Promo

Last pictures I have of this blade.

Referring back to the original thread where I posted general information: This is now the second blade of his collection. What I missed to picture with the blade in this thread here is the wonderful saya/texture on the outside. It is not only lines, but has several times applied what looks like roses to me. The blade looks to be quite out of polish and has been remounted a few times. Tsuba of this blade has a signature on it too.

Last few pictures I have of this blade.

A friend of mine who also collects firearms as I do (and where I know him from) once told me that he inherited a few blades from his father who had a huge passion for Nihonto. He promised me to one day show me those blades. Due to COVID and him living further away from my home it took us some time to finally find a possible date. While he in advance told me he would rather not want me to take them apart we then agreed that we'll look at in person and see if they are easily disassembleable and then decide if they can be taken apart. I told him I'd do a lot of pictures and hopefully find others who will help me to learn as much as possible on his blades to pass back the information to him for him to keep it with the blades (since they are from his father he wants to keep them and not sell). In place I was amazed to learn there were a total of 6 blades that he had. Of those six he obtained five prior to WWII and one post WWII. Since he lived in Vienna and due to him having studied medicine it allowed him to stay in Vienna and care for the wounded (as far as I understood). Due to frequent bombings in which his collection once nearly was destroyed he rented a small storage inside St. Stephan Cathedral in Vienna where he managed to safely store the blades during WWII. Anyway, to get to the blades - I'll be posting them in exactly the order I took the pictures. This means I'll be starting with the blade he obtained post WWII which quite obvious is a blade in military mounting, so a WWII blade. I know this is the incorrect forum, but to keep all threads in the same section (at this point: I had considered posting all blades in a single thread, but due to the larger number of the blades I think this would probably be confusing so I will post individual threads for each blade) I'm nevertheless posting it here.

@Tom Darling, please forgive me in advance if this reply sounds rude for myself not being a native speaker of the English language, but your participations in this thread were sometimes very weird and not very helpful for myself. In post #50 you claimed "The habaki ( -0) is original to the nakago, but not the blade. The three (hi) beyond the machi is also a clue"; to my various inquiries what you supposed to tell me and how a habaki can be original to the nakago but not to the blade and which clue the three hi are for you never gave a reply and left others also wondering what you mean. You later then had suspicion it wouldn't make Juyo since it wasn't directly moved to Juyo but instead Tokubetsu Hozon first. Such assumptions make beginners, as I am, uncertain and require me to check back with more knowledgeable persons, such as Markus, who then assured me your thoughts are wrong and everything is alright with my blade and it does the process as it is supposed to be. Subsequently I had requested better pictures of my blade to have something to share with persons that have helped and assisted me with their thoughts and I was eagerly waiting to get them myself, to finally see something more on the blade. You might be correct in that the pictures as uploaded to the forum are not perfect to make judgements on it - I am surely not the one to be able to tell if this picture is perfect or not. But first of all remember that the forum automatically resizes to pictures of maximum 1800 px width/length, plus during this process which also optimizes pictures filesize-wise as well, hence details may be lost. Next, have I had additional pictures, I would had posted them among too. So no, I don't have a full size blade picture of the other side. I'm keeping this forum updated and sharing what I can since many were very helpful and I love the idea of forums especially when it comes to sharing details and items with persons from all over the world for all to give them access to something they might not have and possibly learn from. Finally, no my blade is not the only one known in this style and shape. Darcy on the first page posted one in exact identical style/shape even with also three hi from Juyo 18. You have participated in this thread with several posts, hence you should be aware of this. Now, I don't want you to answer what you meant with the habaki/nakago post nor discuss again the way to Juyo, but mentioned these two things to maybe give you an outside view on how your postings can be understood/misunderstood by others, especially not knowledgeable persons. Therefore (and also because this way I can at least work around the picture size limitation) find attached a cutout picture of the kissaki area that you had particularily asked upon. To my personal astonishment when comparing the kissaki area with a picture that resulted in cleaning the blade (the particular second picture was posted in this thread on page 3 in post #76) it seems they match pretty well, hamon-wise. @vajo thanks for the hint, I missed to address this earlier. I trust the handling person they will give a freshly polished blade proper treatment though so I don't think as a novice I should tell them how to correctly oil and store the blade. It might also just be a few wooden fibers that were in the way when the pictures were taken.

