cabowen

He was a doctor as I recall....He was a member of the NTHK for a long time. I believe he parted ways with them some time before Yoshikawa Kentaro sensei passed away....He had a fantastic library of sword books and wrote many of his own. Do a search to find all the titles as there are more than one or two.....Do not believe he had a shinsa group though I am fairly certain he did kantei on his own..... I visited him in Tokyo a few times...He was quite the character....

As I said, they are made with lower grade materials, simpler construction methods, and less craftsmanship. I have several omega watches and they are a fine watch. How about patek phillipe and rolex, then?

Art swords should have everything an iai-to has, then some. An iai-to is not made to the same standards of the craft and is therefore inferior from a workmanship standpoint. They are made for use the same way kazuuchi-mono and showa-to were. They are functional, nothing more, and do not represent the highest level of the craft.... I think a more apt analogy would be rolex and timex......

carried by Mr. Matsubara Shigeru Koki 2600 Nen Shoka (early Summer, 1940) Takeshita Yasukuni kore (o) saku (made by Takeshita Yasukuni) Special order gendaito....Any pictures of the blade? Edited to add: No relation to the Yasukuni Jinja.....He was a rikugun jumei tosho and lived in Hakodate city in Hokkaido....

Sayagaki have not (are not) always been done by an "authority". They were/are sometimes done by the sword's owner for identification/inventory purposes. I see nothing wrong with that, if done well.....

That should be 1 shaku 6 sun 7 bu.....wakizashi, not monster katana.....

Column 3 does have the blade dimensions... This is indeed an old NTHK paper (1984). Blade is signed Choshu ju Fujiwara Kiyoshige. They date it to Kanbun and call it Nio Kiyoshige

To add a little to the discussion.... These days, modern smiths often make two kinds of swords: art swords, and iai-to. Art swords are made with the best quality materials using their best effort. The construction is usually multi-piece and they do all they can to make the highest quality sword possible. Iai-to are made with lower quality materials, often one piece contruction or simpler construction. Finishing is not on par with the art sword...There are, in other words. many short cuts taken. As can be guessed, iai-to are made for use and are generally much cheaper than the art swords made by the same smith. Most iai-to are found in modern, reproduction koshirae while art swords are usually found in shirasaya or sometimes, very high quality koshirae. These days many people are trying to sell iai-to as art swords. Some iai-to are in fact quite nice looking. Be careful! Many times older swords which have serious flaws or other problems, like yakinaoshi, for example, are mounted and used for iai as they are no longer highly valued as collectables. Hope that helps.

Chinese....

Undoubtedly their statement is based on the information in the Tosho Zenshu which we are now discussing....

Meiyo Sosho roughly means "honorable master", or maybe "distinguished teacher"....This was an appellation awarded to smiths by the Kokko'in Kai, sometimes called the "National Technical School". I believe it was a craft organization, or guild, that awarded this title to members. "Nyusen" means "choosen", usually in competition, but in this case, I do not believe there was any actual swordmaking competition, just the awarding of this title to skilled smiths. Perhaps one of our Japanese members can clarify/elaborate.....

Kanji have several correct readings and in this case it can be read Masamitsu, Kiyomitsu, etc. Only the smith or those that knew him can say with certainty which reading is preferred.... Also, I don't believe that "meiyo sosho" was an award, but a designation....

It is hardly monolithic in reality (love that honne/tatemae thing....)....And sometimes one gets the impression that smoking that weed would greatly aid in understanding the endless incongruities, exceptions, and contradictions.....such is the mystery called Japan....

It would seem so...With a spurious mei, it was most likely a later addition, thus removing it returns the nakago to an "original" state (at least that is one "logical" way to explain it). I know that blades that are slightly machi-okuri are referred to as ubu too....

\ If the only alteration to a nakago is the removal of a spurious signature, I have found it customary to then refer to the blade as "ubu-mumei".....there is a better than good chance he was not "fooled"....

I think that "virtually undetectable" depends on who does the work as well as who does the detecting.... Detectability depends on the age of the sword/depth of the meiburi. Typically a punch is used to first obfuscate the mei by deforming the area around the mei to bring some steel up, then it can be gently peened down, then it is refiled and, if an older sword, repatinated. If the meiburi are deep, deeper punch marks are used. It often reveals itself by a slight (to not so slight) concavity that can be seen by looked at the nakago on edge. Sometimes very slight remnants of the mei will remain where the chisel cuts were deepest and these can be detected if you know what to look for...It is very difficult to match patina and worn yasuri-me as well... I have spent several days helping smiths remove mei....it is quite an interesting process...

Nice find Brian! Yoshikiyo was a student of shodai Kawashima Tadayoshi, an excellent smith..... Yes, this type of koshirae is typical of late war and shows the shortage of materials and the desperation of the military....

Considering the making of swords was outlawed by the occupational forces in 1945 after Japan's defeat, I would think it very unlikely that any swords were made in 1948.... There are no longer any members of the Kiyomitsu line of smiths working, nor have there been for quite a looooong time.... There are around 100 or so licensed smiths in Japan currently. I have ordered many blades from modern smiths and would be happy to help you should you wish to pursue this....simply pm me....

六十七= 67

Sure, signatures and work styles can change over a craftsman's lifetime. Undoubtedly there have been some genuine works judged to be fake....Most shinsa'in are conservative and would rather err on the side of caution. Most gimei are quickly recognized by those familiar with written Japanese. Those that are very skillful require bona fide, accepted examples for comparison. When oshigata of a smith are collected and assembled in chronological order, one can see how a signature varied with time. While the style of workmanship may vary, usually the quality of workmanship does not a great deal. Of course there are some smiths, and other artists, who were very talented and able to make fakes that fooled most everyone.....

I think he is saying that the signature on your yari is gimei (fake)....

The hamon indicates the blade has a hardened edge. If the edge hasn't been hardened and only a cosmetic hamon applied, it will not hold an edge and thus be worthless as a cutting instrument.

Hmmm, hamon looks acid etched and being artificial, it wouldn't even be useful as a cutting blade....you might get a couple hundred on ebay....

pictures of the blade would help. he is a famous smith with many fakes...

Ichihara Nagamitsu was, as mentioned, a Rikugun Jumei Tosho, so your question might better be framed as "where does Nagamitsu stand in relation to other Rikugun Jumei Tosho?" Based on the gadzillions of RJT blades I have seen, along with too many Nagamitsu blades to remember, I would say that in general, his work is fair to average at best. It is very utilitarian. In my opinion, the better RJT are those that came out of the Kurihara Akihide Denshujo and Nihonto-Gaku'in. These are identifiable by the Aki (昭) kanji used in their mei. Also, the students of Kasama Shigetsugu (usually second mei kanji is tsugu (継)) are of good quality. There are many who worked in Hizen as well, signing Hizen no Kuni ju XX; these are usually better than average. Here are some other pointers as to what to look for: -Smiths with a traceable lineage of teacher - student. -Smiths that were in training before the 1940's. The earlier the better. -Smiths that consistently won awards at the yearly war era sword contests. -Smiths in the Bansuke published in 1943 (??? if I remember correctly...). -Pay close attention to the mei and nakago. Skilled smiths put great effort into properly and skillfully cutting their mei and finishing their nakago. -blades made early rather than later. -special order blades are generally the smiths best work. Be aware that each blade must ultimately be judged on its own merits and that good smiths had bad days and mediocre smiths sometimes got lucky...