george trotter

Hi Bruno, I suppose again, there are always exceptions, but in my obsevations over many years I have not seen lacquer on iron/aluminium scabbards. The high sheen and low sheen covering has always been paint type. George.

Bruno, This site posted by Jacques is all the information you need on scabbards and colour/lacquer etc....very good information. George.

Bruno, The information comes from Dr Jinsoo Kim's site http://www.jpsword.com click on Gunto Story then WWII Swordsmith Ranking and scroll down to Seki Kaji Tosho list. Daido is there with his family and personal name, but although I can read many Japanese names I am unsure how to read this properly...as you know there are two ways to pronounce Japanese "On" and Kun"...and many variations in the pronunciation of Kanji when used as names. His name looks like Higashidani Fujiyoshi...or? Only Moriyama san can be familiar with the Japanese names. Regards George.

Bruno, his personal name might be Fujiyoshi...it is very difficult to know the correct reading of his name...only Moriyama san will know for sure. George.

Hi Bruno, Thank you for posting this signature...if you notice, Dr Richard Stein has put two strong "??" after the mei as he is uncertain if Amachika is correct...I hope Moriyama sama will take a look, but I most respectfully suggest that the mei actually says "DAIDO". His name was Higashidani? Katsukichi (or Katsuyoshi) and he became a Seki Tosho on Showa 18 year 7 month 22 day (22, July 1943). I have seen his work before and it was standard WWII gunto with Seki stamp. I hope this helps, George.

Hi bruno, I think you will find that in anything to do with Japanese swords and fittings, anything is possible. With gunto fittings there were so many shops supplying fittings, lacquer, special koi-guchi and ishi-dzuki that you will always find one set that is just "against the rules", simply because the officer was able to order what he wanted. As a general obsevation I have seen: Type 98 with wood scabbard covered with urushi, also covered with same (like navy), also with thin, good quality green/brown lacquer (or was it paint)...metal ishidzuki was long patent number flange type (special order). I have also seen unpainted wood with metal fittings...just a leather combat cover. I don't remember having seen iron/aluminium type 98 with lacquer...(but there might be some). The rough texture paint on iron scabbards is actually (in many cases) tiny drops of paint spattered over the top of a smooth base coat of paint...this gives a "rough" texture and a low "sheen"...it is not urushi. Some iron 98 types are very high sheen smooth paint (looks like lacquer), I'm guessing, but think these were HQ staff officers who never went in the field so had fancy fittings. Regards, George.

Hi Bruno, can you tell us how you know he is WWII period...was it from the mei? if so, can you show us his mei? I have had a quick look through my references and cannot see any smith of any period with this name...maybe it can be read different ways? Regards, George.

Hi all, Two comments...first, Bruno, I would have to agree with the above warnings that a bent tip or curled edge is a bad sign...if you are considering acquiring this sword, I would advise you to save your money...it is a sign that the metal is soft. Next, about the sources for my comment that it is said that one can't really tell if a sword is tamahagane even when it is traditionally polished. Remember, the discussion context was WWII Seki production by tosho (eg Fukumoto Kanemune) capable of making traditional swords from tamahagane and also of different steel...but made, shaped, signed in the identical way (not stamped gunto). Kapp and Yoshihara 'Modern Japanese Swords and Swordsmiths 1868 to the Present, pages 62-63 says about Seki WWII production that both types were made there but that the vast majority were not made from traditional steel (tamahagane) and those not made of tamahagane are called Showato to distinguish them. "The range and quality of these Showato is very broad. The better ones are almost impossible to distinguish from traditional blades" (I presume these to be in full polish). Also this work was "...of such a high standard that it was almost impossible for swordsmiths or experienced collectors to determine if the blade was traditionally made or Showato". They were so good that mei were forged and the blades sold as genuine old swords. I have read this elsewhere also (Ohmura?) but as most of my books are in storage I can't quote other sources just yet. I would be interested in discussion on this point from the other Nihonto site members as there are a number of factors to discuss on "Traditional Nihonto-Tamahagane" issues. Regards, George.

