george trotter

Just on the point of "proof" (not to throw petrol on a fire), but I remember the rule of empirical proof at university...it was basically that if A states a thesis it must be accompanied by "proof". If B presents an antithesis, it must be accompanied by "proof". If A & B can accommodate valid aspects of each other's "proof" they have a harmonious synthesis...if no, they have revolution and war! I hate to harp on and on on this...but it would help (me anyway) if someone was able to translate the hakogaki. Maybe if Moriyama san could take a look we can find out if there is an important clue to the where/when/who of this tsuba. The where/when/who might assist this debate to a peaceful conclusion. Regards, George.

Jon, Nice sword...you are very fortunate. I looked through my Japanese language Nihonto books and Shibata Ka is certainly held in very high esteem by the Japanese scholars. Strangely though, although his use of the Mitsuoki mei seems known there among people in Nihonto circles (such as Aoi Arts) I could find no mention of his use of it in any ofmy Japanese sources...we'll have to wait for one of the knowledgeable here to comment...or...you could email Aoi Arts with your oshigata and ask them...they might help. Regards, George.

Mariusz, It seems to say (I may be way off), (right column) "Kusa ni Reki? Zu? Tan To" ...Remembering/recalling? the Grass tanto (left Column) "Hei An Jo"...Heianjo (Kyoto) I'm no tsuba collector, but the inscription does not seem to relate to the tsuba in your link? Regards, George.

John...your Sumi (also GU) character seems right...seems to be fit better than my Wata...I don't think I can go any further on the box inscription...a pity, it might have clarified some of the above discussion. George.

Would it be pertinant to the "who/when" discussion to address the information presented by the hakogaki? I have not seen it mentioned (maybe I missed it?). I am not familiar with koshirae gaki, and I have struggled to translate this...so to me it looks like it "might be": "Hisanori (?yo?) Watanuki? Tei" Any comments? George.

It has been mentioned that this tsubaka is apparently some obscure export artist who signed as Hisanori who is "untraceable"...I'm not sure what that means...I don't have Haynes, but I looked up my little library of fittings makers (the two primary sources used by Haynes) and it seems a lot of Hisanoris have been traced. Most worked late Edo into Meiji...quite a few are listed...Wouldn't conceivably more than one of these be in the correct working dates to have worked on this tsuba? I don't know about their styles, but there are: Chizuka Hisanori...orig. Kaga,...to Edo, worked 2nd half of the 18th Cent...school of Teruhide of Omori Ikeda Hisanori...Kaga...works noticed 1830,1844...signed Manzai Hisanori...Owari...end of Edo period Imai Hisanori...(with kao) 1804 ...used akagane and nanako ground, takabori Watanuki? Hisanori...(is this written on the box?)...Tokyo...Meiji period ...mentioned by Marc (sources Hara 1902 Masters of Japanese Sword Art (in German) and Wakayama 1984 Toko kinko jiten (in Japanese)... if I've messed up the translations I'm sorry in advance. I love the horse (with a name like Trotter how could I not?). Hope this helps, George.

Ray and Jon, Nice swords...these pics certainly show similarities in the yasurimei and some strokes of the meis themselves...I did not know about this Ka/Mitsuoki connection...I was thinking about Endo Mitsuoki...different man altogether. I must do some further research...in the meantime, I wonder if any of the "old hands" can give us any information on this use of the Mituoki signature?...early signature?...special reason/place signature? Since KA trained with Miyaguchi Toshihiro who later became Miyaguchi Yasuhiro of the Yasukuni Jinja sword forging smiths I wonder if he used an "alternative mei for a special place or steel forging...like Ikkansai Morikuni/Miyaguchi Yasuhiro did...I'm sure we'd all be interested to know. If I find anything I'll let you know. regards, George.

