Nicholas

@Scogg I’d appreciate if my personal information is taken down. And yes I did reach out to see if @tumbleweed5780 would be interested in selling the sword. The beginning of the conversation that is not shown is that I am willing to pay a fair price for it. I’m not looking to rip anyone off. I don’t buy swords to sell and turn a profit. Never needed to.

@Conway gotcha, that’s the website I got the Joko No Retsu reference for this smith. Interesting sword from a smith I’ve never encountered before. Not my cup of tea. I’ll most likely put it up for sale.

@Bruce Pennington

Looks right thanks @Conway. Medium grade Gendaito. Japanese swordsmith index has him as Joko No Retsu (Chu Saku). I’m not sure what Akihide is?

I just picked up this sword and I’m having trouble with the full translation. I see Kaneyoshi but can’t get the rest. Please help.

Thanks, I’m glad I bought it. I thought to myself when’s the next time I’ll see a Koto blade possibly from Nambokucho period with tameshigiri kinzogan mei at that price. Probably never again. If it was papered and had sayagaki I probably wouldn’t be able to afford it . It’s a change of pace from the Gendaito I normally collect.

I agree and definitely respect his opinion.

I’m not sure of the age or level of the lost paperwork. Mike guaranteed it to pass shinsa. The 2 body cutting test is what drew me to the sword. Whether it was Nambokucho or not was an afterthought. After looking at some Omiya attributed swords I can see why that is the suggestion. It just didn’t have the classic Nambokucho shape but with little to no taper that got me thinking.

I don’t think Mike is lying to me. I know his opinion is highly regarded and he was very kind to me and easy to deal with. Just wanted to see if others shared the same opinion of the sword. I believe the hamon is in Nioi with some utsuri. Jigane looks to me as itame/ mukome mix.

I understand that sugata is only one piece of the puzzle when judging a sword. The shape just makes me think Muramachi period when I look at it with my inexperienced eyes. The sword also came with a little tag on it that says Omiya Morikage. Maybe that’s what the attribution was previously. I’ve read that There is a huge difference in activity in the hamon from the kamakura period compared to Muramachi. It’s just hard for me to understand without seeing it in hand.

I purchased a 70.4cm sword w/ 2 body cutting test from Tetsugendo. While speaking to Mike Yamasaki about the sword he said the sword was previously papered to Omiya (origami had since been lost). He also gave his personal opinion of Soden Bizen/ Nambokucho. My question is does this sword have a Nambokucho sugata. What should I be looking for as clues to the age of the sword. Side note: I am happy with the purchase either way. And I probably will send it to get papered and sayagaki.

I also had the chance to buy this sword but decided against it due to how deep the pitting is and overall condition of the sword.

Sure did.

Sword is signed: Taira Sadashige and dated second month of showa 18

I’m going to have to look more into this. I never thought about that. Thanks