NBTHK Hozon Paper Translation Assistance

[waljamada]

Was hoping someone could help me underststand what this Mihara School attributed blade's hozon paper says.  I believe if it's just attributed as Mihara that means mid-Mihara.  Ko-Mihara is the oldest going back to 1300s and Sue-Mihara going up to the end of muromachi.  Is this just Mihara?  Also does it say when it was issued?

 

Side note this blade has a ware flaw and I'm also wondering if anyone sees any potential fukure as well? 

[Bugyotsuji]

"Naginata Naoshi Katana"

"Lacquer writing blank blank Iwahashi"

"Mumei, Mihara"

Issued "25 April Heisei 24"

 

As above

[waljamada]

Piers, thank you very much.  So 2012 papers.  Wondered about what the lacquer signature was/is.  Wonder if it's it's old attribution someone made on the maker?

[Bugyotsuji]

The name is not really standard format for a swordsmith artist Mei, but I was surprised to find three smiths in my Meikan with their names starting with 岩...! 

[Jussi Ekholm]

I believe NBTHK gives approximately dating like following

 

Ko-Mihara = Nanbokuchō

Mihara = Early to mid Muromachi

Sue-Mihara = Late Muromachi

[waljamada]

Jussi thank you for the clarification.  Also am I right in saying that a Naginata Naoshi Katana means that it was originally the blade on a pole arm weapon?

[Jussi Ekholm]

Yes you are correct Adam. Do you have pictures of the whole item? It looks to be an interesting item.

[waljamada]

Jussi, here's some more photos.

[Jussi Ekholm]

Very interesting item, thanks for sharing Adam.

[ROKUJURO]

This is a bit surprising. Normally the KAERI in the BOSHI tells us that it is not NAGAMAKI NAOSHI. (Probably too long to have been a NAGINATA). 

[Bugyotsuji]

Could it have been requenched?

[PNSSHOGUN]

Great looking sword, thanks for sharing. Agree that the area near the ware is a fukure.

[Hoshi]

Quote

This is a bit surprising. Normally the KAERI in the BOSHI tells us that it is not NAGAMAKI NAOSHI. (Probably too long to have been a NAGINATA). 

 

NBTHK does not attribute to Nagamaki-Naoshi. It's a Naginata-Naoshi, and the Nagamaki is to be considered a subtype of Naginata, which furthermore finds itself defined by its mounting. 

 

That said, katana-sized naginata Naoshi of the koto period, probabilistically were used at some point in their lives as Nagamaki. 

[ROKUJURO]

Chris,

thank you for these informations!

[Rivkin]

Such shape and work were popular between 1360 and 1415, which is consistent with papers issued.

[Xanderain]

Funny enough, I was trying to google more information about my blade that I just purchased off of ebay, and it is this exact sword.   I had to double check the NBTHK number on the paper.  It is actually sitting on the wall right in front of my.  I love it.  It does appear to have a couple of blisters in the steel.  I've also been researching the dates of popularity of the nagamaki, and get some conflicting sources - most say they were at their height of popularity in the mid-Muromachi period.  But, I had really been wondering what the attribution said and what it meant.  I appreciate the translation.  Google translate came up with Kuchimaki bridge as it's first translation.

[waljamada]

Xanderain, nice and congratulations!  I really liked the look of the blade and glad it went to a home that loves it.  Had a nice length, bohi and unique as a naginta-naoshi.  It really tempted me and had some good conversations with the seller.