cabowen

The designs at the top of the first tsuba might be Mr. and Mrs. Pac Man.... :lol: The bottom tsuba design seems to be similar to shoji, sliding lattice window covers....

maybe Hiromoto??? 広元

A welded on nakago is about as bad as it gets. This blade looks very suspicious. It happens more often that one would like....

It seems many of the earlier Kaga smiths were more consistent in their use of the nakago-jiri peculiar to Kaga. In later times, until shinshinto, it often isn't as pronounced. When I see mei like Nagamitsu, Masamune, etc., my take is that they are usually gimei rather than some lesser known smith with the same mei. It is often times hard to prove either way. I would bet this sword would fail shinsa though as a gimei.

Akinori, not Akimori.....I am guessing that the name on Jinsoo Kim's site is a typo....

nakago-jiri isn't consistent with earlier Kaga work.

Maybe Kimura Sukemasa

The nakago looks, at least from the photos, to possibly be a tsuki-nakago (welded on nakago)....you should have someone very experienced have a good look before you spend any more money.

It does indeed look purposely defaced. Very odd. And unfortunately a big negative for a gendaito. Still, a great find.

Grey- have you never seen a Tadayoshi/Tadahiro gimei signed katana-mei?

Not sure I follow you Grey....

No better way to study a sword than to make an oshigata....

紀元２６００ is 1940.

It looks more soshu to me, maybe later Uda or the like....I would be inclined to think this is a gimei rather than a non-famous Nagamitsu...

That is called "ippon nyusatsu" in Japan and is usually done when there are time constraints (large crowd/before an end of year party etc.).

Who cares if it is 100% traditionally done, or how it is done, or by whom? The fact is that they are doing something towards advancing kantei skills and are making an effort. Sorry, but this comment makes it seem as though you are putting down the efforts of those who are making an effort in the USA. Let's not be our own worst enemy in the West when it comes to Nihonto study. We should be praising and encouraging anyone who goes to a lot of trouble to put on an event like this. Comments about experts and good swords do little to thank the efforts of people like Mike and others. I know I would be over the moon to have something like that here in SA. It doesn't have to always be the Japanese way. I think I would prefer to be put into a group and be able to discuss among ourselves actually. Less intimidating. We all know how kantei is done in Japan, it is well covered everywhere. Highlighting the differences between "us" and "them" is not very constructive or encouraging, and that last line is particularly demeaning to those running these events in the US as far as I am concerned. Brian Who cares how or by whom? Really? I care and I would think anyone serious about learning should care. I have never said anything about it "needing" to be done in the traditional way, I simply pointed out the way it is and has been done to highlight the differences in approach as I think it is indeed both important and relevant. I have not "put down" the efforts of anyone and there is no need to take my observations personally or to try and twist them into some sort of personal criticism. The last line about needing expert judges is a statement of fact. If you read my followup I specifically wrote that I would think there are people in the West that are capable of this role. It's about the process, don't make it about the people. It is stating the obvious and should go without saying that I believe in education and applaud all efforts in that direction. The Japanese approach has five components: top quality learning materials, learned teachers, student input, quality feedback to help guide the student, and a formal structure for it all to function efficiently. It works quite well. Each of these parts is a vital part of the process. And, as Paul has noted: I know the Japanese system works and works well, mostly because I participated in it several times a month for more than a decade. I think I have a legitimate basis for comparison when judging the merits of the differing approaches. I have not, and am not, saying that the approach being used in the US is not providing a learning experience. I am saying that by adopting some of the elements of the Japanese approach, it might provide a richer, more efficient learning experience. I would like to think that most people recognize the constructive nature of my comments and are more interested in improving their knowledge than they are in wasting time with pettiness and imagined slights.

I agree with Adam- it's a personal decision. If it were mine to make, I would lean towards a pair of blades by the same smith.

Got it.....Thanks again for sharing this...

I think you answered your own question with this statement. You are probably right....I would like to think though that there are a few people capable of this in the West....

Not to pick at it too much, but It seems to me that the leather ito should be flush with the fuchi, not above it, and perhaps as you note, more uniform in its application. I understand the spirit you sought though and think in general you were successful in achieving it....

A traditional kantei is run a bit differently than those I have seen done in the US. Normally, several items are put out for in-hand inspection. Each participant views the items and then submits a bid for the maker. The judge then either accepts the guess, or returns it with a note (wrong period, wrong "road", etc. and the participant has another chance, based on the feedback, to try again. At the end of the allotted time, the answers are given and the judge discusses each blade, the guesses made, and the merits/demerits of the more popular wrong guesses. Not only do you need good swords but you need expert judges who can quickly reply to the guesses with the appropriate note to help guide the participants.

Extremely doubtful it is genuine. One of the most faked of all smiths.

Not to derail this thread, but I couldn't agree more...Kantei is the major tool used in Japan for instruction. One learns not only to differentiate periods and schools, but levels of quality as well. It is beyond me why this has not become a regular feature of US sword shows.

Oh, thanks George....now I follow.... Doesn't even remind me of koto, never mind Sa!

We can't really say it is gimei because inlaid signatures done on blades subsequently shortened are never by the smith who made the blade originally and are attributions, not attempts at copying the original smith's signature. That being said, this is a very poor example in every way possible: the calligraphy is bad, the inlay crude, and the blade has none of the characteristics seen in works by Sa. I wonder what has led you to believe that the sword was owned by someone important (other than in the way we are all important to someone)?