SteveM

This has me stumped. I'm not even sure which direction to read these in. I'm guessing right to left. The individual kanji themselves are legible enough, and they are still in common use today. Most of them, anyway. But together I don't know if they constitute a classical Chinese poem, or if the writer meant for them to be read in a unique way, like manyōgana. Anyway, I post them here in the hopes that someone can crack this. I will arrange them in the modern way, left to right, but remember I'm not sure at all which direction they should be arranged. 城民天希稻語高王樓推安囗安揚門 矢馬方射潔有賓播鞅勢乃武遙南隣囗囗

The site below notes that Tomotaka used a variety of names and signatures, including 友高 https://www.tsuruginoya.net/stories/nannkaitarouchousonn/ I agree with Jussi that the date is 弘化元年 (well, basically the same thing that Thomas said, but in this case 元年 - gan'nen, is the correct reading), so 1844. The rest of the mei should be 代田道長 Daita Michinaga 南海太郎友高　Nankai tarō Tomotaka The "rō" is correct, it is just a bit stylized. In any event, a signature I can't find anywhere else, but the name Daita seems to be associated with this like of smiths. It would be nice to see if one could be authenticated.

I think its Kiyomichi (清道). I think the sword on the site that Jussi pointed to is misidentified, and that one is also Kiyomichi. Check out a similar signature here. https://japanesesword.com/archived-pages/2017/8/1/stainless-toyokawa-arsenal-kai-gunto-by-kiyomichi I'm looking for more examples because I'd like one or two more before I close the door on this. There is an auction site that lists a Kiyomichi with the same signature https://aucfree.com/items/q246066058 but I'd like to find a site other than an auction site.

1. Edo period wakizashi. Kanbun-era or later. 2. Unknown era wakizashi, but I would guess late Edo. 3. Possible replica? The shiny nakago at first looks like it might be part of a stainless steel (anti-rust) Japanese navy sword, but without a signature or stamp, the whole thing looks dodgy to me. The hamon looks suspicious to me. It looks like it could be an acid-etched hamon. This forum doesn't recommend or promote any "alternative" restorations, as any such treatment will likely ruin the sword. Best to just preserve as is, or maybe lightly wipe with lightweight machine oil. There is no quick tip to learn how to judge swords. There is only a long and often confusing process of reading and studying. For sword #1, the length is wakizashi length, and though it has three mekugi ana (meaning the size or the placement of the tsuka has been altered at some point), the three holes are very close to each other, and the end of the nakago looks original, so the sword length may have been altered by machi-okuri. To me it looks like it has always been a short sword. Not much of a sori to it, as is typical for Edo-era wakizashi. The machi doesn't look out of the ordinary. Genuine Japanese sword. #2 looks interesting as it has a bit of length and a bit of a sori to it. Still wakizashi size, though, and the nakago looks unaltered. Everything else is completely obscured by the very rough condition of the sword. No stamp on this sword? I can't tell if this is a WW2 sword or if it is a pre-WW2 wakizashi. Probably doesn't mean much in terms of price on the open market, at least not in its current state.

I would say Nagahisa, but its just a gut feel. I think the theme has been posted before on this forum, and if I'm not mistaken its a kind of hat, but I'm not sure of the origin. I can't remember if it has a Chinese or Japanese origin. I'm thinking a kind of hat worn by Japanese nobles or priests in Heian times, but I can't quite recall it. I'm sure I posted a reference to something like this: an ukiyoe or something that showed a character wearing this kind of hat.

I was just looking at this again this morning. There is a phrase 諸事万端 (shoji-bantan) which just means "everything" (perhaps a bit more poetic). There is also a buddhist phrase 諸行無常 (shogyō-mujyō) which, in essence, means all things change, nothing is permanent. I'm just puzzled by the 満足 on the inscription on the sword. I agree with Trystan in that it is a wish for everything to be fine, rather than a phrase praising some deed done.

I like them both. Not knowing anything about the fittings other than what I can see in the photos, I would say I prefer the top tsuka, because I like the nanako and the rendering of the horses. The bottom tsuka is lacquered leather with blackened same? And the theme of the fuchi/kashira is...daikon, maybe? The menuki theme is transporting rice in a boat, I think. I don't think the metalwork is as nice as the top one, but the tsuka itself is interesting. I don't think there was an obvious loss or gain in the swapping of the tsukas. (Assuming both tsuka were orphans, and the swap didn't split up a complete set.)