Hi Bruno, I think (at last) I am beginning to understand your question. I think I, and the other posters here may have been misunderstanding you. I think you are asking : If a sword is so dirty that you cannot see any details of steel, hada and hamon activity...then is the only way to be sure whether the blade is gendaito (tamahagane and water tempered) or "machine made" (western steel, oil quenched etc) to have the sword traditionally polished. I would asnwer...it depends on a number of factors to be considered first... your knowledge and judgement. If the sword has an obvious WWII Seki gunto shape and signed by one of the known Seki Gunto Tosho, with a sho or seki stamp...it is almost certainly western steel...you don't need to have it polished to know what it is based on your past observations of Seki gunto. In the case of a dirty Fukumoto Kanemune, you said he is known to have worked in both steels. If he worked with different signature, different shape and tang finishing for each style (like Yasukunitosho Yasunori who signed Kunimori when using western steel)...you would only need to know these details to decide on the sword being Tamahagane or not. If you don't know this, or if Kanemune worked in both steels but his signature, shape, tang etc are the same...then I would say (if you believe this) you would have to have it polished to see which steel it was. BUT, even in traditional polish, Japanese sources on forging say you can't really tell if the steel is tamahagane. Maybe you should post this question on the Nihonto site and see what the members there think? Regards, George.

Hi Bruno, Yes you are right. I read Ohmura again and he does say iron scabbard with black uneven coating. I must say however, that I have not noticed such a combination among those I have seen...in fact, all those with definite metal scabbards were all light coloured paint (light brown, yellowish or pale greenish colour). I suppose, as with all Japanese things, there are always variations...Iwould be interested if any members have a metal scabbard with thick black (or dark) ishime finish or dark paint finish...at least it would confirm that we can never say never!. About the traditional polish question.....I have not read or heard this before. As far as I can tell, all? blades, including Seki production (but not NCO blades) are polished in the traditional way...photos in Fuller and Gregory show rows of girls polishing them with stones and water. I think the difficulty in finding hada on some WWII blades is because they do not have it, not because of the way they have been polished. Regards George Trotter

Bruno, I read the Type 3 gunto site you posted and if you read it carefully it only says that the hilt-binding is lacquered...it does not mention lacquer on metal scabbards (Ohmura san's English is sometimes a little unclear as it is a direct translation of Japanese grammar). All the sword scabbards pictured there are wooden/ishime types...no metal scabbards. To answer your question, I think we can definitely say that the thick lacquer is only found on wooden scabbards (Type 3, 98, 94), and metal scabbards (Type 3, 98, 94) all have painted surfaces. I suppose there may always be an exception, but I personally have not seen it. Your earlier comment about -some people say your swords are gendai and some say they are not- is a very good reason why you need to do your own study and be able to appraise your swords yourself...it's lots of fun learning swords. regards, George.

Barry san, thanks for this interesting post...I can see why you drooled! I have seen the koiguchi with "dust cover" before, but not with the extension on the scabbard . I have however seen the metal plates fitted beneath the hilt same before and from memory the blade and fittings were well above average. This feature was offered by one of the WWII Japanese sword shops (Wakase Co. of Tokyo see Slough page 258-259), as a necessary improvement, for all officers requiring hilt strength in a fighting situation. I THINK I also read about these strengthening plates in an advert in "Dai Nihon Token Shoko Meikan" 1942 ...available from Dr Jinsoo Kim's site...and very interesting too, but as most of my books are in storage (building) I can't check. Keep up the good work, Regards, George.

Baz me ol' bunyip, I agree...to remove, or paint over such high quality lacquer would be terrible...but I'm sure Bruno has decided to leave things as they are. I also agree about this lacquer work. I have seen it on a number of Type 98 koshirae as well. These mounts also contained better blades...gendai as well as shinto etc. I can remember that the scabbards varied in colour (like these Type 3's ) from almost black through a dark green to a reddish/marone brown. I once saw a badly deteriorated scabbard and it had very thick lacquer over a coarse wrap of a linen like cloth (i think it was) over wood. I think this must have been a very expensive fitting and thus restricted to the well-off officer, hence the better blades usually found in them. They are rare in Type 98. I looked up Ohmura san's site and he shows about 6 examples of these Type 3 ishime mounts all with Emura's and Nagamitsu's etc in them. He does not show the metal type (or I did not find them). I agree, a rare and important mount. Regards, George.

