Tamba no kami Yoshimichi ?

[bullpuppy]

I just added a new sword to my collection. The seller, who acquired it from an estate, believed that it is gemei. I did send the pictures to a polisher and his insights are with the pictures at link below. The sword needs polished so it hard to make out the details The sword speaks to me (along with all the other voices) in that it has seen some action. It has a sword cut on the mune with a piece of the blade still protruding (an encounter with someone with very bad intensions). I wonder if he won that battle. It is light and balances very well and feels like it was build for real use. Any opinions would be most appreciated.

 

http://www.fototime.com/inv/FE69C51204FC0D4

 

The seller Description is below:

 

 

Blade is Keicho Shinto ca. 1600

&

Signed by 2 smiths, the first and 2 second generation Yoshimichi big shot

Dared keian 3 = 1648 + 3 = 1651

Anyway sure gimei otherwise big time !

 

Anyway the blade is very nice and very attractive & well made, there is quality in it, nice Hamon and hada with good Hataraki, after polished will be day and night with no question !

 

Double bohi/gomabashi on 1 side & single big wide bohi on the other, both running from the habaki, so from the notch 15-3/4" up, well cut horimono on both side.

 

26-1/4" nagasa

Tang is 8-7/16" , 1 hole

Blade is wide 1-1/4" at the Habaki

1/4" thickat Munemachi

 

Healthy blade with no kizu no blister no hagire/crack, no bend.

 

Strong monouchi with a lots of temper and strong kissaki with big Boshi, Kissaki is crisp !

 

Mix with some nicks/chip/nail-catcher but nothing major, temper is wide and all will polish out.

Generally clean old polish mix with scuffs/scratches/stain here and there, 1 small sword cut on mune/edge nine decoration from battle souvenir, someone got the a stroke....

[pcfarrar]

I checked through my books and the signature doesn't look good for any of the early yoshimichi.

 

Nice sword though

[bullpuppy]

Thanks Petter for looking it up. The polisher made some interesting points though.

[Bungo]

It has a sword cut on the mune with a piece of the blade still protruding (an encounter with someone with very bad intensions).

 

 

which picture shows that ?

 

 

Milt THE ronin

[pcfarrar]

It has a sword cut on the mune with a piece of the blade still protruding (an encounter with someone with very bad intensions).

 

Usually from GI's playing with the swords after they captured them...

 

 

Also Tim your pictures are quite good, send the images of the nakago to Gordon Robson and pay the NTHK $50 to judge it. Then you'll know for sure if its real or not.

[bullpuppy]

It has a sword cut on the mune with a piece of the blade still protruding (an encounter with someone with very bad intensions).

 

 

which picture shows that ?

 

 

Milt THE ronin

 

 

Picture number 17 shows that. It sticks out enough to give one a nasty cut. Someone gave it a good wak.

[Nobody]

Blade is Keicho Shinto ca. 1600

&

Signed by 2 smiths, the first and 2 second generation Yoshimichi big shot

Dared keian 3 = 1648 + 3 = 1651

The date is not Keian but Kansei. It reads Kansei san nen ni gatsu hi (寛政三年二月日).

 

Kansei 3 = 1791

[bullpuppy]

It has a sword cut on the mune with a piece of the blade still protruding (an encounter with someone with very bad intensions).

 

Usually from GI's playing with the swords after they captured them...

 

 

Also Tim your pictures are quite good, send the images of the nakago to Gordon Robson and pay the NTHK $50 to judge it. Then you'll know for sure if its real or not.

 

:lol: Ok, let me have my little fantasies........ Those Gi's must have been fighting over someone. It was a pretty good hit.

 

 

Thanks for the advice on the NTHK. I will contact him.

[bullpuppy]

I received an email from a polisher in Japan and his translation is as follows:

 

The swordmaker who produced this sword is 'Tanbanokami Yoshimichi'.

This sword shortened by Suriage in Busyu Edo(Tokyo) in February, 1721.

this sword shortened by Mishina Yoshimichi.

 

Thank you pleasure.

Mitsuhiro.

[bullpuppy]

I just got a response from the NTHK and it is below. He did miss that a mekuiana was filled with iron but never the less it would not make a difference to the outcome.

 

 

NTHK Comments:

 

 

I'm afraid the signature is bad. The reason for this is, if this is a cut down blade, why isn't there an original hole just above the Tan character in Tanba, where you would expect the original hole to be. There is no Edo Mishina Yoshimichi, and from what I could see of the hamon, it does not appear to be sudareba, which was Yoshimichi's trademark hamon. Finally, notice that the carvings stop at the "new" habaki area and not further down the nakago, where you would expect them to be if this were a cut down blade. Don't worry about a payment, this was an easy call. Just a note, this is an Osaka Yoshimich style signature, but it does not match any of the three Osaka generations. The "kami" character in particular is not correct.

[Nobody]

NTHK Comments:

 

Finally, notice that the carvings stop at the "new" habaki area and not further down the nakago, where you would expect them to be if this were a cut down blade.

Hi Tim,

I do not object to the conclusion of NTHK. But I think that there is a logical weakness in the reason.

How can NTHK deny a possibility that the carvings were added after the cut down?

And I also realized the filled old mekugiana as you already mentioned.

[bullpuppy]

Is it rude to point out these points to them. I am new at this but I would not want to insult them.