Gunto Sword Translation Please

[hddennis]

Just acquired what appears to be a stainless steel blade shin gunto. It has no acceptance stamps nor does it have a showa stamp. One side of the tang has a nice two character signature and the other has about 6 chippy characters in a different hand. Can anyone translate this or tell me what I have?

 

Howard Dennis

[Mark]

I must be blind........... do not see anything???????

[hddennis]

It didn't accept my picture, I'm trying again

 

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

Howard,

 

Pic is a bit too small, but I can see 昭和?年?月 (Showa ?th year ?th month) on the ura, and 兼宗 (Kanemune), I think, on the omote.

 

I'll check in a bit and see if I can match the mei to a smith.

[hddennis]

Thanks, I can't seem to get a decent image here but I posted one here:

http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese- ... post999032

 

 

Is it normal to find a stainless steel blade with a signature?

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

Thanks, I can't seem to get a decent image here but I posted one here:

http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese- ... post999032

 

 

Is it normal to find a stainless steel blade with a signature?

Howard Dennis

 

You should post pics of the blade, nakago, etc. here so we can give our assessment based on more than a mei rubbing. Stainless blades can have inscriptions but I don't recall offhand seeing one with a traditional art name and nengo [EDIT 2: oops, I saw one with a nijimei on this very site a while ago, lol]. In any case I reserve judgment / comment until I see the blade itself.

 

With that larger image I can see the nengo reads 昭和十?年四月 Showa ju ? nen shigatsu (Showa 10+? year 4th month [April]). I am still struggling with that all-important kanji after "ju" though. It could read 八 hachi (, which would make it Showa 18 (1943). I am not going to put money on that however, it's just the best fit I can see for it.

 

I looked at the oshigata I have for gendai Kanemune smiths but haven't found a good match (yet).

 

EDIT: so this might be 桐淵 兼宗 Kiribuchi Kanemune: http://blog.livedoor.jp/budojapan/archives/4451475.html

 

 

Seems like a decent mei match, that "kane" character is very distinctive. Oh, and that sword was made in Showa 18 (1943), BTW.

 

Lower grade gunto smith.

[hddennis]

That's Great! Thanks for the help, It looks like a perfect match to me. Now what exactly do I have? The mounts are identical to the one you show. It's signed but no acceptance stamps. I etched the blade in two places and there is no hard and soft steel nor is there any rust so I'm sure it must be stainless steel. Can it still be called a gendaito or is it something else? In the pictures of the Kanemune blade you listed it also looks as if it has an artificial temper? This is a sword class unfamiliar to me.

 

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

Now what exactly do I have? The mounts are identical to the one you show. It's signed but no acceptance stamps. I etched the blade in two places and there is no hard and soft steel nor is there any rust so I'm sure it must be stainless steel. Can it still be called a gendaito or is it something else? In the pictures of the Kunemune blade you listed it also looks as if it has an artificial temper? This is a sword class unfamiliar to me.

 

Howard,

 

As I said before, no way we can tell you what you have until we actually see what you have. Written description can give us suspicions but nobody will state anything definitive based on secondhand information.

 

First some vocab. Literally, gunto = military sword. Gendaito = "modern sword" (1876-1945). Showato = "Showa sword" (1926-1989). However, collectors use these terms with a bit more connotation than that. Usually when we say gunto or showato, we mean a non-traditional blade (traditional blades must be folded from tamahagane and water quenched). So this includes handmade blades but with modern materials or methods, e.g. mill steel / oil quench, or machine made blades, stainless, etc. Usually when we say gendaito we mean completely traditionally made blades, like Yasukuni-to (swords made by the Yasukuni shrine smiths) or prewar swords by traditional art smiths. Of course there are exceptions to these usages, so we will often talk about a "traditional blade in gunto mounts" for instance. I am just trying to help you get the landscape sorted out.

 

The sword I linked to looks like oil quenched handmade (and not folded). This would match with Kiribuchi Kanemune's history in developing "gunsui-to" (see this article for more information). It is still a "real sword" for practical purposes and yes, the hamon is real, just not water quenched. The hazy habuchi (transition) and lack of interesting features are common characteristics of oil quench in a factory steel. Assuming I am correct, this would therefore not be a cosmetic hamon. I think you are getting sidetracked by the poor state of polish which masks the appearance of the hamon in some areas.

