Jussi Ekholm

I think Dirk summed up pretty well how I feel about this thing. I like really old stuff the mostly due to the history attached to the pieces. Swords made during the modern age do not have the same historical importance in my view yet they have other qualities. What Thomas said is also true, we need new makers to keep the tradition alive. Likewise we need new collectors & enthusiasts to keep the tradition alive who collect new stuff as well as old stuff. In short the newer the sword the better condition of the sword would be important factor I'd guess. Seeing as tameshigiri would be about the hardest use swords of modern day will have to endure, and most precious modern blades will probably not be used at all for cutting things. So like Dirk said above, flawless typical work of the smith would be of highest importance, or that is how I believe. The debate about "power relations" between smiths old vs. new - new vs. new I'll leave to more experienced folks.

The most important thing is that you like the sword, I don't think anything else really matters. As you are buying it for yourself. I will say that the "Hizen smith code" by KarlPeterSmith is bit controversial subject and it is a research in progress. See more here -> http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/14763-tadayoshi-waki-expert-help-on-mei/page-4 How long are you staying in Sweden? There are people who have great nihonto knowledge in Sweden and also on Hizen swords. I am not personally that fond of Hizen swords, and I don't know a thing about them. Still I'm guessing I should have around 100 Tadahiro signatures (various generations) scattered across my books & magazines. I think I could gather bunch of them up for you if you'd like. Like others before me, I would be leaning on gimei. I also think John at Nihonto Australia seems like a good guy, I've only exchanged few emails with him.

I will keep my hands down as I can't stand Namban style tsuba. I was lucky to attend NBTHK Scandinavian meeting where Namban tsuba were one of the themes of the meet and I got to see some good quality Namban items. I understand the skill needed for some of the items and how they might be something that someone collects but they definately are not for me...

相州住康春 ^ what was said above ^

Very sad news. Unfortunately I never had the pleasure of meeting Kjell but he was very influental person in Scandinavian nihonto community and I have heard many good stories of him from his friends. My condolences to family and friends.

Guess I don't yet have enough books, as I hit bit of a dead end. This is the closest signature I could find in my books and it's from Kotō-meikan. It is listed as Kanenori (Tenbun 1532 - 1555). However I'm having difficulties matching it to anyone in Seskos Swordsmith index. Some my own remarks why I picked this one. In Kane character it has short upper stroke similar to yours and it has a small "window" (many Kane have big "window"). Nori character is not exactly the same but this was closest 2 letter combination in Kanenori signatures I could find. To explain my point in pics, here is Kanenori, which has long upper stroke and large "window". http://www.tokka.biz/sword/kanenori5.html San'ami school in Mino province seems to have been the the home for many Kanenori smiths as I think Kanenori lineage is listed as most important of San'ami. But I'm having trouble matching that above signature from Kotō-meikan. In 1500's Seskos index lists 3 Kanenori 兼則 (all from San'ami) as Eishō, Tenbun, Eiroku and Mino-to book by Cox lists these three smiths as Eishō, Tenbun, Tenshō. However there are signatures for all 3 of these smiths in Kotō-meikan, and the signature I added to pic is to a 4th one who I think is not listed in neither of these indexes (as Tenbun smith in these both indexes is the one who moved to Echigo). Maybe those with access to more books of Mino smiths can find this particular smith. This stuff is going above my knowledge but trying to do some detective work is always fun.

Hello Anders, welcome to the forums. You can send me your email by pm and I can hook you up with contact info of Scandinavian NBTHK. Our meetings are in Stockholm so depending where you live it might be easy or hard to get there. Your tanto is in my opinion signed by Kanenori 兼則 from Mino province. Unfortunately I don't have access to my books on Mino swords at the moment but there are 10 Kotō Kanenori 兼則 in Mino listed in Seskos swordsmiths. I have Kotō-meikan on my phone and I think the closest 兼則 signature in there is the one working Tenbun (1532-1555). And I think late Muromachi is also fitting the shape of the sword. I'll try to look more into it tomorrow when I get home and can access my books.

I had to join the ebook crowd as the prices were absolute steals. Now I can understand how easy to access the ebooks are as I have them on my PC and on my phone. So I can read them on the go. I would strongly recommend getting Koshirae-taikan: http://www.lulu.com/shop/markus-sesko/koshirae-taikan/ebook/product-21676093.htmlThe pictures are amazing and you can zoom in. With this book I am really getting sucked into ebooks.