Finally saw more of the blade. I hope that you in here not only you'll enjoy it as much as I did, but also to be educated on certain details.

@Tom Darling, it is not that I would hold back pictures for no one to see, it is simply that I do not have something to show in here. I've learnt to be patient and rather not inquire ten times. Sorry, and if it helps (sometimes shared pain hurts less? ): being the owner waiting is even worse than being a reader like you are.

OK, I got a small teaser to share!

@Nobody thanks for the proper translation help! Very important to have Native speakers such as you aboard. @Tom Darling, I currently do not have something that I am able to share of it (and the only thing that I have is very poor). I'm working on it and as soon as I got something that does it justice, it will be posted. I'm looking forward to see it now in full glory myself, so I'm among with you waiting for this!

It looked familiar to me so I looked up recent mails of you and found you telling me what it is .. while I would grant Brian the money I guess it would not be fair ...

Guys, it is an original Masayuki. Juyo would be the icing on the cake, but honestly: I don't need it. It would be nice if it would make it. If not, it still is a Masayuki blade of unique shape and with a cutting test. If I was to choose between the same blade without machiokuri but also without cutting test and my blade with cutting test but machiokuri I'd still always pick the one with the cutting test, even if this means due to machiokuri it won't make juyo. It adds so much more to its history and makes it very special not only among the Masayuki/Kiyomaro blades, but also among other blades of this period. The submission to juyo is mainly because it anyway already is in Japan and I won't be sending it over a second time, hence the try. I didn't find the blade, the blade found me, and I love it the way it is. @Tom Darling, I've asked @Markus and he specifically told me that currently there are no shortcuts to juyo. Even if there were, I do not understand the sense of this discussion. I'm following the process by the rules and did TH first to get papers confirming it is an original Masayuki blade (remember that was a big discussion to nearly all). At least to me there is no benefit in using a shortcut to juyo (if there were one) - imagine getting to see a blade with juyo but no TH papers, wouldn't that sound weird and potentially suspicous? And this way I have everything according to the rules and all properly documented.

James, there is a "brother blade" of nearly identical shape which is in Juyo #18, Darcy posted it in this thread here: However, this one doesn't have a cutting test. I've asked for cutting test marked Masayuki/Kiyomaro blades a page earlier and came to a total of three others known with a cutting test, hence with mine there would then be a total of four known. Markus additionally yesterday was so kind as to count the Juyo blades by Masayuki/Kiyomaro and came with the number of 72. Assuming Yas a page earlier in post #177 is correct with his "around 130 blades" for this smith, this puts the Juyo rate at 55,3%. This is not knowing how many of the non-Juyo blades by Masayuki/Kiyomaro were submitted to Juyo and failed. I don't know how this "Juyo rate" compares to other smiths and if such a comparison may at all be done though. I can't add anything on the value, except that I'll some day need one for the insurance when it is back. But the ROI rate doesn't matter this much anyway since I'll be keeping it, this has not changed since the starting post. It might not be usual to start a Nihonto collection with a Masayuki, but I don't think it is wrong either.

Tom, it is going to Juyo Shinsa, but needed to pass Tokubetsu Hozon first.

Just read the whole thread. I've been made aware of three other Masayuki/Kiyomaro blades with cutting tests. Re how it ended up where I got it from, start reading at this post here: Markus, big thanks for posting in here the translated information. To me, as a full novice, it sounds really unique that a (undated) blade underwent a cutting test two years after it was made, and then the cutting test among the date was added by the smith himself. At least I have not heard of something like this before.

Getting to see this today almost felt a bit surreal, though I‘ve been told of it. After all, it is the final proof of the blade being an original Masayuki. Can’t tell how happy I‘m today!

Re-read mail, my mistake: he referred to the book but the two blades were from his references. Sorry!