Hi, I haven't seen many of these type 3's but the few I noted are: Dark ishime scabbard...AKIHISA (Yamagami Akihisa of Niigata 1 mil yen Toko Takan p.2) 2x metal scabbards were 2 x Yoshihide. Can't find him but lesser quality...no seki or sho stamps though... wouldn't say "good" gendai or even if they were gendai at all. I was hoping that the swords in the pic might provide a little more info on the relative qualities in ishime or metal Type 3's. From what I have seen, the good fittings seem to have good blades...stands to reason I suppose. Regards George.

Hi Bruno, That's a nice little group of Type 3 swords. I have seen a number of these over the years, and from what I have seen, only the wood scabbards have the dark colour and rough finish. The metal scabbards seem to have only various light brown smooth painted finish (I may be wrong but this is what I have seen). This is off topic, but if those swords in the pic are yours (most mounted for left handed use), can you say whether the dark wooden scabbard ones both have good gendaito blades (maker's names?) and whether or not the brown ones are gendaito or plain gunto blades? Regards, George Trotter

Hi First Cav Apache, Firstly, you have a very nice example of Bizen Nagamitsu's work from WWII, in Type 3 mounts (i.e. Type 3 = a type introduced 2603 years from the foundation of the empire = 1943. This is one of the many dating systems used by the military then). You have a good sword which appears to be in good condition...DON'T buff out anything! Just accept that the blade has a few tiny nicks. Just oil it lightly with a clean soft cloth lightly dipped in thin mineral oil (3in1 or similar) and enjoy it. Get familiar with the smith and the mountings by reading books and sites like this (try 'Japanese Sword Index'). You will gain knowledge on both your maker, and the mountings and may want to have the handle rebound some day. You have started off well...congrats on a great find. Regards, George Trotter, PS don't forget to sign your posts.

Hi Chris, when you put your ad up, mention whether your scabbard catch hook comes out of the handle through the guard at the top of the blade or the side of the blade. From memory, the round iron guard sword catch hooks come through at the side. You will need to ask for the correct scabbard. Regards, George Trotter.

Hi Roland, Yes, the link you give is this same smith, 27th Generation Kanemoto. He is in most modern books. Toko Taikan p.138 (million yen), Hawley KAN 1560/MAG 9 and Slough p.44. This modern smith is a graduate of Watanabe Kanenaga of Seki. His personal birth name was Kaneko Tatsuichiro , but he changed it to Kaneko Magoroku. He signed simply KANEKO, also MAGOROKU and also KANEMOTO and from 1944 he was made and signed 27th Generation KANEMOTO. Slough quotes a source that says he is a direct descendant of the TOKUIN School's KANEKO MAGOROKU (I don't know this reference/group) . As to the matter of my "theory"...I mentioned this Kaneko to you based only on your boshi pic as you had originally thought your boshi pic looked possibly like Magoroku Kanemoto, I pointed out the similarity with the boshi of this modern Magoroku Kanemoto and that the blade details you gave sounded the same also. (I did not mean that your blade was modern, by this smith). ALL the wartime swords I have seen (4) are the same boshi/hamon as your first pics and this link you give here.....it also appears from your later pics that the hamon seems to be similar also, and also tang shape. This suggests that the wartime 27 Kanemoto was working from a similar tradition as your sword...I presume the Magoroku Kanemoto style... which was your original thought. Whether the sword you are interested in is by this modern man, I can't say from photos...but you need more study of both makers to check similarities or differences there. If your sword is definitely old, you need to check the Madoroku styles and if not them, then the other guys have made sound suggestions to check in the MINO tradition....a very big field. Finally, it is always possible that a maker will not sign a sword...there are a lot of unsigned swords from all periods, including Showa. When I see good quality mumei swords I always wonder why it was not signed. I can't explain why. Regards, George.