I think I can donate some books. I will group these into a package and I can slip in Hawleys leaflet to help starting with translating mei (even though resources are now great online it's still nice thing to have as backup if you don't have many books). "Beginner set" Clive Sinclaire - Samurai The Craft of the Japanese Sword Fuller & Gregory - Miltary Swords of Japan Cutting Edge - Japanese Swords in British Museum Hawley - Japanese Sword Inscriptions

The part I didn't understand was between hada description and hamon separated by ,, Also subdued is better English word than sinking for nioiguchi. I think hadatachi is common trademark of Hōju school. The above mentioned book is great source for Hōju blades as it has 10 of them. And it just happens to be one of my favorite books. :D

Info on sword n. 20 in that book - is roughly here. I've had a long day so there will be errors and this is already bit above my understanding. Like always I trust that someone more experienced will make corrections to it. 重要美術品 - 太刀 - 銘 寳壽, 正中□年正月日 - 鎌倉時代 （ 一三二四、 五）東京都 武蔵御嶽神社蔵 - 刃長 七四,二 反り三,五 元幅 三,四 - 鎬造, 庵棟, 反り高, 中鋒. 鍛えは板目に杢目交じり肌立ち, 総体に白ける, 刃文は直刃に小乱交じり沸つき, 匂口沈む. 茎は生ぶ, 先栗尻, 鑢目不詳,目釘孔一個, 銘は表に二字銘, 裏に年紀がある. 宝寿は平安時代以来続く奥州舞草鍛冶で現存する寶壽ものは鎌倉時代初期以降室町時代後期に及んでいる. この太刀は正中（ 一三二四· 五） 年紀があり, 殊に貴重な資料である. Jūyō bijutsu-hin - Tachi - Mei Hōju, Shōchū [] nen a day in new year - Kamakura jidai (1324-5) Tōkyōto Musashimitakejinja zō - Hachō 74,2 cm sori 3,5 cm. Motohaba 3,4 cm - Shinogi-zukuri, An-tō, Large sori, Chūhō. Kitae is itame and mokume it is hadatachi, (I don't understand this), Hamon is suguha and ko-midare in nie, nioikuchi (sinks?). Nakago is ubu, saki kurijiri, yasurime can't be determined, 1 meguki-ana, mei is niji mei, there is date on ura side Hōju started late Heian period in Ōshū. And Hōju is early Kamakura extending to late Muromachi period. This tachi is Shōchū (1324-5). This is very important article.

Left one is from Koto-meikan - Middle one is your - right one is from Meito Oshigata Shu, as description is in all Japanese I couldn't read it correctly quickly but I think it says this wakizashi was made around transition period from Kotō to Shintō, so I suppose this is the same smith as in Koto-meikan.

More pictures would help in identifying as it will be hard without seeing the blade. Just looking at the signature my guess would be Mino and late Kotō. There were several Kanenaga working in Mino province during late Kotō period. However in Koto-meikan there is oshigata of Tenshō era Kanenaga and he seemed to use similar curved bottom left stroke for naga.

I don't know about it now that I can guess age by nakago but I must confess if I saw that blade with tsuka on, I would have probably guessed Hizen and mid-late Edo. So I would have been very wrong.

Stephen, could you at least post the overall picture of the sword so we can see the sugata? And some measurements would also be very helpful.

I don't know anything about Hizen swords and they are bit later than my main interests. However as they are good swords I can still appreciate them. So I am just chiming in to second what Markus said about running Hizen article series in Token Bijutsu. 468 is the first number in my library and it has article: Hizen-tô #25 – Jishin-mei of the 2nd gen. Tadahiro (忠広) and daimei of the 3rd generation. In that article you can see about c. 30 Tadahiro mei, with an article that explains things (of course I personally haven't read it fully [just small pieces of it] as my with my beginner Japanese skill even small articles take so long to translate for myself and all Hizen articles are long). Lots of interesting information in this thread and hopefully it will continue on.

Ken the difficult thing is that swords are one of a kind items so it is hard to put a set price on an item. Someone will pay more for some item than someone else. The question is how much is that particular sword worth to you, how much are you willing to invest in it? For example I've had an eye out for a certain sword at Japanese dealer for a long while. It's been for a sale for a good while even though for me the price would be perfect and if I would have that amount of free money I would buy it in heartbeat. However it's not considered to be a top deal as it haven't sold in this time. For comparison few last swords added by the seller were sold almost instantly. Nick is a good seller, have you taken a look of this sword, might be something that you are looking for? (it's much easier to "recommend" stuff if you have something specific you are looking for ) http://nihontoart.com/item-details.php?id=123

That looks very nice, I can't wait to see that one in person.

Yep it's 4,1 cm I think there was an accidental typo of 1 sun too much which would explain the 3 cm. There are many who know Japanese better than me who can explain differences but they both mean blade length. 身, mi ; 上, kami ; 上身, uwami all mean to my understanding the blade above machi, where as nagasa, hacho, hawatari, uwami no nagasa etc. mean the actual length of the blade from machi to kissaki. So in short I believe that both 身長 : 刃長 have the same meaning. For example I have 2 Sano museum books, one uses 身長 and another uses 刃長.

Very nice book find Randy. I believe the title is 中 ( 心 押) 形 庄内刀ノ内 - Chūkokoro oshigata Shōnai-gatana nonai , I'm not exactly sure about those in brackets.