Fare well Ted... As a relative newcomer to the NMB I have seem the occasional instance where a moderator has had to step in...I for one always appreciated your moderate words and sensible interventions...you will be missed. Regards, George Trotter

Hi , Steve Looking at the boshi it does seem to return. Franco, thanks for those links...much larger/clearer than the one I referred to on p.53 of Nagayama. Looking at Nagayama again with a glass this time, I now see that in his tiny graphic he also finishes its shinogi just short of the tip...pardon me an' my ole eyes... I think I'll go back to painting my doors, can't do too much damage there...and keep my trap shut... Regards, George.

Hi Martin...yes, a nice little sword...Steve can be pleased...a nice find. The same thoughts went through my head about the "fresh" appearing mei...and also the why this would be done...I think your two possiblilities are quite reasonable. I am curious as to whether the hamon is yakitsume? Could you check the tip Steve and let us know if the tempered edge curls around and returns a little bit back down the back edge...or runs off into space without returning at the tip? Regards, George.

Jon and Ray... there is a Mitsuoki from Akita as you suggested. I don't know if this Mitsuoki and Shibata Ka are the same man as I can't find out anything about him except he is listed in Hawley as a Showa smith in Akita MIT 204. An oshigata matching this is to be found on Rich Stein's valuable oshigata database...have a look at this mei and maybe let me know if this is the Mitsuoki mei you saw on the "Ka" sword (and on the Aoi Arts sword Ray)...if so it may be an alternative name used by Ka ...this I did not know... http://www.home.earthlink.net/~ttstein/mitsuoki.jpg Regards, George.

Hi Lee, nagamaki and John, I said the shape "suggests" a naginata or nagamaki naoshi...I also thought Shobu-zukuri at first, but the shinogi does not follow through to the tip...the shinogi ends before the tip, as in a Naginata/nagamaki naoshi, so I discounted it. I am happy to agree with you that the sword was made as an original wakizashi. What do you think of the mei? Regards, George.

Hi Pete, For your first try you have done very well...correct identification, but wrong reading for first three Kanji...your Taira Yasu Shiro is correct...but pronounced "Hei an jo"... a sword smith group in Heian Castle in Yamashiro province...their descendants are still going...I have a WWII period gendaito signed "Heianjo Sadayoshi". Yours reads :Hei An Jo Nobu Yoshi Saku. I can only find one Nobuyoshi with this mei...he is Yamashiro Prov. 1532 and has Hawley number NOB 590 (from the pics, your mei looks "fresh", that is. chiselled a bit later than 1532 period). Sword type is wakizashi size as you say and in reasonably good condition and nice iron fittings...will clean up nicely with a gentle wipe with a light oil and some TLC. (VERY carefully). The shape (without detailed pics) suggests a Naginata naoshi (altered polearm blade) in shape, or possibly shortened Nagamaki (a more slender polearm blade). I think you have landed on a nice little wakizashi...complete and in reasonable condition...appears quite old and is nicely signed. Regard, George.

I agree with the sentiments above, that we are here to help members and share knowledge on our chosen field...but I must say that the "give me a quickie translation" (so I can make a killing in an on-line auction) type inquiry is (to me) just an abuse of many peoples good nature and years of study. It obviously distresses many bona-fide NMB members, especially those who had planned to bid on the item themselves. There are other members who laugh and say "so what...that's what we're here for". So that the NMB members who are distressed by this "exploitation" by "quickie question" members (who usually never share their knowledge back), and those who believe that "giving out knowledge regardless of how it's used is what it's all about" can both achieve a level of satisfaction....how about we discuss the following. Mods...can we introduce a "rule" that requests for mei translations must be accompanied by an attempt to have translated the mei themselves...so we can point the enquirer towards better resources to help him/her succeed at the translation themselves?...this is still helping/guiding/teaching the true swordlover to learn (what we are here for) and should also deter the "quickie for profit" people who need the info "quick-time" so they can get in before the auction ends (which is not? what we are here for). This will keep NMB to a knowledge sharing/learning board...not just a "free resource" for people who profit from the info and never contribute any of their own knowledge back...this should satify both portions of NMB members. Just an idea. Regards, george.

