Need Help With Translation

[Mineo29]

I was wondering if anybody could tell me what this says? Thank you so much for your help.

[Brian]

http://www.aoijapan.com/wakizashi-mutun ... n-2gatu-hi

 

Not convinced by the mei.

 

Brian

[hxv]

I concur with Brian. The placement of the nakago ana is wrong, and the nakago jiri is wrong as well.

 

Hoanh

[Mineo29]

I the sword is from my great Uncle Sunny. he is 96 now and obtained this during WWII. Thank you guys for your reply's.

[Mineo29]

could it be a much older stamp then the one shown on that web page?

[Mineo29]

Or could it be a reproduction back from the 1940's that somebody had in their home? I mean i was told by my uncle that it was found in a cave. Thanks for all your help.

[kusunokimasahige]

It could be a sword which was made for the army on which someone put a false signature to give it more cachet.

 

I own a Minamoto Masayuki Katana in Gunto Mountings. Highly likely Gimei, but still a real sword.

 

A proper polish could reveal more about this sword, found in a cave (which I for one believe if it was found on Guadalcanal or Iwo Jima or Okinawa or any of the other Pacific War Theatres), depending on what branch in the service your Grandfather was and if you have provenance and proof he served in the Pacific theatre and in which unit specifically.

 

If this sword would be seen by Japanese experts on Shinsa (see this topic : viewtopic.php?f=6&t=16581), more light could be shed on who made it, even if it does not pass the scrutiny of the Japanese judges.

 

If it is Gimei (false signature) it still can be a real sword. Whether or not it was made during the period 1932-1945 is another thing. Looking at the patina on the nakago and the extra mekugi-ana (hole in the nakago) it might well be earlier.

 

But, that is for judges and experts to decide. A proper polish can be expensive, but it will bring out the aspects of the sword.

 

And, should it fail shinsa because of the mei, the mei can always be removed (By a proper polisher), repatinated and the sword can be resubmitted for Shinsa.

 

Hope that answers some of your questions.

 

KM

[cabowen]

I think it is safe to say that this is not a WWII era blade, but one much older, probably Shinto.

 

Not sure about the mei as I am not familiar with this smith. He is not really an A-list smith so odds are better that the signature is genuine. It looks well cut. Shinsa is indeed your best bet.

 

Do you have any close up photos of the top part of the blade?

[Mineo29]

Yes i do.

[cabowen]

A little further down the blade would be helpful....

 

I once owned a blade by this smith and the hamon is identical...

[Mineo29]

Thank you for your help!

[Mineo29]

Would these nic's on the blade suggest it was used in battle?

[cabowen]

What is going on here:

 

[Gunome]

the sanbonsugi suggest a mino sword

[cabowen]

This hamon is textbook for Shinto Seki Kanenobu smiths, of which there were more than a few....Clearly the nicks indicate it has hit something. Whether or not it is from actual use or post war abuse is hard to say. Many of these nicks we see were made by kids (mostly) playing with Dad's, Uncle's, Grandfather's souvenir when they weren't looking...

[Mineo29]

Cabowen, For some reason somebody put scotch tape on the blade for no apparent reason.

[cabowen]

Oh, I see.....You might want to clean the blade with some acetone, then put a thin coat of high quality firearm oil on it. Read the faq about care and handling if you are not up to speed on that....

[Mineo29]

Thank you, and i will read the FAQ. I was always nervous cleaning the blade being its so old. Being it is a Shinto Seki Kanenobu, would anybody happen to give a opinion on when it was made?

[kusunokimasahige]

Here is a list of smiths who signed with Kanenobu :

 

http://nihontoclub.com/view/smiths/list ... rt_era=All

 

Now when Chris says Shinto Seki Kanenobu he means : Shinto (The sword period) Seki (City/region/municipality) Kanenobu (The Smith).

 

Many aspects of a sword, including the signature can roughly say when a blade was made. Sometimes you have a date, that helps. The signature is as Brian said : Mutsu no kami Fujiwara Kanenobu.