First of all, I mixed up the links earlier. I originally wanted to post this link showing a great summary of Yamada Gosaburo: https://nihontoantiques.com/project/7561/ Jussi, good tip. Markus came up with another Masayuki blade that has a cutting test and is shown in the book on the Masayuki/Kiyomaro exhibition - interestingly a Wakizashi, made a year prior to my blade (hence 1840), also in Naginata shape - and very interesting, NO name of the person who performed the cutting test. Plus no date - Markus confirmed that no separate date for a cutting test means it was performed when made. Small side note: would be cool to have both of them - a Masayuki daisho with blades in similar shape where both have cutting tests... But to get back, Markus also told me something I was not aware of (and forgive me if I'm using modern terms/non-nihonto/non-Japanese usual wording): Munetsugu seemed to not think the best of Kiyomaro, what might had resulted in the Yamada family being loyal to their "own" smith and not really worked with Kiyomaro. The lack of a name of the person who performed the cutting test therefore would make sense to me, at least for the first blade where they made a cutting test for Kiyomaro.

Sounds weird, but this also (to me) means promising! Jussi though managed to find another one. Seems now there are two! Jussi, as usual excellent archival assitance. You truly are a gift to this forum and all members here with all the excellent information you are able to provide. A big THANKS from my side again! Could you let me know why you think the cutting tests by Yamada Gosaburō were done at the same time or very close when the blade was made? I assume due to a lack of an additional date when it was performed, which might was thought to be not necessary when done when made? If that is the case, would you assume the same for my blade? Edit, found this site here with an excellent and full review of the life of Yamada Yoshitoshi/Yamada Gosaburō: https://www.nihonto.com/koyama-munetsugu-固山宗次/ This one is also interesting in that the blade shown has also a cutting test performed by Yamada Yoshitoshi/Yamada Gosaburō, that one however with a date. If the ones that Jussi mentioned of being done when the Munetsugu blades were originally manufactured have no date for the cutting test on them, I then should clearly assume the cutting test on my blade was done when made. Going a bit further by assuming this is the case, would this indicate my blade was in the possession of the Yamada family/purchased by the Yamada family? If yes, are there any documentation on the Yamada family and their sales which possibly could contain additional information?

I just realized that (to my understanding) Tokubetsu Hozon also means the cutting test signature is authentic. So far the discussion was mainly on the smith. Can anyone educate me on this? I've seen where this cut is done, but is the proper translation really "Golden Wild Goose"? And any history on Yamada Gosaburō that is worth mentioning? Plus maybe a bit tougher to answer, how common/uncommon are cutting tests in combination with Masayuki/Kiyomaro blades? Pulling the translation I was given from the very beginning of this thread:

John & Chris, thanks for the compliments! Christopher, don't worry - Oshigata and professional pictures were already "ordered". They finally are something to then share in here too. Michael, the blade is already polished. It was sent to Japan, Tanobe confirmed signature being authentic, then submitted to NBHTK Shinsa where it was also confirmed original, but papers will only be issued to blade in polish. Therefore it got a double gold habaki, shirasaya and was polished by Saito, submitted again for December shinsa where the result now was Tokubetsu Hozon paper achieved. So all done. Not sure if I should submit it to Juyo though, would mean another year in Japan.

Some time since the last update ... today I got informed that the result notification of the NBTHK Shinsa came in, it achieved Tokubetsu Hozon.

Last four pictures I could not attach to the previous post.

I've tried a few more shots to show some details, they are attached. Do they help identifying the smith?

I might be attracted by the items where I don't know what I'll be getting, at least that is how I may explain the purchase of the attached shown blade to myself. I did not get a picture of the tang (because the seller didn't know how to disassemble the blade) prior to buying it, but I had hoped for the best, still I was a bit disappointed to see it was unmarked. But since I nevertheless like it and the price was not too high I still don't feel bad for having bought it. A friend suggested this Katana might had been made around 1920 - I suppose he is correct, not only because he knows way more than I do, but also because it is quite obvious it isn't too old. Still it seems to have a nice hamon and be of a certain quality. Yet I'll need to properly clean it and hopefully be able to make a few more pictures that show more details of the blade. Looking forward to any comments on it!

The tachi I had obtained earlier this year spent his life since 1945 in a shirasaya inside a wooden box - it still had some rust pittings. So I guess storing it inside a shirasaya does not protect a blade from rust, especially since you wouldn't see rust that soon if you just store it this way (you don't take all your blades out of shirasaya daily, do you?!). Therefore assuming a blade is in shirasaya then again in a permanently closed bag for conservation I think it will be tough to check if it requires some additional care. So I would assume if I displayed a bare blade I would see it more often and therefore also oil and care more often and easier, plus if nothing can touch it aside of the air, it depends on the air where you live and how you live - or do I understand this wrongly?