Well I guess that I don't understand how that post of mine sterilized the discussion. I am not a car person, and I am not aware of Dr. Tilden's classification. Heck my car knowledge starts mostly from late 90's, so discussing old cars with me is bit limited. For me sword & knife classifications make a lot more sense as they are what I've been mostly interested in. Classifications are just classifications, they make things easier and sometimes humans like to put things in neat little boxes. Gokaden is just a form of classifying things. If you don't like it you don't need to use it. You can for example just speak of provinces by themselves without any bigger classifications. I am personally starting to be more a fan of the gokishichidō classification as I am learning more and more. Markus of course explains many of the errors of this classification in his blog post oppsed to gokaden. Having Enju as an example of Kyūshū-mono and it's connection to Yamashiro tradition. However I am not an art connoisseur or metallurgical expert, I'm a historical romantic so many times the minor details are not for me. For example in Kyūshū-mono I like Bungo and Naminohira, Bungo swords from Muromachi period are not generally appreciated very highly but they are good enough for my taste. I know I can't collect the highly regarded smiths/works so I must try to collect good swords from lesser regarded smiths. I don't know why you dislike the Mino tradition? Mino was a highly important base of sword making during the time when Japan was in turmoil, so to me that is historically important.

I think you can look at European swords throughout the years and they will look somewhat similar to each other for a thousand years. It's a design that worked for the people who used it. Maybe not the best design in the world (neither Japanese or European) but it's something that will definately be capable of killing you. Here is Geibig typology that is used in c. Viking period swords Here is Oakeshott typology that is used on c. medieval swords. Yes there are in my opinion greater differences in European swords throughout the years than in Japanese swords but it's understandable given the circumstances. There are some regional varieties so some swords can be for example be identified as English, Italian, German, Scandinavian etc. longswords (but you have to look the sword as whole, not just the blade) and similar to that. Some viking sword styles are much more common in some areas based on the findings etc. 1. I think this is a tricky one and it takes lots of knowledge to say 5 big Yamato schools from each other (at least in my opinion). As I've always been wrong with my Tegai - Shikkake guesses, for the few times I've had the joy of guessing. I'm not sure if you have nihontō kōza but in that book (and probably in many others) you can see the distribution map of Yamato province and that it was divided to 15 areas. The text about various Yamato schools will then explain you their historical origins. As an area Yamato province is quite small, as most of the Japanese provinces tend to be as there are so many of them. So the various schools within the province are very close to each other geographically. - For example we have various regional knife styles around Finland. I can identify the few well known ones but experts would probably be able to tell around what part of the region it was made and by whom, similar to Japanese swords. Gokaden as a classification is most likely not the answer I think you seek Peter (based on the part after numbering). I think you are trying to find out about the line where very early Japanese swords evolved into a curved single edged sword, and why it stayed that way? Carlo Tacchini has written an excellent article about the evolution of the Japanese sword, it can be found on the articles section http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/forum/47-on-the-origins-of-nihonto/

Guido don't you know this rare german Volvo 190? I attached you a picture of this car as the few surviving examples are cherished by collectors worldwide. Luckily I photoshopped found this rare picture of it. On more serious note I find it funny how specific my own collecting interests have evolved in the last few years. As I know I can only own few blades I want them to be exactly to my liking, well of course as near that as I can achieve with the very limited budget that I have. I browse sword sites pretty much daily but even though I see lots of amazing items for sale very few really speak to me - as in that is something I would like to have in my own collection. It's good thing to appreciate various swords but I know that as I can only have few swords in my own collection I want them to fulfill my own collecting desires as much as possible. I'll definately pick the sword I like over a higher quality item no questions asked if the price is similar.

Awesome Markus, those books are great as I love all old & mythical stories. They are great to read even if you are not into swords, there is something beautiful about old folk tales.

I had to rush to class so the translation part was left out as I didn't have time. I've seen in many sword books that numbers are just two kanji under eachother. For example when length is is centimeters or item number is mentioned etc. I don't know how correct it is but we tend to shorten numbers similarily in speech in Finnish language. Firearms & swords registration card Registration place & number ( I couldn't figure out the place ) Type of sword - tachi , nagasa 2 shaku 5 sun 2 bu - rin Sori - sun 2 bu 5 rin , mekugiana ? (but it has 2) Mei, omote - Bakufu-shi Kawai Hisayuki made at age of 75. Ura - Man'en (I don't understand what this means in the middle) 12th month. Cultural properties committee Issued at Shōwa 26 6th month 6th day Someone can translate the missing parts and correct the errors. I looked and it seems that the sword is published in 新々刀大鑑 ( Shinshintō Taikan ) and it has Koshu Tokubetsu Kicho papers. In pics it looks like a very good sword to my eye. The ad and tōrokushō seem to have incorrect sori 2 bu 5 rin, the book has 5 bu 5 rin which sounds more reasonable, NBTHK papers have 2 shaku 5 sun 1 bu for length while tōrokushō and book have 2 shaku 5 sun 2 bu (76,4cm).