both very suggestive of a shinto wakizashi.

I would like to see a full shot of the year. I'm guessing Bunsei 2 (文政二年), but I can't quite see the whole thing. This would put the date of the sword's manufacture at 1819.

If you are talking about the other side, the inscription is 伊豫松山住靖献造之 祈栄高田本家 Iyo Matsuyama-jū Yasutate tsukuru kore Kiei Takada Honke The translation of that is Made by Yasutate of Matsuyama in Iyo Province / With prayers for the prosperity of the Takada family The front side is just 靖献作 (Made by Yasutate) You can find some more information about Yasutate in Markus Sesko's Index of Swordsmiths.

The kanji was right, the reading was wrong. 献, and almost every other kanji in the lexicon of several tens of thousands of kanji, has multiple readings. Ken is the most natural reading for 献, but not the only one. Actually, I think many Japanese people may misread this one. This well-known dealer has misread it https://www.nipponto.co.jp/swords4/NT328989.htm As has this one https://www.tsuruginoya.com/items/a00514.html

Yasutate real name: Gōda Toshiyuki

Yasuken? Can you show pictures? Or, maybe type out the kanji?

加州藤島友重 Kashū Fujishima Tomoshige

How many words? Figure a cost of approximately 25 - 30 yen per character for a specialized field such as antiques, and multiply by character count, and you will get an idea of how much it would cost to have it translated.

The surrender tag is an address and name of the person to whom the sword belonged. 西宮市下新田甲子園口一九四 安井重? maybe 重寅？ Nishinomiya shi, Shimo Shinden Kōshien-guchi 194 Yasui Shige-something (possibly Shigetora?) Nishinomiya is a location in Kobe city. Kind of in-between Kobe and Osaka. If you flatten out the tag, the last character of the name might be a bit easier to read. The Senjuin Group from the fabulous Fred Weissberg https://www.nihonto.com/yamato-senjuin/

The mark is from China 道光年製　Daoguang Nianzhi, a porcelain maker's mark from maybe late 1800s to early 1900s? (I think. Not my speciality).

Its a very poorly written version of 団結している刃物 Sadly, the "United Cutlery" company did not pay for a translator to properly translate the name of their company, and they ended up with this odd-sounding Japanese phrase - probably the result of google translate. At any rate, it doesn't mean united strong steel. More like "blades that are uniting together", which sounds as awkward in Japanese as it does in the google-translated English.

Well, him and a bunch of other smiths took the the 5th Seat, so I don't think it is a powerful selling point. He seems like a reasonably obscure WW2 smith. Even in excellent condition you have to wonder how much the sword would be worth when you can already buy papered antique swords for a couple of thousand dollars. I mean, if the sword was recently bought/sold for around $2300, would a polish turn it into a $4000 or $5000 sword? I don't think there would be a market for this sword at that price, so I'd say sell it as is.