Mei help please, I think I am half way there.

[obiwanknabbe]

Hi everyone..

 

Well it seems the gods of Nihonto have smiled upon me today. I came across this little (thought literally 27 inches) gem by talking to a customer of mine at the vineyard I manage. He said he had it and did not really need it. I said i have money, and suggested a trade. I'm in it for $750.00 usd so i don't think there is anyway i could have gone wrong here. Other than a few scuffs, minor stains, and a lil nick in the point, this sword is flawless.

 

At any rate, I have given this mei my best shot. I think i did pretty well.. stress on "I THINK".

The first one i cant find. I think the second one is "dai jo". The third I am 99.99% sure is "Ju". The last two I think are "Kuni Hiro".

 

I also THINK that his blade is Shinshinto. It is not sharpened all the way to the habaki and from what i remember that was something done in the Shinshinto period.

 

How did i do?

 

Thanks again to all of you!

 

Kurt .K

[Gabriel L]

Good try. You got the "-ju Kunihiro" correct.

 

洛陽住國廣

 

Rakuyo ju Kunihiro.

 

Probably gimei of KUN232? He's a super-famous smith, and fame breeds gimei. This doesn't match his mei "handwriting" well.

 

Blade has a Mino style pointed gunome hamon... not the same as Kunihiro workmanship from the first few oshigata / photos I can find. My vote is gimei Horikawa Kunihiro. However, this is just an opinion based on available information, not an appraisal... others are welcome to chime in.

[obiwanknabbe]

Well, if nothing else my Mei reading skills are getting better. Thanks so much for the help Gabriel

 

If this is in fact Gimei, is it possible that it is an honorific form of it or some sort of Nakirishi mei from a student from much later on? The reason that i ask is that, from what i can see, the workmanship of this blade is top notch. Not a single forging flaw or opening anywhere to be seen. Am i wrong in thinking gimei was only done to con people because on its own this blade is really nice?

 

Also, do you think im placing the time period correctly? Im only going by one clue here, the Ha not being sharp all the way down, but it would fit the student hypothesis if the blade was made in the shinshinto period.

 

one final question.. (for now.. im full of them), the signature in the link you provided is slightly different. It reads Rakuyo Ichijo ju kunihiro. The signature i have does not say Ichijo, it just says jo, or am i wrong? There is no kanji for "Ichi" included in the mei. Could this be someone else entirely?

 

While it my be irrelevant, i thought it worth noting that this sword is encased in a very nice, very old, extremely robust shira saya with a carved wooden habaki that fits like a glove. Someone took a lot of time to do this.

 

well, one way or another, i have a really nice sword to enjoy. I am thinking of having this one touched up by a professional. Any ideas one the approximate value here? Could I go wrong @750 or did i take a bath on this one? Im trying to figure out if a polish is worth it.

 

Best regards,

 

Kurt. K

[Gabriel L]

Hello Kurt,

 

The detail about being less sharp near the motohaba is not so strict a kantei point that you could use it to date the sword, or at least I do not think so. That is, after all, more a function of the current polish than the original sword. Unless you are saying there is a flat edge at the motohaba? That would be a little unusual. EDIT: not that I'm disagreeing, it could well be shinshinto.

 

There is no "ichijo," but that is also in my opinion evidence that this is gimei. There is little reason to think it is some other Kunihiro who signed with "Rakuyo." Rakuyo is an extremely uncommon inscription, it is an archaic name for the region that became Kyoto. (Ichijo is a notable family, btw). There are very few smiths who signed with Rakuyo ju, and only one Kunihiro I can find. What's more, that one smith – THE Kunihiro – is well known and gimei certainly exist of his work. Plus, although I said the handwriting looked wrong, it still looks like they were maybe roughly imitating the genuine mei. Put it all together and the odds are much, much higher that this is a gimei of THE kunihiro, instead of an obscure mei from another Kunihiro that also signed Rakuyo ju. And as to nakirishi mei or daimei etc., no, I don't think so... students sometimes made blades and signed for their teacher, but usually those cases are noted and identified as such in the literature. And as I said this doesn't look like the right style for Kunihiro's school, subjectively speaking. And nakirishi mei was something done in Showa period as gunto production ramped up, it isn't something you see in historical nihonto.

 

Naturally if I am correct this means it is at least Shinto, but more than that I cannot say from the photos.

 

As to quality, that is another can of worms. In one strict sense, gimei does not by definition mean the sword is bad. There are decently-made gimei. On the other hand, the practical reality is that gimei are USUALLY not excellent. This is a real old Japanese sword and as such has a certain base value and quality level; unless there is a fatal flaw on it somewhere, I'd say $700 is a steal. On the other hand, it is not likely to be especially valuable, unless the workmanship was unusually good for gimei, in which case you'd still want the gimei removed. But this is getting ahead of ourselves, it has to be appraised by an experienced person in-hand first. And, you'd ideally get the opinion of a togishi on whether it can be polished.

 

In a more specific sense, the photo looks like it has some relatively rough shaping (doesn't the shinogi look a little wavy? Or is that purely an artifact of complex distortion in your lens?). I've seen togari-gunome hamon like this on some fairly low-end nihonto, but of course then there are smiths like the Kanemoto line who are highly valued. It all depends on the finer details of the workmanship, which do not show up in these photos.

