Surfson

Here are photos from the book (sorry about the resolution - as it happens, I have the book and the tsuba in the book and the one above are identical, other than the use of gold for the whiskers of the dragon).  

Just saw this sell this AM on Yahoo.jp for less than $550.   My study of the mei was equivocal, just using Markus Sesko's book on sword fitting signatures.  I did happen to stumble across an example of nearly the same tsuba in a book on 100 tsuba that is nearly identical (see the next post).  Would love to hear opinions about whether this tsuba is shoshin or not.  It has no papers.  My take is that if it is gimei, the maker must have had a tsuba like the one on the next post right nearby since the two are nearly identical in every aspect.  

I look forward to seeing them Tony.   There were some nice pieces in the auction.  

Very interesting!

Good luck with them Tony!   

Hi Tony.  I assume that you bought them from the Sofe Auction yesterday.  Although I didn't get the only sword I bid on yesterday, I have bought a few swords from them in the past.  I had no trouble with the shippers that they recommended.  You probably have special requirements due to shipping into the UK, where modern sharp swords are illegal as I understand it.  I suggest that you talk with one of the UK collectors that often ship swords into the UK to find out the best way to avoid problems at customs (Michael for example).

Mihail.  I am glad to hear that you like it and are thrilled.  If you continue your interest in nihonto, you will get even greater thrills as you pursue it!

埋　This is the typical ume kanji

I'm no expert in tosogu, no doubt, but it could be older.  Many early ones get hitsuana added later.  This one seems to have escaped that since the sukashi design uses up the room for ato hitsu ana.  

Hahah, yes, and I am among those ranks (of the fallible).  I can't see the mei on the tsuba well.  The papers clearly don't say Umetada however....

Or the polisher(s) polished into the top part of the nakago (I have a couple swords on which this has occurred).

By the way, it looks like the sword had at least two more holes in the tang - you can see part of them on the folded part of the mei.  By my count, there were six holes at least.  This is a good sign of a well loved and often remounted sword.

Sorry, I just noticed that Ray already flipped the photo.  In any case, since the length is currently 29.5 inches and based on the last hole (the distal one in the orikaeshi mei), it wouldn't surprise me if this sword was 34" or more (86-88 cm), quite a large sword!

John, I agree that it is orikaeshimei.  Because of this, when the sword is photographed upright, the mei is upside down.  If you rotate the photo of the mei 180 degrees, some of our great readers of obscured meis (I am thinking Ray Singer here...) may be able to give you a reading of the mei.

Hi Mihail, and welcome to the NMB.  It's a little hard to tell from the photos, but my guess is that this is a genuine Japanese sword that has recently been in the hands of an amateur restorer.  Rather than being polished, my sense is that a previous owner put the blade through abrasive cleaning (maybe sandpaper) and perhaps buffing.  This shinogi line is rounded, which is always a clear sign of this.  Is this your first sword?  If so, welcome to the hobby.  When you have learned all that you can from this sword, hopefully based on a lot of reading, you will hopefully be able to get most of your money back to apply to the next study piece.

Are you sure the papers say Umetada?  If so, the first kanji is atypical.

Also the Bohi goes into the region that should have the boshi....  I do have a sword by this guy, but haven't studied the mei on yours.

My sense about tsuba like these is that the thinner they are, the older they are, and 3mm is fairly thin.  Also, the carvings get a certain amount of wear to them so that the cuts are very much rounded off.  

Bruno, FYI, there is a tsuba that is square like this listed as the first figure in Sesko's "Japan's most important sword fittings" book, that is Juyo bunkazai and listed as Ko-katchushi.  I am not knowledgeable enough to tell you the era in which yours was made.  

I like the tsuba Bruno.  How thick is it?  If quite thin, maybe it's Tosho?   Although admittedly, it would be an atypical design.

Wow Michael, that is quite an elevation, from Oei Bizen to Yoshioka Ichimonji!   

I'm just guessing here, but I would imagine that most daisho built for order during the Edo period had non matching swords, and that many of these daisho survive today.  

I would not assume that all daisho that are not made with matching swords clearly produced for the daisho were assembled by dealers or collectors.  To the contrary, most that I have seen give the impression that they were assembled during Edo.  I have a daisho set of koshirae that came out of the Compton collection, and the interesting thing about them is that one tsuba was made as a nearly perfect utsushi of the other tsuba in the daisho.  The two tsuba differ by over 100 years in age as I recall.  I think that many samurai carried daisho during the duration of Edo, and that the majority of them probably had two swords made by different makers.

This is a good question Dan.  I think that it depends on the swords and the mounts.  One sees daisho where the mounts are not particular noteworthy, but they do match.  In such cases, I would think that there is no premium for the daisho compared to two separate swords.  When the mounts are particularly nice, having a full daisho set probably does add some value, though I would think in most cases, the premium would be modest.  Buying a daisho is more of a commitment, since the buyer is buying two swords in one purchase.  

Calimero, these all appear to be fine tsuba and most of us would gladly have them in our collections.  You have done very well.  I presume that you have had some guidance, some luck or both in getting these great pieces!

Kimura Yasutoshi F/K Daisho

These two are Tosa Myochin and Tachikanagushi