 

Compared with the photo brian posted I would say Gimei for that exact smith :

 

http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2013/13353-2.jpg

 

That means that the blade itself might be from the late 17th, early 18th century and from a Seki smith, (who might even have signed with Kanenobu) but it is also possible that someone, or he himself has put an older, more famous signature of a different smith on it. Reasons can be : To add to the value. To give a kind of hommage and various other reasons.

 

 

KM

[cabowen]

As for age, probably later 1600's to early 1700's.

[Mineo29]

Thank you Cabowen. Kusunokimasahige, Could it possibly be that Kanenobu signed it at a later date in his life? Or is this clearly like you suggest, a false signature? One thing i do notice is their is no signature on the opposite side of the tang like the one you posted.

[kusunokimasahige]

If you look closely at the crispness of the signature in the photo and compare it to the one on your sword you will see a lot of differences. The way the signature is chiseled out gives it away. I am not sure whether smiths (on a bad day or in later life) had substantial differences in signatures.

 

I will let that be answered by others.

 

KM

[Brian]

There were a LOT of Kanenobu's around that time, so I can't say for sure if it is gimei or not. As Chris said, the hamon is textbook Mino/Kanenobu and a good kantei point. It doesn't match the Kanenobu I posted, but that is just one of many.

The regions don't mean anything here KM. Honorary titles don't match the area the smith worked, remember?

Sword looks ok...worth keeping and preserving. Nicks are never a good thing, and don't indicate much besides the fact that someone damaged the blade. Yours don't look too bad though.

 

Brian

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

According my library (including the Mino tö Taikan) there are only two Kanenobu signing that way.

 

It may be this one (the style of engraving is similar):

 

 

 

ps same nakago on both Fujishiro and Mino tô Taikan.

[kusunokimasahige]

Ah yes Brian, sorry about that. Indeed, regions do not matter. I have struck that remark from what I wrote Mineo.

 

KM

[Bazza]

Jacque has kindly posted the Fujishiro oshigata of the OP's query. I recently had the opportunity to give an opinion on just such a sword. At first I thought it had to be a gimei because I had never (or hardly ever) seen such a mei that looked as if it had been cut with a 6 inch nail and a 2 pound hammer on "the morning after"... Then a f reind brought to my attention the Fujishiro oshigata and it all fell into place. The OP's sword looks genuine to me. I've included my description below and attached the two photos of the nakago that clearly shows a similarity to the OP's sword.

 

Bestests,

BaZZa.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Japanese sword - EFU -no-TACHI style: Blade length 64.3cm, straight temper line with a “swell” near tip & at midpoint, original polish shows tightly forged grain, full-length wide groove both sides (slight stain spots, numerous small chips to edge); tang 16.5cm, good brown colour with “hawk feather” file marks, boldly inscribed MUTSU KAMI FUJIWARA (陸奥守藤原)and continued on other side KANENOBU (兼信). The signature purports to be the ca 1655 first generation Mino KANENOBU and though the temper is not his usual style the signature itself is in close agreement to a reference example; scabbard, handle, guard and fitments of the EFU-no-TACHI style ca 1850 - 2 hangers on a nashiji gold-lacquered scabbard with kirimon crests (cracking along seams), shitogi (“rice cake”) guard, & unbound rayskin handle with traditional “rice bale” tacks & “hair tweezer” menuki.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

[cabowen]

Looking back through my records at the Kanenobu I owned, it was also this Mutsu no Kami. I agree with Barry that the mei is most likely ok.

[Mineo29]

Would anybody have an opinion on to why their is no signature of the opposite side of the tang? Every reference shot i have seen so far has one

[cabowen]

Your sample size is pretty small....Most smiths have some variations over their lifetimes....I wouldn't be too concerned with it at this point.

[Mineo29]

Would it be wise to clean the blade? Or would i be taking away historical value to it? As well as collectible value? Thank you once again everybody for your patience and knowledge on my sword.