Ray Singer

I would not assume it is not worth fixing. The mei is interesting, that * appears * to be the name of two swordsmiths, so perhaps a gassaku (a piece made by two individuals) if the signature is authentic. The Buddhist inscription on the reverse may have been added at a later time, and if so would not be viewed as fake. I personally would consider sending to someone such as Bob Benson for an evaluation. As others have said, nothing should be done to try cleaning or repairing the sword yourself, especially not to disturb the natural patina on the nakago. Best regards, Ray

It appears the sword is no longer ubu. The back of the nakago has been shaved down, and part of the mei lost.

http://www.sho-shin.com/yam13.htm Gordon Robson focuses in this school.

One side has the appearance of a KAO followed by Kuniie Yasusada. There are three columns of kanji on the reverse, which may be in a different hand.

If that last kanji were an abbreviated form of 歳 (sai) I would think this read 'go ju sai' (at the age of 50). I'm almost certainly misreading this, but just a thought...

Additional photos, including the kissaki, are here. http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/20876-island-made-gunto/?do=findComment&comment=253132

Unfortunately appear to my eyes to be a Chinese fake.

Reference example (mumei in shirasaya only with several kitae-ware). https://www.aoijapan.net/katana-mumeinobutaka/

The reply from Aoi: "When we bought the Koshirae the owner said it's made in Kyushu island after Meiji period and usually Chinese productions are not on the market in Japan. so we accepted the owner's opinion without question. but as you pointed out it looks different. then we decided to retract the item from the auction."

Strongly agree with Ed's recommendations. When I have a Hizen-to I am considering making a purchase of, I always consult with Roger first.

Roger Robertshaw describes a katana-mei yondai Tadayoshi on page 197 of his book. Not saying this piece is shoshin, however Roger has said several times that there were exceptions to the tachi-mei only rule.

I think you all need to get off your high horses and rein in these comments. Someone should really pony up and buy this one.

Appears to be Showa era (not Edo or Muromachi period).

I believe only the yondai (4th gen) signed using the mei Omi Daijo Tadayoshi.

No problem Mark. I likewise looked but could not find a matching smith. Maybe meikan-more, but I thought it might be worthwhile to look into Iruka as a possibility for your sword. They are a school related to Yamato Tegai working in Kii and are not often seen. It appears that particular SANE kanji was used by a few smiths within that school. Refer to Markus' Geneologies and Schools of Japanese Swordsmiths page 69.

Does not appear to be sanskrit. Rather, this is kanji and hiragana in sosho style (cursive format).

Mark, I am attaching a reference for the SANE kanji. This is an Iruka Sanetsugu tanto. Best regards, Ray

The bonji is Fudo Myoo (a Buddhist diety).

Shinano (no) kami Fujiwara Nobuyoshi. Information on this line can be seen below. https://www.aoijapan.net/?s=shinano+nobuyoshi&x=0&y=0 http://sanmei.com/contents/en-us/p1403.html https://nihontoantiques.com/project/katana-sword-fss-706/

For the second mei, perhaps Sanenobu (實信).

Norimitsu. These kanji were used by the so called 'Ho' Norimitsu. https://www.aoijapan.net/katana-bishu-osafune-norimitsu-tachi-mei/ Your tanto looks shinshinto though.

FWIW, Ohno Yoshimitsu has made several high-end nata similarly shaped to this example, done with his trademark hitatsura choji hamon. I saw one Japanese collection which had two. Another was offered on a site in Japan for 700,000 JPY.

A gakumei which was judged gimei and may (or may not) have since had its mei removed. http://www.legacyswords.com/fs_ant_daito45.htm

Gakumei may have been added using the mei of a completely different sword as an act of deception. Was judged gimei and the mei was removed. I have seen several Gakumei in which the mei was clearly removed later.

Having two Rays replying to this thread will be confusing . But if the question was to me, I only shared the comment as an example of the quality level seen in earlier works of this school (a school normally only associated with utilitarian work). Some later Bungo (Takada) work can look like high quality Sue-Bizen and I have seen a couple that I would have thought were the work of the better (ie. Eisho) Sukesada. Aside from the kokoku example, the first sword shown on this page was a particularly excellent sword that was given its attribution by Dr. Homma. http://www.sho-shin.com/sai12.htm