cabowen

These poorly done stylized bonji are most often done to hide kizu....

tamba no kami yoshimichi not new....

Well, things aren't always what they seem/appear! Some of us have a pretty good handle on the situation without a whole lot of guesswork involved.... Lots of people, some who know better and many who don't, like to call blades signed Kunimori yasukuni-to-usually for sale purposes. This is incorrect and since they were not traditional blades, causes a bit of indigestion among those who appreciate traditionally made blades, Yasukuni-to inclusive...

gimei....

Bingo......

To me, the shoshin example looks to be more "block" like (kaisho) and with more air/space between the kanji. Yours seems compacted and less precise....Sometimes, like music, the space between the "notes" is as important.... The only way to know "for sure" is to submit to shinsa..... Have you posted any pictures of the blade?

There are things about this blade that do give one pause, but as I said earlier, Kurihara had many others making and signing his blades so there is no one signature reference valid for all his blades. I would suggest two courses of action: -Ask Tsuruta san why the mei is unreliable -Get a hold of the book on Kurihara published 8-10 years ago and look for oshigata dated Showa 16 for comparison. He undoubtedly had more than one person making and signing blades at any given point in time, especially later, but you may find a good match. I would also check the obvious- when was he awarded the kunyonto by the government? Now, before the obvious is asked, I will say that what makes this blade a bit suspect to me is: I am not sure if he used the Hikosaburo in his mei this late. A large blade like this was usually inscribed with more than his mei and date. He loved to add dedications, patriotic phrases, etc. Largely cut mei seem more common on his earlier work. And frankly, the blade appears very well made (from what I can tell from pictures-especially the jigane), almost too well made! Additionally, there have been many gimei WWII era blades showing up the last 10 or so years. Kurihara is a prime candidate after the publishing of the book about him. Add to that the difficulty in verifying his mei and you have a recipe for fraud. I have perhaps 50 or more Kurihara oshigata, unfortunately they are all packed away in storage....I think checking the book I referenced above would be a good start for you....

Why do you think it is probably gimei? Kurihara had so many people making and signing blades with his name by Showa 16 that I think it would be very hard to prove it is not a daisaku daimei..... Nice blade!

I have a 32" Yasukuni-to by Kajiyama Yasunori that came in its original gunto koshirae. The saya had three layers of leather at the bottom with two of them worn through from the tip no doubt dragging on the ground...It has a general's tassle. I often wonder about the cajones that fellow must have had to carry around a sword of that size.... By the way, this sword is illustrated in the Yasukuni-to book...it is also discussed by Kenji Mishina as the first gendai-to he ever polished.....

definitely Katsumasa. Bottom right of Yoshi is kind of like this: 弋　義 bottom right of Katsu is kind of like this: 力　勝

Unfortunately, no.....

I will take a quick poke at this... There were a few books written during WWII about the practical aspects of swords after actual use. Some were quite gruesome. Nakamura Taisaburo, the famous iai master, has also written quite a bit on this based on his experiences using a sword during the war.... Briefly, as relates the hamon, the point of your question: - a wide hamon makes for a brittle blade that breaks rather easily. -a narrow hamon if chipped, is gone, and the blade can break at that point rather easily. -ashi are softer areas within the hamon and act as crack stoppers. Choji and gunome with many ashi therefore are probably a good thing! -shinto and shinshinto are, in general, harder and brittler than koto. Hope that helps...

One side says 1 Japanese sword, mumei...The other side has a name, Iwata Kiyoshi, and address, adachi ku senju san chome 63. That is in Tokyo...

I think it would amaze people to know how prevalent the use of acid is in modern polishing....I would bet that most togi in Japan are using it....a dirty little secret.

Here you are... Yokoyama Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada:

Many times swords made for iai are not fully sharpened.....

I have seen showa stamped blades in original iai koshirae. That is what this looks like. I would bet against it having been mounted originally as a gunto.

Not machine made but not traditionally made-western steel and oil quench most likely. It was made for iai practitioners.....You could do worse for a first sword-I know I did.....

WWII era iaito. Non-traditionally made.....Looks to be in nice condition...

I have seen several blades by the nidai and don't recall if they all shared this trait... The shodai achieved a certain level of fame when his blades were tested and praised by Nakayama Hakudo, the famous iai master. You will often see his blades with a "cutting test" stamped into the nakago. The shodai is known to have used western steel. He ran a "factory" that pumped out a lot of gunto during the war. Most are identical- light, bo-hi, gunome hamon, muji, etc. Rather average and most likely not traditionally made. The nidai's work is identical. Information on the nidai is very scare... I have seen a fantastic blade made by the shodai- 29 inches long, wide, with o-gissaki. O-gunome hamon and beautiful jigane. Custom made for Nakayama Hakudo....Seeing this excellent blade and noting what Yoshichika was capable of made me quite sad as it seems he devoted all his time to making these unremarkable gunto.... Due perhaps to this reputation as wazamono, his blades seem to fetch prices that are well above comparable work by other smiths. If you come across his traditional work, it would be well worth the money. The cookie-cutter gunto are another story...

Mei reads "Nidai Minamoto Yoshichika saku kore" (二代源良近作之) - no doubt it is the nidai. Too bad one mekugi-ana pierces the mei....

A good polish is a good polish-Sashikomi or hadori, it comes down to personal preference...Enjoy what you like- that is what it is all about....

Generally, by the mei...."Koa Isshin Mantetsu Tsukuru" http://www.geocities.jp/guntou_kenma/newpage-mantetutou.html

Perhaps I should have said "a bad polish CAN kill a sword". Certainly there are degrees of "bad" and as you note, one can still see something in many cases... But look at all the WWII gunto that have been bad mouthed for decades. In many cases, these swords have been tossed into the ditch, literally and figuratively, because they looked like junk. A proper polish later and you have a completely different animal. I remember showing Yoshikawa Kentaro sensei a WWII blade by Tsukamoto Okimasa in WWII polish. He said, "Oh, gunto" and handed it back to me. In other words, "oh, piece of junk". I had it polished, it passed Hozon shinsa (with star stamp), and showed it to him again. This time he actually spent some time looking at it and commented on how nice the activity was in the hamon. He called over another member who has a yushu rated Okimasa and had him look at it. They both commented on how skilled he was, etc. Clearly, with the proper polish, it became a blade of interest. In its war era polish, it was dead....

I have never seen a high quality polish on a blade made for military service, Yasukuni, RJT, Denshujo, or otherwise. At best, they are perfunctory. I have spoken to a RJT who told me they had a small "factory" set up next to his forge for polishing. There were several people there, including women, who were not professional togishi. He would make the blades, the shinsa'in from the Army would come by about once a month and inspect/star stamp his blades. They would then go to the polishing "factory". Something like 15-20 blades a month. That is 2 days or so per blade. You can not achieve the quality with amateurs and 2 days per blade.... The written standards may be stringent but in practice, the polishes are poor. They get poorer the later in the war you look. They had more important things to worry about than the quality of the polishes. See tatemae/honne..... I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point. I believe it is safe to say that overall, the polishes seen on most WWII gunto, whether Yasukuni-to, RJT, Denshujo, or otherwise, are mediocre at best when compared to what first class togishi are capable of today. I have seen some good polishes on special order blades, blades made for the yearly contest, and the like... I can't begin to tell you how many times I have seen a muji gunto with cheap hadori by a relatively unknown smith completely change after a quality polish. I remember specifically a blade by Ishido Teruhide. We have all seen many of these. Most look like your typical gunto and hardly need a second look. A friend had one polished just for fun and it turned out to have just beautiful jigane with a really active ha. I was amazed..... A poor polish kills a sword....