oops, sorry Ted, meant Roland... Regards, George. PS. love the boshi Roland

Hi Ted, I hope you won't think my comments way off track...but the pic you show of the continuation of the gonome hamon into the boshi is identical with that of a wartime gendaito owned by a friend of mine. Before you delete me (joke) I hasten to add that the details you give could actually be used to describe his sword! The blade is by modern tosho Kaneko Magoroku. He signed "27th Generation Kanemoto" and is/was considered to be the continuation of Magoroku Kanemoto line in Seki. My point is...although your blade is so much earlier, it is a close fit with the work of a smith who presumably studied examples of, and worked in, the Magoroku Kanemoto tradition...so your estimation of possible Magoroku Kanemoto is quite understandable to me. I also hasten to add, that my friend's sword is the only example of 27 Kanemoto I have seen like this...his illustrated examples (eg Gendai Toko Meikan p.45) are suguba or slight notare with ashi. I hope this comment is not considered too inappropriate to Nihinto studies. Regards George Trotter

Hi Tom, I think there may be a little confusion over "Mantetsu" and "Takehisa". These seem to be separate things. The Mantetsu swords signed Koa Isshin are not made by a swordsmith as such. They are made by a "team" in a factory and then probably signed by a specialist signer. They are described in sources including John Slough's book Modern Japanese Swordsmiths pp.94-96. Slough includes a comment on the little "W" stamp (meaning unknown). He illustrates a tang signed "Takehisa" with the "W" stamp also (on same page) for comparison, but he is not claiming that the Mantetsu blades and Takehisa blades are associated or connected in any way, other than both having the "W" stamp. If you buy the Takehisa blade, you are NOT buying a Mantetsu blade...different things. Hope this helps. George Trotter.

Hi Gamble, Yes, very difficult.... I suppose, ultimately we would all be guessing (except Moriyama san)...but looking at strokes it MAY be as follows: Middle pic looks like AKA SAKA MITSU KANE (then part of the top of a fifth character?). Right pic might be HO JO JI KANE (something). Unfortunately I don't know anything about smiths and schools who made yari but there was a Mino Akasaka line and some smiths wrote Hojoji. Also, what appear as strokes may be shadow or rust pits on the tang...or I might be imagining things... Regards George Trotter PS...nice yari!

Hi Ralph, you have a nice sword to begin your research with. When you are on Rich Stein's site you should find a link to a Seki Tosho site (WWII Seki (town) swordsmiths) provided by Dr Jinsoo Kim. Look through the 280 odd maker's names listed there and you will, with a little practise, find your man's full name (his art name and personal/family names) listed. If you have any questions, eg, when he started his career making swords for the military at Seki town in Gifu Prefecture (just up behind Nagoya),just post them and we will be pleased to help you with stuff you can't find yourself. Since you are obviously excited by your sword I think it is important that you get the pleasure of looking stuff up yourself, finding your guy yourself and then seeking answers from the forum for the "hard" questions. Have fun, Regards George Trotter

Charlie, I agree with Brian, your horimono seem "balanced" and appropriately placed. When used to hide flaws you will often see horimono of bonji or some symbol placed in a "not just right" place, or a strangely twisted shape...this is to hide a crack etc...same with horimono of flowers, dragons etc....just a bit awkward looking. So IMHO yours looks "right". Regards, George Trotter

Hi Charlie, Firstly, ato bori is quite common. I am no expert, but I have seen bobi and other such carvings that are obviously done after the sword was made, after the sword was shortened, etc etc. Possibly it was done sometimes to alter balance or of course, to hide kitae ware. As for horimono of flowers, dragons etc, it may be done as an appreciation of a good blade, but again, often done to hide flaws. In your case, it is very very difficult to offer an opinion in the absence of even pictures, but, if the signatures are those people are not gimei, and are who you say, it seems that Toshihide (Tos 22) working at 1784 and the horimomo dated 1798 are quite compatible, as Hawley 's dates are just a guide, and considered by that author to be his peak of career year, so he could conceivably be working decades on either side of 1784. This is just my opinion on the matter and I haven't seen your sword, but by the sounds of it it could be correct. You are fortunate to have the signatures, dates etc of both the maker and the carver. Regards, George Trotter.