Ray Singer

Hi all, I have a issaku koshirae in shakudo nanako in which it appears that there may be a missing element on the kashira. There is a line of what appears to be solder (it is not glue) in a short band on both sides of kashira. I am confused by this and uncertain if there was some element, such as a thin band around the kashira, which was previously attached and now lost. Aside from that bit of solder, the piece does not seem to be incomplete. If this is helpful in evaluating the issue, the feedback I have received is that the set may be Yoshioka or Yasuda. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Ray

Jean is correct, they may all be intended for sale but some never make it through the week's kantei period. One of the early swords he had for kantei was a tanto that was clearly a Norishige. I called him two days in and there were already a queue of customers for that sword. Best, Ray

In this case it does. Both are terms for the appearance of shingane in the works of those particular schools (Yamashiro Rai and Bitchu Aoe). Not all Kamakura jidai blades were muku-zukuri. I am speaking from experience btw, I own a Kamakura tachi papered to Aoe which clearly shows shingane. - Ray

Both sumi-hada and rai-hada are expressions of shintetsu, seen in Kamakura blades. Best, Ray

Have not dealt with them before but that is a nice sized hakobore on the sword described as a 'small chip'. - Ray

After the first generation founder of the Yoshimichi school (Kyo), there were two parallel lines working in Kyoto and Osaka. http://www.sho-shin.com/osaka-tamba.html http://www.sho-shin.com/kyoto-mishina.html - Ray

I purchased a sword recently with a shirasaya by Brian Tschernega and was very impressed. The attention to detail was wonderful, to the extent of having made the tsuka to fit precisely into the the sword's futatsuji-hi. Every sword I have had a shirasaya made for stateside (or had an existing one repaired) has been sent to John Tirado and I've always been pleased. - Ray

Hankei's work is unique. Here is another example where you can more clearly see his particular interpretation of Soshu-den and the work of Norishige. http://www.sho-shin.com/hankei.htm - Ray

Very interesting, I would like to know what is said about that habaki. Can I assume it is an iron habaki that is also credited to the smith? Regards, Ray

Craft of the Japanese Sword The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords The Art of the Japanese Sword 'Modern Japanese Swords: The Beginning of the Gendaito era' also sets the starting date at 1868. - Ray

A few references, and yes let's split this off if possible. Sorry to have taken the discussion thread on a tangent, Best, Ray

Hey Joe, I will admit having no idea where the NBTHK draws the line on this one. I'd love to hear if someone knows and can chime in on how they frame these two periods. I have probably seen the 1868 cutoff more often then 1876. Best, Ray

My understanding is that the cutoff is either 1868 or 1876 depending on your reference. So, early Meiji perhaps. Different authors treat this differently, with some ending Shinshinto with the Edo period and others using the Haitōrei. Diego, if you have any books to share which indicate Taisho period falls within shinshinto I would welcome seeing them. - Ray

Yes, I am sure. Meiji and Taisho period blade are not shinshinto. Best regards, Ray

Diego, I think you may have misread the standards. - Ray

Nice find Jon! - Ray

I don't understand what you are referring to. Which Masahiro dai-mei pieces at auction and what is this new scholarship based on? Best regards, Ray

I would consider the preservation of a nakago in its ubu signed form as a factor in evaluating its condition. I also agree with the NBTHK that more leeway should be given to older swords in this respect, and that modification in Muromachi and later swords is less acceptable. Tokubetsu Hozon and Juyo are also about the rarity of the sword and its value as an important reference example. That is why tired early koto swords will sometimes pass Juyo, if there is valuable reference material contained in the nakago. Ray

The latest standards do seem to indicate that allowances will be made for famous smiths, however this sword was papered in 2013. At the time I believe Hozon was the best it could achieve and it may not have been resubmitted this year to attempt higher papers against the amended rules. http://nihontocraft.com/2015_NBTHK_Nionto_Tosogu_Shinsa_Standards.html - Ray

It is a mumei Muromachi period sword, which disqualified it from receiving Tokubetsu Hozon. - Ray

Please see attached. Best, Ray

Very beautiful, thank you for sharing. I likewise have a sandai dai-saku dai-mei which is of the same large proportions. He made a very beautiful jigane. Best regards, Ray

My guess is Tashiro Yamato (no) Kami Minamoto Kanenobu Saku Best regards, Ray

The mei is Kawabe Gihachirō Fujiwara Masahide, which is not the signature of any other smith than Suishinshi Masahide. - Ray

Reference link for comparison. http://nihontoclub.com/sword-images/16761/16808 http://nihontoclub.com/smiths/MAS102 - Ray