Ray Singer

No doubt at all I think that a gimei signature has been crushed. https://web.archive.org/web/20130101060911/http://www.ksky.ne.jp./~sumie99/sword18.html

Bizen Wake (和気): https://www.aoijapan.com/katana-mumei-waki/ https://nihontoclub.com/view/smiths/meisearch?type=All&mei_op=contains&mei=和気

Photo attached.

Please do nothing more on your own to restore this sword or improve visibility Georg. The Masayuki could have been evaluated for authenticity in its previous state, and this is type of 'cleaning' does not help in authenticating it or do anything good for the sword's preservation.

Contact Roger Robertshaw at http://www.hizento.net. He (literally) wrote the book on the Hizen Tadayoshi school. He is also in this group using the member name omidaijo.

There is absolutely no possibility that the sword is a reproduction. It is only a question of whether the signature is authentic (signed by one of the actual Hizen smiths using the mei Tadayoshi). Gimei (forged signature) of famous smiths is relatively common and does not necessarily mean that the sword itself is of poor quality. You have an authentic, antique, traditionally-made Japanese sword.

It would not necessarily be you personally making the choice of a togishi. Go through a reputable agent such as Darcy to get this into the hands of Tanobe-sensei and/or the NBTHK for an assessment. Once the mei is confirmed, the agent/Tanobe can recommend a togishi appropriate to this blade. Different polishers have different forte. Some excel at Shinto. Others are best for koto. Some you want to go to if the blade has special condition issues that must be addressed. This selection should be made by an expert such as Tanobe-sensei who can examine the blade and suggest the best craftsman for its restoration.

Example of an Ichihara with a 3-stroke NAGA. http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2012/12249-2.jpg

It is really extremely rare to find a date on an Ichihara Nagamitsu. Most are signed like yours, 3 character mei with no date. Best regards, Ray

This appears to be an Ichihara Nagamitsu. https://www.japaneseswordindex.com/naga.htm

I would suggest that he remove the nail from the tsuka (handle) and make a more conventional mekugi out of wood. A chopstick can be used. Here is some reference information for your friend. http://www.nbthk-ab.org/Etiquette.htm

https://nihontoclub.com/view/smiths/meisearch?type=All&mei_op=contains&mei=肥前國忠吉

Mei is Hizen no kuni Tadayoshi.

The horimono are identical to the Juyo example and show the blade to be machiokuri.

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Returned to owner. Please archive. Kind regards, Ray

Unfortunately I would lean on the other side towards this blade being gimei. That is both based on the appearance of the mei itself and also having a very uncharacteristic mei format (I cannot recall any authentic Sue-Bizen with a four character mei of Osafune + smith name). The Tadamitsu were considered among the best of Sue-Bizen, and were a target for gimei. I agree with the thoughts above pointing to Sue-koto as the time period.

Osafune Tadamitsu. Not all Bizen Tadamitsu are dated, but they tend to either be a nijimei (2 kanji) or a nagamei (long signature) starting with Bizen/Bishu. I have never seen on signed only Osafune Tadamitsu.

I think there's a good chance this is an authentic mei for the nidai (second generation).