 

The mounts of that sword are the well-known Type 98 shin-gunto army officer mounts. Very common. However, small differences in style can make it a different type, so I am not stating that your sword is necessarily a type 98.

 

As to your sword, again you must post pics before we can say anything. Stainless blades are rather obviously stainless, they have a bright clean nakago with minimal patination (not cleaned, simply naturally rust-resistant). If the blade doesn't have rust but the nakago has a patina, obviously it just means the blade was protected (e.g. oiled, kept in a dry environment with little air circulation, etc.). EDIT: here is an example of a stainless sword. This is all conjecture until we see your sword though.

 

As to etching etc., please please please don't do that. Even if it's "only gunto" and out of polish there are very strict and correct ways of caring for these items, and amateur etching is very much frowned upon. Read the care guides here and here! A qualified, traditionally-trained togishi (polisher) can open a "window" to see if there is a hamon. That is the recommended avenue of investigation if the old polish is too hazed over to see if there is a hamon. However, it is difficult to find qualified togishi willing to do a full restoration of showato unless they are totally traditional. And it makes no financial sense because a traditional polish will cost more than this kind of sword is worth, so you only do it if you are really attached to the sword. Just fair warning.

 

Basically, show us the goods!

[hddennis]

Gabriel, Thanks for your response. I appreciate the help. I used to belong to the JSSUS for years and have handled many swords and polished a few. Trust me when I say this sword has no temper or hamon. Pictures will only prove to you it looks exactly like the sword on the site you listed, mounts, blade, nakago and signature, the only difference is mine shows no hamon. Now that I think about this, the nakago shows a small amount of patina like your example so it can't be stainless steel but maybe it's the gunsui-to steel.

 

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

Apologies, somehow I overlooked that you've been at this site for over a year (edit: and have owned blades much longer than that). I was operating under the (false) assumption that you were a newbie to nihonto/gunto in general. My bad.

 

I'll set aside the eternal argument about amateur polishing, the common stance of this site being well-established, and simply say in that case that it is interesting/odd that your sword has no hamon. Curious to see it.

 

I have no personal experience with ginsui-to (assuming this sword even is gunsui-to, and not just more usual showa-to by the same smith) so I won't be able to speculate on its properties or why one might not differentially harden such a blade (but still sign and date it, etc.). Perhaps it was a metallurgical experiment. Perhaps it was simply a wartime shortcut. Maybe someone else here will know better than I; it is extremely possible.

 

Regards,

—G.

 

PS — looking around for more info on gunsui-to, this NMB thread has some good comments. If this sword or the other were gunsui-to, they could be considered gendaito as they were folded and water quenched. However, just because Kanemune did some experimental development of gunsui-to, does not automatically mean all the swords he made were gunsui-to... that's another consideration.

 

I'll keep looking.

[hddennis]

I'll try to get pictures tomorrow. My experience has mainly been with Koto and Shinto swords which react immediately to any light etching no matter how bad the surface. I wonder if the late swords with oil tempering only has a very light surface hardening that the etch doesn't react to? Can oil tempered swords be repolished and regain the original hamon?

 

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

Can oil tempered swords be repolished and regain the original hamon?

 

They can; but who wants to pay pro togishi prices for a sword that will never recoup the cost, and which togishi wants to take the job, are other questions.

 

Regards,

—G.

[hddennis]

I realize the costs would rule it out I was just wondering if reason my sword shows no temper is because it was oil tempered which once lost can't be regained. For some unknown reason this blade is all one hardness.

 

Howard Dennis

[hddennis]

[attachment=0]Kanemune 6.png[/attachment][attachment=1]Kanemune 5.png[/attachment][attachment=2]Kanemune 4.png[/attachment][attachment=3]Kanemune 3.png[/attachment][attachment=4]Kanemune 2.png[/attachment][attachment=5]Kanemune 1.png[/attachment]here's some pictures, I hope.

[hddennis]

pictures? I hope.

[Lance]

I think your sword and the other example are probably a Seki smith, instead of Kiribuchi Kanemune

who was a student of Ryuminsai Kanetomo, who help develop Gunsuihagane.