Thanks Jean...very interesting article...I can see no connection here or in my Japanese sources which link Ka and Mitsuoki in any way...unless perhaps they worked together or studied together at some time...maybe the above posts refer to a joint forging effort some time resulting in a mix of meis? Can Ray and Jon give us some more details? Good makers, both of these...worth knowing more... Regards, George.

Oops...meant to type that Endo Mitsuoki was b. Meiji 37. George

Hi Ray, You intrigue me...what do you mean the Shibata Ka sold by Aoi Art had the Mitsuoki mei. They are different men...did they work on the same blade? ...or did Aoi say they are the same man? One man has the surname Shibata b. Meiji 39 and the other is Endo b. Meiji 39. George.

Jon, No...Shibata Ka of Akita and Endo Mitsuoki of Niigata are different men...both excellent gendaito smiths. If you have a sword by Mitsuoki I envy you (I once had one but foolishly let it go....that's my oshigata on Ric Stein's site). I don't know Ka's work, but i did once have a sword by his patron/teacher Sato Shigenori...also excellent (again, my oshigata on Ric Stein's site)...also now gone...sigh! Regards, George

Hi Mark, You forgot to mention to Mr Morita that this sword is on Ebay...maybe in the interests of fairness you could advise the Ebay seller of this information so he can share Mr Morita's knowledge it with all the other possible Ebay bidders who are interested in this sword? Regards, George.

Hi Tom, I think it probably correct that more info has come out since F&G wrote their book. Personally I have seen the "Gi" stamp with some frequency...but only on tangs of "Type 3" mounted swords. These came out as Bruno says, in Nov? 1943 I think...there is an article you might have missed on this mark and type of sword, by Ohmura san...interesting. These marked swords seem to be mainly oil-quenched sunobe-to and the mark is put on by private contractors. try: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~t-ohmura/gunto_118.htm It seems fairly common...but not nearly as common as SHO and SEKI stamps. Regards, George.

Me again...Bruno asked about suguba on Showato and he wanted to know how to tell fake hamon...I have seen a lot of suguba on Type 3 mounted Showato, usually with "gi" stamp, and many seemed to be "weak" looking nioi-guchi hamon...so I am inclined to think oil tempered...I have also seen suguba on a fair number of kaigunto, usually the unsigned type with anchor stamp...as these seem to be "anti-rust" steel with (I think) a high % of chromium or some such in them, the hamon on them seems to be "weak", not even nioi-guchi...even more like a fake hamon, but I don't know how done. I suppose I am saying again...I always look for nie to be sure the hamon is water tempered (but there may be exceptions to water/nie?). As for Brian's hamon...although I said it looks like nioi-guchi in the close-up (pic 2), the overall (pic 1) of the hamon seems to show a robust choji, of hako or uma-no-ha shape, so that suggests strength and tempering...I have a "Showato" (Ando Kanemoto (slough p.50) which has hada and nie and a clear, defined hamon which is definitely "hard", which leads me to think water-tempered and traditionally made of western steel, but the blade shape, and the nakago and mei "finish" are typical of the WWII Showato/gunto production type...but NO Sho/Seki stamp and the mei says "kore o kitau" (forged this)....by the "rules of stamps" and blade kitae this should be "traditionally made", but by the "rule of observing Showato/gunto style characteristics" it should be Showato/gunto. I suppose we have to come back to "each blade being judged on its merits and general rules are ok, but exceptions always exist. It is a difficult area without physically testing each blade. Regards, George.

