SteveM

法久作　Norihisa-saku Norihisa is a modern swordsmith.

杉田善昭作　Sugita Yoshiaki-saku Modern swordsmith, who passed away about 6 years ago. Well-known. Is there a date on the other side? No guarantee the signature is authentic.

The Wakayama entry form Shunmin (春民) says: Surname of Funakoshi, who later adopted the name Shunmin (春珉). Extant works with the mei of Shunmin (春民). Born in May of Meiji 1 (1868). Died in Showa 15 (1940) at the age of 73. He had two apprentices; Shunkai (春海) and Shunshu (春秀). So according to Wakayama he is a post-Edo artist, who only used the name Shunmin, albeit with two slightly different variations on the second kanji (民, 珉), both of which are pronounced "min". Beautiful tsuba. Makes me want to see more works from him.

備州長船盛光 Bishū Osafune Morimitsu, is what the signature says. There is no guarantee of its authenticity. Always better to look at the sword, rather than focus on the signature.

兼氏　Kaneuji

Without provenance, we are just guessing. Merchants, farmers, craftsmen could also carry wakizashi length swords for self-defense while travelling, so this particular item could have been in the posession of almost anyone.

Not that I know of. We usually caution people not to take too much stock in the names written on kogatana. It was common to engrave them with the names of well-known smiths, even if they had no connection to those smiths.

粟田口一竿子忠綱 Awataguchi Ikkanshi Tadatsuna

尾州眞野國奏鍛之 Oshū Mano Kuniyasu Kitau kore

OK, well for sure they think its 重親. I just wonder if they think its one of the guys listed in Wakayama, or if they think its a different smith, or... It just feels funny that there should be no record of this one from 水府.

I'm not convinced the first kanji is 重. I was thinking the first one looks more like 実. Did it come with papers?

You are asking two possibly complicated questions: value and equivalence. Its not a high value art sword, or even a high value antique, but value is subjective. Despite the funky signature, it does look like an authentic Japanese sword, possibly several hundred years old. Sub $500 on today's market, would be my guess. But I think everyone on this board would cringe at it being called a Walmart sword. Its a real Japanese sword (at least, it looks like one from the pictures), so it has real history, and at one point it had real utility and value. In the hands of a properly trained togishi (polisher), its old glory could well be restored. This is nothing you can buy at Walmart. And we get so many people on the board who proudly post their first purchase, only to find out that it is a Chinese-made replica. You are already through that minefield unscathed, so that's why it feels wrong to write this off as some mass-produced piece of junk. The other thing is: if you (or us) get into the habit of denigrating these old swords, its a very short step to abusing them, subjecting them to the old "sandpaper polish", or otherwise trashing them with the justification that they are "junk".

Yes, in normal times you could bring the sword to a sword show, or some other venue where the US branch of NTHK offers authentication services. Or, you could send it to Japan for authentication by the NBTHK, which is sort of the gold standard for sword authentication. Sending to Japan is quite labor intensive, as it involves getting the sword registered once imported, and then de-registering it again once it has been appraised and is ready for export. Covid is making all of this much more complicated. I haven't looked lately at the NBTHK site, but I thought someone on this forum mentioned they were looking at ways to authenticate swords online. http://www.japaneseswordindex.com/origami.htm However, the sword has to be in a condition that will allow them to authenticate it - meaning the sword has to be in reasonably good polish. Also, they won't authenticate swords that have fatal flaws (unless it is some exceptionally, historically important sword). You could pay thousands for a sword polish only to discover a crack in the blade, which would likely get a sword like this kicked from the authentication process. If you are in New Jersey, maybe there is someone on this forum who lives nearby who can take a look. Otherwise, look out for sword shows once the virus calms down a bit. Bear in mind, most everyone who looks at the sword is probably going to say "too rusty to see anything". I think its best to keep as an artifact. You could get new furnishings (scabbard, handle, etc) made for it to at least make it look more presentable, but that too would be a labor of love costing over a thousand bucks.