My guess is that the last four is a phrase rather than a name. Maybe a kind of dedication. I was thinking the sword might be an award of appreciation, 諸㕝（事）満足 being the equivalent of "for exemplary work in all matters", but I can't find any references to this phrase. 諸㕝満足 Is there nothing above the 義 ?

I think this is your man, but he is something of a mystery 後藤廣正 Gotō Hiromasa See the thread here for another example http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/7335-need-help-with-mei-updated-pics-as-of-319/

藝州住森本廣隆作 文久三年十二月日

Sorry - I meant 8. Must be the virus rotting my brain.

Hello, Here is another six-character Sukenaga signature, dated Tenpō 3. I don't know if it is authentic. Actually its even hard to see the signature from this photo, but it looks like a six-kanji signature. http://www.adcoop.co.jp/j-sword/j-sword_htm/sw42.htm

Supposed to have been drawn by Maruyama Ōkyo. I have my doubts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maruyama_%C5%8Ckyo

Possibly 関住福田兼次作 Seki-ju Fukuda Kanetsugu-saku Made by Fukuda Kanetsugu of Seki

And here I am again saying with hardly any confidence that the correct kanji is 佑 http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/19772-mystery-marine-mount-found-in-puerto-rico/?hl=toyosuke&do=findComment&comment=202762 Bruce, maybe you can poke Nick to see if he can scratch this 4-year itch.

Wow, in that other thread I said very confidently it was 豊祐 (Toyosuke), but looking at it now I'm not so confident. Looking at it again I'm not sure which of the three it is, but I'm leaning far away from 祐. 祐 = suke 佑 = suke 佐 = suke Maybe Nick Komiya knows for sure.

Oops, my mistake. Yes Tenshō (天正 1573-1592) and Tenbun/Tenmon 天文 (1532-1555) are the two dates mentioned. Sorry about that.

The paper says 刀　祐定　　天正　　　備前 「備前長船祐定」古くは明徳頃から昭和名で続き 共に栄える。備前を代表する刀匠。 本作小板目によく鍛えた地鉄に乱刃を上手に焼いて いる。生茎二字銘の一振。 The salient bits are "Katana Sukesada Tenshō (era)" and "Jitetsu is well-forged into ko-itame, and skillfully rendered in midare-ba style hamon. Original (ubu) nakago with two-letter name. " Note the discrepancy between the paper, which says Tenshō-era (mid-1400s) and the sayagaki which says Tenbun-era (mid-1500s). I agree with the other thread that says the last polish has obscured the hamon. Obscured, but hopefully not destroyed. You would want an educated opinion to verify the sword before deciding to throw a couple of thousand Euros into a full polish and new shirasaya. I don't know if we can trust either the paper or the sayagaki. There are a lot of Sukesada smiths.

在銘祐定　時代天文之頃 Zaimei: Sukesada Jidai: c. Tenbu 長サ弐尺壱寸五分有之 Nagasa: 2 shaku 1 sun 5 bun 淑晃 Yoshiaki ? (multiple readings possible)

Here's another one https://www.seiyudo.com/ka-098121.htm

My guess is Chinese. Top of the fan: 拾捌羅漢図 A depiction of the 18 Arhats. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighteen_Arhats

J: Someone tell me if there is a landmine there. B: There is a landmine there. J: *steps on landmine* BOOM! . . . . J: You so-called experts are so unhelpful.

On the reverse side, is the date. I'm tempted to say the year is Keiō - 慶應, based on the first kanji. It bears a striking resemblance to the grass-script version of Kei that we saw recently in another thread. Month is August.

武州住 正春 I think its very charming. Nothing to apologize for. A nice tsuba to have in the collection.

If you are an amateur like me, you will insert a few phrases into a search engine to see what results you can get. With an obscure smith, it takes a bit of luck to find a match, as the likelihood that a dealer has a papered item for sale, and has good photographs to compare with, is not high. One key may be the unique 州 kanji, which probably hints at when the sword was made as contemporary smiths may have used the same kanji. If you have a bit more experience and access to a good set of reference material, you will look at the sword itself and determine the era and style, and narrow it down to a particular region, time, school, or smith, being mindful of the signature, but trying as much as possible to let the sword tell you where it is from. Then the sword will confirm whether the signature is accurate or not. If you put up pictures of the sword, we should be able to reach a very quick conclusion on whether the sword was made in the 1300s or 1600s. Actually, if you have a good sword book, this is one of the things you can probably do yourself, unless the sword has been substantially altered.