 

http://www.nihontocraft.com/Kanetomo.html

 

From what I've seen any of the smiths who worked under him all used the same character for Kane that Kanetiomo did,

http://www.sanmei.com/contents/media/A6 ... _PUP_E.htm

 

I have a sword signed Kanetsugu using the same unusual character for 'Kane" as yours. it was suggested by another member as Seki, after doing some research I agree. Acouple images below of my blade and tang as well as another from the Japanese Sword index sword signed Seki Ju Kanemoto using the this similar 'Kane" Your sword looks to be out of polish, maybe having a small window opened will be able to identify itf there's any Hamon or hada before deciding if you wanted to have it polished, and if it was worth it..

 

Rgards,

Lance

[Gabriel L]

Lance,

 

Interesting.

 

So in a nutshell, you agree that OP's blade and the blade I posted earlier are by the same smith, but believe that contrary to the Japanese page's assertion, the smith is not Kiribuchi Kanemune; rather it is an undocumented Seki Kanemune smith.

 

The primary basis for this idea is that the Kanetomo students (in Gunma) all adopt the same more modern/complete kanji for Kane as seen on the Kanetomo blade you posted; also, that the looser Kane form is often seen on Seki smiths. This is certainly a compelling argument.

 

Naturally what I'd want to see next is the mei of a known Kiribuchi Kanemune sword, and/or any other Kanemune that match the previous two blades posted to this thread. I have not seen any other purporting to be by this smith online or in my books, so there's no way to verify this at the moment, and I have not seen any other Kanemune gunto documented with this mei, so it's hard to build a case for the other side as well.

 

Still, a plausible idea. I hope we can find harder evidence for or against it.

 

---

 

Henry,

 

Thanks for the photos. As you more or less surmised would be the case, they don't help determine much more than we have already considered. However they do at least allow me to confirm that it is not stainless, matches the Japanese page's mei very well, is mounted in Type 98 mounts as you already ID'd, etc. Basically shores up our understanding.

 

As to why you can't get a hamon to show, I have nothing more to add, other than getting a polisher to open a window would be my personal next step.

 

Best of luck,

 

—G.

[hddennis]

I sense you still don't think I know enough to tell when temper is present or not. I've polished enough Japanese steel over the last 25 years to know there ain't no window in this sword, it's all one hardness. In order to get a window or hamon you need two different hardness's of steel , it's how Japanese swords work. Hard edge, soft spine, etching will split the two like oil and water. I've done it countless times

 

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

I sense you still don't think I know enough to tell when temper is present or not...

 

Howard, please don't misinterpret my comments. I'm just saying that I personally am at a loss, and that's the only recourse I would have. I am not at all saying you are wrong and I am right vis-à-vis this blade, to the contrary I was admitting that I can be of no further help on that particular point (except to speculate that it was a wartime shortcut, as I said before).

[Lance]

Attached are some images to compare, starting with Kanetomo from John Slough's Oshigata Book, next are 2 Kanemune from Fuller and Gregory's Swordsmiths of Japan, (doesn't use Kiribuchi in mei, instead reads Gunsui, and the other mentions Gunma, between that and the shape of tang and mei I'm pretty sure it's him.)

2 Seki Kanemune from from Fuller and Gregory's book one Fukumoto Kanemune, Swordsmith Amahide had a son who used that name but the kanji I've usually seen for him is the Kane normally seen, so I don't know if it's his son or someone else, most likely there's some kind of connection though.

 

Hope this is useful,

 

Regards,

Lance

[Gabriel L]

Lance, many thanks.

 

Definitely looks like that must be the Kiribuchi Kanemune in Fuller and Gregory (I have Slough's book but not F&G yet). In which case the blade in question is definitely by a different smith.

 

That's funny about Fukumoto Kanemune, I thought I had seen oshigata of his mei that didn't match...? I have to look again, those examples look quite close, especially the last one is spot on, including the nengo. EDIT: so the example of Fukumoto Kanemune I saw was in Slough's book, and the nijimei in that example is quite different; I wonder if it is nakirishi mei? It has that choppy thin quality. Same with the examples on Dr. Stein's site (one / two).

 

So now I'm doing a 180°, which is embarrassing, but the truth is always preferred. I can always blame that Japanese site for misleading me.

