Alex A Posted January 11, 2013 Report Posted January 11, 2013 Hi, i would appreciate any help with these papers. Basically, i need to find out if it says the katana is o suriage anywhere? and also a date of shinsa. There is also an a4 sized sheet that came with the sword (not sure what this sheet is?). I know it seems a bit silly trying to find out this information long afer the purchase, but it was my first buy which included some naievety..Id be glad of any information. Please excuse the photography. Alex A. Quote
Shugyosha Posted January 11, 2013 Report Posted January 11, 2013 My Japanese is a bit limited but if I have it right, in the second photograph, the first full length column on the right says "o suriage mu mei". Kind regards, John M. Johnson Quote
Shugyosha Posted January 11, 2013 Report Posted January 11, 2013 Sorry, date of shinsa is in the fourth column from the left in the first photograph: Heisei, 19th year, 1st month 21st day. I think that is 21st January 2008 (Heisei started in 1989). Best, John M. Johnson Quote
Alex A Posted January 11, 2013 Author Report Posted January 11, 2013 Thanks John for that information, and the quick reply!..very much appreciated indeed.. Alex A Quote
Alex A Posted January 11, 2013 Author Report Posted January 11, 2013 Thanks Adam, much appreciated! Alex A Quote
Alex A Posted January 11, 2013 Author Report Posted January 11, 2013 Whats puzzling me here is that to me the blade doesnt look like its been cut short by too much, im no expert, obviously, but the blade looks to me like its suriage. I thought for a blade to be o suriage the entire original tang would have been removed. Im on a bit of a learning curve here. Would anyone be able to tell from the following pic if its o suriage? Alex A Quote
Nobody Posted January 11, 2013 Report Posted January 11, 2013 The A4 sized sheet is the export permit of your sword. Ref. http://www.nihontomessageboard.com/arti ... rd_law.pdf Quote
Alex A Posted January 11, 2013 Author Report Posted January 11, 2013 Thanks Koichi, much appreciated. Alex A Quote
Lingonberry Posted January 19, 2013 Report Posted January 19, 2013 This might help a bit. http://www.ksky.ne.jp/~sumie99/O-suriage.html and http://www.ksky.ne.jp/~sumie99/kissaki.html#FUMBARI I think the short version is to check and see if the hamon ends after the machi or keeps going and to check the shape of the funbari, assuming it's still there. Quote
Jean Posted January 19, 2013 Report Posted January 19, 2013 Just a tip: check the yasurime on both sides of the nakago, if they are the same (seems to be kiri) there is a great chance that the blade is Osuriage. Quote
Alex A Posted January 20, 2013 Author Report Posted January 20, 2013 Thanks Adam and Jean for your assistance, much appreciated. The hamon does clearly run past the hamachi. The yasurime is also kiri on both sides as Jean stated, thanks for helping to sort out this query. Alex. Quote
Jean Posted January 20, 2013 Report Posted January 20, 2013 Alex, Search the Board to learn how suriage is done. There are different ways of doing it, but if the Yasurime are the same on both side, it means that nothing remains of the initial nakago then that the blade is O suriage. Quote
Alex A Posted January 20, 2013 Author Report Posted January 20, 2013 Cheers Jean, just had a quick look to see what there is, plenty of reading, thats for sure. Alex. Quote
Alex A Posted January 21, 2013 Author Report Posted January 21, 2013 Ive had a go at translating the hamon on this nthk paper using the glossery, im new to this so apologies!. From what i can gather it reads "ko gunome midare"(irregular small gunome)..That bit i understand. What is now confusing me is that the dealers worksheet says "gunome choji". I cannot find the word "choji" anywhere in the hamon description. I can find "width of the tempered portion", not sure where this comes into the equation. Is it possible the dealer could have been refering to ashi when he uses the word choji? Alex. Quote
Shugyosha Posted January 21, 2013 Report Posted January 21, 2013 Hi Alex, I agree with you. That column of the Kantei Sho begins with "middle thickness/ depth", something I can't read and ends "no ko gunome midari". I can't see enough of the dealer's work sheet to tell what that says. Is it perhaps a pro-forma and he forgot to delete an irrelevant part of the description? Kind regards, John Johnson Quote
Jacques Posted January 21, 2013 Report Posted January 21, 2013 Hi, Just a tip: check the yasurime on both sides of the nakago, if they are the same (seems to be kiri) there is a great chance that the blade is Osuriage. Yasurime of this smith (Kiyomitsu Enpo era) are usually kiri, so, they don't help much. Quote
Alex A Posted January 21, 2013 Author Report Posted January 21, 2013 Thanks again John, think the large dealer down south may have got it wrong or maybe it was just there take on it. :? Hi yes, kiyomitsu is kiri.. Alex Quote
Alex A Posted January 23, 2013 Author Report Posted January 23, 2013 My last go at this with my limited knowlege is as follows: Papers say osuriage (大o- meaning large) so i can only presume that means large cut off the blade. On the subject of the yasurime being kiri (kiyomitsu blades of that age where kiri), maybe it was shortened by the kiyomitsu school (possibly because the sword remained nearby the kiyomitsu school) or a school that also used kiri. Finally, i described the hamon as gunome choji in another post(this information came with the sword on an invoice-worksheet), whereas the nthk papers describe it as ko gunome midare. Im not sure where the choji comes into it, maybe someone could put me right looking it at the pictures below. Excuse the photography. Apologies for bringing this up again! Alex Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.