刀銘日州国正作平成二十九年夏 備前祐定皆焼に倣う複式互の目丁字刃文板目肌の地金其我意を十分に現す会心作也 於日向国平岩郷松葉景一路国正平成二十九年五月八日 Mei: Nisshū Kunimasa Heisei 29 Summer A heartfelt work that well expresses the desire to replicate the hitatsura of Bizen Sukesada, with undulating chōji and itame hada Hyūga, Hiraiwa city, Matsuba Ichirō Kunimasa. Heisei 29, May 8th. Nisshū is the old province of Hyūga, now part of Miyazaki prefecture. Great sword.

Yes, it says 大原住真守 (Ōhara-jū Sanemori), which, if you have put into a search engine you will know was a very famous swordsmith. You ought to be very, very suspicious of the name on this sword. I think it is a garden variety wakizashi, that someone has put a fake signature on. It could be from the anywhere between the 1500s to the 1900s. Don't bother trying to get the habaki off any more than it already is. I don't think there is anything further to gain by removing the habaki. The sword itself would cost thousands to restore, and after the restoration you would still have to reckon with the fake signature. This means either leaving it on (preserving it for whatever historical value it might have), or getting it removed, which would make it eligible to get properly appraised by the NBTHK in Japan, but that would be another investment in time and money that would be very difficult to justify from a financial point of view.

The papers are not from NBTHK. They are from another organization: Tōken kenkyū rengō kai (Sword Research Association). I don't know anything about them. Their name may have appeared once or twice on this forum, so you might find out something about them if you search on this forum. Beware of the low-end mumei wakizashi market. It's a minefield.

That's what it looks like to me as well.

平成十三年新作の展覧会出品作　Heiseijūsan nen shinsaku no tenrankai shuppin saku 平成十三辛巳年卯月宮入小左衛門行平 Heisei jūsan kanoto-mi uzuki Miyairi Kozaemon Yukihira Submission to Heisei 13 (2001) New Works Exhibition 2001, April, Miyairi Kozaemon Yukihira

Tamekuni looks right, but I can find no such smith in the reference book, or on the internet. Very late Edo piece, maybe.

Would be better to look at the sword itself, rather than this one section of the nakago. It could be a real Japanese sword, with a fake signature. This bit, in isolation, looks slightly suspicious. 囗氏作 (something-uji-saku).

赤松彫鐫 Engraved by Akamatsu. I have no idea who Akamatsu is. This name doesn't show up in my reference book of metalworkers. He doesn't show up in a quick internet search either.

First one, left side in handwriting, looks like the name of the person who ordered the piece. Maybe 村田様 Murata-sama Can't make out the next line. The line on the right: 本？？ Everyone's got the hot-stamp right. The horizontal bit on top is probably 越後 (written right to left, with the circle in-between). The circle probably has 木 in the middle. Then vertically it says, as everyone mentions: 木村, 攺良製 using a variant of 改, and maybe in this case it means the tansu was renovated? And then 川町 again as Uwe mentioned.

Fujiwara is a name that has historical, aristrocratic connotations, and so people of importance often claim descendency from the Fujiwara clan. It is very common on swords, but even historical figures, like IeyasuTokugawa, claimed connections to the Fujiwara clan as it gave authority and legitimacy to their administration. It doesn't add or detract from the sword. In this case, its just way of signing a name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujiwara_clan

No, its supposed to be 国 (or any of the other million variations). However, according to this site I just found today, it is a name (Yukikuni), and the work in question is indeed a gassaku. Wakayama doesn't list this the name Yukikuni (之国) under any of the four possible "Tsunenobu" entries, but according to this dealer it is supposed to be a name of Fujiwara Tsunenobu, a late Edo artist along with Yasumitsu. I guess this is validated by the authentication paper, but it seems slightly unusual to not find the mei in Wakayama. http://aoyamafudo.co.jp/product/1630/

No, just the work of Yasumitsu. I don't quite understand why the other name says Nobutsune no kuni. If I hadn't see the dealer's site, I might have also said the last kanji on the right side is 図 (zu - illustration) like Uwe. In any case, my guess it that it points to an inspiration - an original work from Nobumitsu that Yasumitsu is copying, or some effect Yasumitsu is trying to replicate.