 

—G

 

PS The differences between the Fukumoto Kanemune oshigata in F&G vs Slough / Stein's site make me wonder if perhaps there isn't a Seki Kanemune that is poorly documented and/or confused with Fukumoto Kanemune. Or perhaps it is just a case of nakirishi mei as I already surmised. Or maybe his mei changed at some point. Pure speculation, in any case.

[hddennis]

Thanks Lance, that's an interesting concept. To work though we have to assume that the Japanese site got it completely wrong. I've been sitting here studying my signature and the last Kanemune #122 completely matches mine in all aspects. However I do NOT believe that 283 is the same smith. His Kane is very similar but not a perfect match. His mune lacks the line that goes crossways and splits the upper and lower part of the character. #122 and my sword also both lack a Seki stamp Why would that be left off both swords?

 

Howard Dennis

[Gabriel L]

This is one reason I don't like gunto... so little consistency. You never know who's signing, what metal is used, what forging method, which blades were daisaku by less-skilled workers, etc. It changes from sword to sword and there was constant pressure to take shortcuts. Makes it very hard to pin things down sometimes. And then the blades themselves are so often in very bad condition... headaches all around.

[Lance]

Your welcome, when I first acquired my sword I didn't even fully recognize the first character as "Kane" and kept thinking it was something else so you have me me beat. viewtopic.php?f=15&t=15779&hilit=+gendaito

 

Now most of this is in my head so it's all a positive learning experience

 

 

Regards,

Lance

[Gabriel L]

Now most of this is in my head so it's all a positive learning experience

 

This is completely why I do these online translations. Every time I do, I learn way more about a given group of smiths than I would have bothered to do otherwise, not to mention reinforce my kanji skills significantly ( for instance the "kane" was immediately obvious to me simply because by now I've had to struggle with so many odd looking "kane" in previous swords).

 

Well, I also do them because I like to see people's stuff ID'd if possible, but that's a bonus.

[Lance]

Hello Howard,

My guess is either the Japanese site made a mistake or they wanted to associate it with a more unique/famous smith, or I'm wrong but I think the images I provided show well reasoned differences between the two.

Traditionally even up to Showa and modern times times many smiths would use the first character from whoever taught them in their signatures, if not exact it would still be close. Also during the war there were mei cutters, who's job it was to put a signature on newly made swords. Seki in particular did this alot:. for example Fukumoto Amahide ran a sword factory and John Slough's Oshigata book mentions that 80 % of the swords signed by him were actually signed by his son, Fukumoto Kanemune and Ishido Hidetoshi, this could explain the slight variations. Something mentioned on this board alot whenever discussing signatures is they're never going to be be exactly the same, similar to your own signature, you probably couldn't take 2 of your own and get an exact match but you'd still be able to recognize your signature.

 

Regards,

Lance

[Lance]

This is one reason I don't like gunto... so little consistency. You never know who's signing, what metal is used, what forging method, which blades were daisaku by less-skilled workers, etc. It changes from sword to sword and there was constant pressure to take shortcuts. Makes it very hard to pin things down sometimes. And then the blades themselves are so often in very bad condition... headaches all around.

 

At least with Seki and Showa stamps, if you're looking for a traditionally made blade you can just bypass them. That's one less headache

 

 

Regards,

Lance

[hddennis]

Fellows, in an ongoing attempt to understand this sword I went over it with a fine tooth comb this morning. As my interest was older blades, I never learned anything about late blades and they are unfamiliar to me. I first stated this blade had no stamps, I was wrong. After this discussion of what my blade and smith could be I thought I'd go looking for a Seki stamp to verify Lance's opinion. I found a stamp but don't know what it is. Can anyone tell me what this stamp is and what does it's presence on my blade signify?

 

Howard Dennis

[Lance]

Looks like an incomplete or "half-stamp" for Nagoya arsenal. Sometimes when they applied the markings they didn't strike it fully, and you wouldn't get a complete impression. Below is a link to a post about arsenal stamps, lots of different examples to compare your's to if I'm incorrect. (also has other incomplete struck stamps, like Seki and Showa)

 

 

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=8010&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=arsenal+stamps

 

 

Regards,

Lance

[hddennis]

Thanks Lance, I'll check that out. Does the stamps presence mean this is not a traditionally made blade or does it just mean the blade was accepted for use by the arsenal?

 

Howard Dennis