 

Anyway as I said before you can't argue at that price. Whether you want to pay for a polish should probably be a personal decision based on your desire to see it cleaned up, NOT because you think it will be financially worth it. That is my subjective opinion. I hope others will chime in with their views, it is always good to get a discussion going.

 

Most importantly though this is all based on just a couple of photos, none of which I would call really good (sorry for insulting your photography skills, if you took them!). Better photos would allow more confident answers, and even better would be to take it to a sword group / club / event in your area for them to inspect.

 

Congrats on your find, I know I seem a little negative on it but to be honest I am just happy it's in the hands of someone who likes it and wants it properly looked after.

 

Regards,

 

—GLL

[obiwanknabbe]

Wow.. a wealth of knowledge.. Thanks Gabriel!

 

Yea sorry about the pics.. they were taken with my phone. Not the best option but all I had. I will try to take some really clear ones and post them up when I get home.

 

As for flaws in the sword.. no.. none at all. That's what I find rather surprising . The quality of the blade is excellent (other then the described scuffs etc. The mune is straight as an arrow and the hada seems to be a really tight itame. Its in very old polish so its a bit hard to tell. I think it may be the original polish as the Hamachi is dead even with the rest of the blade? Then again, perhaps that is why its flat there. I'm smart enough to say I don't know.

 

Kurt. K

[obiwanknabbe]

Here are the better pics i promised. Taken with a far better camera. I just wish i could upload higher res shots.

 

Kurt. K

 

Also, just thought i should add.. This blade is almost weightless in hand. The balance is superb.

[Gabriel L]

...I think it may be the original polish as the Hamachi is dead even with the rest of the blade?

 

Actually, if you're saying the hamachi is ground down to almost nothing, that's more like a sign it's been overpolished in that section. Assuming this is what you mean. But that's a conditional issue, not an intrinsic quality issue.

 

Thanks for the pics. Ideally some closeups would be good. You can post up to 1200 pixel images, I think up to 1MB.

 

Ultimately though it's academic, I think this is one where someone would have to see it in person to know for sure. Still, like I said, almost certainly a good deal for $700.

[obiwanknabbe]

Sorry about my mixing terms. i am still learning and have much to learn. When i say the hamachi is even with the edge, i mean that it is not not bowed looking or wider at any point to the rest of the cutting surface. As you can see in the pic, it does not look tired at all. I have seen instances where a sword has been polished but not all the way down to the bottom of the hamachi so as to facilitate the use of the old habaki.

 

That was what i was talking about.. Sorry for the confusion.

 

Thanks again.

 

Kurt. K

[Nobody]

One point looks strange is the first kanji.

Rakuyo is another name of Kyoto, and the kanji for that should be 洛陽. However; the kanji on the tang are 落陽, which also reads Rakuyo but it means the setting sun. I suspect that the mei might be deliberately chiseled in that way.

[Gabriel L]

One point looks strange is the first kanji.

Rakuyo is another name of Kyoto, and the kanji for that should be 洛陽. However; the kanji on the tang are 落陽, which also reads Rakuyo but it means the setting sun. I suspect that the mei might be deliberately chiseled in that way.

Very odd. Not sure what to think.

[obiwanknabbe]

Gentlemen,

 

Thank you so much for your input here. It seems the plot is thickening? The English major in me begs me to ask if any known smiths were noted for using plays on words in their mei? Same word Rakuyo, same pronunciation, but different meaning? Also referencing Kunihiro and a place he was known to work, settle down, and eventually die. Could this be a sword, made by another smith to honor THE Kunihiro's passing? Like a memorial? Just a shot in the dark.

 

Kurt. K

[cabowen]

There is nothing about this blade that even remotely resembles the work of the famous Kunihiro.

[Gabriel L]

Gentlemen, thank you so much for your input here. It seems the plot is thickening?

 

I think it's only thickening in the sense that the person who inscribed this mei was thick... When I said I "don't know what to think," I meant it as "it's odd that they couldn't even get that detail right."

 

Chris has put it a bit more directly than I have, which in some cases (like this one) might be a better way to communicate. I've stated my opinion diplomatically a few times now, but to be more explicit, on the available information there is no rational conclusion except gimei by a completely unrelated smith. The workmanship and style just aren't there, and the prevalence of fakes cannot be ignored.

 

Like I said, I'm glad you're happy with it – really. But please enjoy it for what it is, and do not hang your hopes on what (by all appearances) it is not.

 

Sincerely,

 

—G.

[Stephen]

Hey for seven fifty, you got a true shinto blade. I see a hamachi, I think, so dont fret over the mei, go by the sword and its blance and beauty. You have a fine bit of history.

[obiwanknabbe]

Well gentlemen, I think enjoying this blade for what it is will be the course of action. I wholeheartedly thank all of you for your input on this topic. I have learned much, and with conversations like this, I will continue to learn more.

 

I think i may go ahead with having it polished anyway. The pics don't really do it justice and i think it will look spectacular after a touch up (i don't think it needs much of any geometry work).

 

Kurt. K