Hi all, As we know, the "rules" of gendai, showa, gun to don't ALWAYS apply ALL the time...but they are general. Some interesting points were raised here. Again, these are my observations... Brian...as a rule, if it has the Sho or Seki stamp, it isn't gendaito...at first glance at your pics (my only point of judgement), I would assess the Kanefusa as probably Showato made 1940 or after as it has the regulation stamp, which had to be put on all swords of "non-traditional" make to differentiate them from "traditional" swords regardless of whether for military or civilian use (because it was so hard to tell the difference), . Hamon/hada uncertain from pics...I would assess the polish in the first pic as "recent" (repolished in ha-dori?), which to me always hides the original qualities that show in original WWII sashikomi polish (this is my opinion). pic 2 of the ha-machi area seems WWII period polish and to show what is termed nioi guchi hamon...so possibly oil tempered. I think we need to see nie to say water tempered...but as David Flynn says...some water tempered blades show just nioi hamon on occasion...so I can't be too helpful here...sorry. The civilian mounts are quite common, even in sho stamped swords....probably made and mounted in civilian mounts c.1940 as many people bought swords like this. Horimono is quite rare though. There is one similar carved sho stamped sword around here but I forget by whom...also a nice sword. Doug...the comment about Yasutsugu using nambantetsu (western steel) I think refers to the argument about Showato not being nihonto because they used western steel...that is, if Yasutsucgu of Musashi and Echizen lines used nambantetsu for 11 generations (or something) from Kambun down to almost Meiji and they are nihonto...well...how can that be if showa blades using western steel, but otherwise traditional, are not nihonto?...I think this might be the reference meant. Regards, George.

I'd go along with John here Bruno. A close look at gunto mounted blades will show some with "weak" looking very fine nioi line (nioi guchi) hamon which indicates oil temper (usually no hada at all) and then other blades which tend to show nioi guchi hamon, but with some larger nie, or nie in valleys and peaks (often with some areas of hada, usually masame)...these we tend to call showato (handmade, water tempered, but probably modern, western steel). Gendai blades have obvious nie, hamon and tend to be accepted as tamahagane if the maker, group etc are known to work in traditional ways...the hamon and workmanship "stand out" with nie and hada. The navy dirks, and military sabres we see have chrome blades, etched or abraded hamons and are termed fake of imitation hamon guntos. Two things I would add...as it is so hard to tell the difference between gendaito and showato forging features (ie. western or tamahagane steel) the seki and sho stamps became required by law around 1940 and were intended to identify NON tamahagane blades...they are not "military acceptance" stamps as they were put on by the maker, not the army or navy. Another sign (not ALWAYS of course) is the yokote line of showato and gunto. These tend to be cosmetic line, rather than actual line..."rounded" rather than a distinct "line" where the angle of the ji changes to become the curve of the kissaki ji. Good gunto mounted gendaito tend to have better polish and tend to have the distinct change of angle at the yokote line. (just an observation). Hope this helps, George.

Hi John, I just tuned back in....without reading all the above again, I think I'm the one who introduced the word "auction" into the thread...no distortion of your words or any offence intended...your comments just led to a parallel slant. I think many comments have been made and your reasoning and motive for "outing" the junk fake sword seems to be well accepted as legit by all...I think you did the right thing and your motives were honourable...so sorry for any bad vibes...not intended at all...I raised the issue of non-bidding people providing unsolicited information (to on-line auctions) that is not addressing any wrongful actions...or helping a friend...just "interfering" by altering the outcome. I asked what members thought about this...for that matter...what do you think of this behavior in this situation? Regards, George.

Grey, I had a quick look....he is listed in Hawley Kan 2714 and Toko Taikan p.95, Slough P.71. Imai Kensaburo...he won 3rd seat 1941 and was Rikugun Jumei Tosho (star stamp) You'll find him on the link above on Ohmura's Military Sword Site (in Japanese though). he was born c.1894...died 1971. he studied under Kiribuchi Kanetomo and first signed Tomoyuki. Studied under Kasama Shigetsugu...probably at the Denshjo in 1930s. Nice looking nakago and mei...what's the blade like...any pics? Regards, George.