nulldevice

These swords are never real. There is always a story about a wartime bring back that has been just recently uncovered and now is available on the market in Japan without any modern papers. If a real Masamune were to show up in Japan, it would be sent to the NBTHK and paper, and it would make waves in the sword community. The seller removes themselves from all responsibility in the ad:

I’ve bought books from Aoi at a really good deal. 2x cheaper than anywhere in the US. he shipped fast and was super communicative.

My personal taste would prefer this over the Kotetsu. Or if I had that much money for swords I’d probably go to DTI and pick up a Juyo from each of the major sword making schools and still have some left over! No doubt this collection was top notch and I wish I could’ve made it out to NY to see them on display.

Did anyone ever find out what that Kanemitsu went for? I heard estimates from $500k-1.5M If I recall correctly, there were 2 $400-500k offerings at DTI last year. They were long gone before I showed up later in the day to even see if they were on display.

A Komonjo listing with a false sayagaki to Ko-Bizen Masatsune. The boshi looks like one done in a kaen or hakikake style with lots of nie particles. Something you won't find on Ko-Bizen blades.

I ran it by my wife, she said no

Indeed, thanks so much to Rayhan and Markus for giving all of this. I have my work cut out for me ingesting all of this information!

Its signed: 東神正茂作 昭和十九年三月日 Tojin? Masashige Saku A day in March 1944

Very informative, thanks @Brano! I just looked up chikei in Sesko's book and he describes 2 types of chikei, one type that does follow the hada which is usually tied to soshu-den referring to the darker layers of steel and another type which is not bound to the hada like you show above.

To add a bit more, this has been my understanding. If a blade is heated roughly evenly across the entire blade before yaki-ire, there will be small differences between the layers (hada) and some of these will be more prone to martensite formation due to having variations in carbon content. This will result in formations such as chikei during tempering and quenching. On the other hand, if there is a section of the blade that is quenched at a different rate than the surrounding areas due to clay application (thinner or thicker) or some other process, this area can form martensite formations more independently of the underlying layers of steel and the pattern resulting from this may be more tied to an area that was heated/quenched differently than the rest of the sword. In this case, these formations would be more free from the hada as Sesko describes and this is where jifu comes from. Edit: And then additionally, you get other hardening formations such as tobiyaki and yubashiri which are characterized by having distinct borders, looking like water droplets, etc. All nie formations that come from hardening, but with small differentiating characteristics.

So a question is, are these splotches of ji-nie tied to the underlying hada directly or is it a heat-treatment process in which certain spots are tempered in such a way that more nie forms in splotches resulting in jifu, and in the case of widespread jifu, jifu-utsuri? Based on my understanding, nie formations such as chikei follow the hada directly and I have understood jifu to be sort of opposed to that as it is a localized spot of ji-nie with a defined border more tied to tempering rather than forging grain.

Might be a question for Markus as he's been translating Honma's Appraisal diary so he has been working on a first-hand account translation and might have ran across it.

I know looking at Sesko's definition of Jifu, he mentions that "it has more or less a clear border" and "it appears free from the jihada, the forging structure, and is not limited to follow the pattern of the grain".

I believe Brano is talking about the ura (Inside) in this case would refer to the bottom photos since this is listed as a tachi. The reflection of the nioiguchi doesn't look as bright as the omote monouchi or the nioiguchi further down the sword. Now this could be a photograph thing and really in cases like this, its hard to capture this without seeing it in person. Its still a wonderful looking blade and a Juyo Ko-Ichimonji that is signedis nothing to scoff at. Way above my collection level at the moment. This would be a fun blade to study in person. But perhaps these little things (if we're discerning correctly in the photos) are what would make this "only" a Juyo sword and maybe not a TJ sword. But that is nitpicking way above my paygrade! I'd be honored if I can one day own swords of this caliber.

There's no shortage of green paper sai-jo saku at bargain prices on Jauce...

Its signed Sukehisa: 祐久

Does anybody have the images associated with this wonderful article archived? It's a shame they were lost with Darcy's passing as his diagrams and graphs were always a good accompaniment to the writing.

You'd be hard pressed to go wrong with either IMO. Rai school and anything from the Bizen Naomune school will be top notch work no doubt!

Here is the other example from the Nihonto Taikan. The bottom of the Shige kanji is again just 3 strokes. I can post the description pages as well if anybody is interested which usually give context about the smith, but they'll need to be translated.

If other more knowledgeable members chime in and have no issues with the signature, I would say that it is worth sending to the NBTHK for appraisal, especially if you are already in Japan where it is a much simpler process.

A few references from Fujishiro and the Nihonto Taikan for the same blade. Some differences in some of the kanji strokes but I will admit I don't know Masashige's mei and any changes over time and I don't have enough references of his work to provide any additional context.

Its signed: 文化六己巳年十一月日 手柄山正繁 I believe the date is: "A day in November of Bunka 6 (1809), year of the snake" Tegarayama Masashige My date translations are super rough, so its probably a bit garbled but I think its close. He was a quite high ranked smith (Jo-jo saku) who was active in the late 1700s to early 1800s.

I mean, there may be 10 more Usa Ju Nobukuni signed blades out there with old and modern papers sitting in collections that we may never see. The NBTHK has records of these and probably the best library of resources and oshigata in existence and we get only a very small glimpse into their world. What we do know is that during the shinsa session, they had reason to assign the blade to the Tensho Nobukuni and we know that they have more resources than just Fujishiro, Hawley, Toko Taikan, etc.. I hope you can find more information and wish you happy hunting as well. The thrill of tracking down new information is indeed exciting and challenging when dealing with a foreign language that is hard to search if you don't speak it at a decent proficiency level, even with good internet skills. Edit: Also, if your final goal is to put all doubts aside, a new shinsa is really the best way. The reasons have been beaten to death above.

How do you know that tanto you found was the "only and first" tanto signed that way? The NBTHK has had hundreds of thousands of blades pass through their shinsa over the decades and there is no possible way to guess how many Nobukuni signed blades passed through in any given year. We'll likely never have that information in English let alone Japanese for the lower level papers. I would assume there are many more examples of blades with this signature that the NBTHK has record of. There isn't an online index where you can search NTBHK paperwork and only a small portion of papered blades make their way onto the internet where we can search them. The NBTHK asked that many people with older papers re-submit for a new shinsa just to clarify the very thing we're debating in this thread. Not all old papers are unreliable, but enough are that in order to remove all doubt, you should resubmit for Hozon and get the same attribution.

Google translate says: IDK that I agree with the last part about it being a koto sword. The tang looks like a much more modern sword and not a pre 1600s sword. I'll let others chime in regarding the rest of the translation on the wooden tag. IDK how accurate it is other than the last part.