Lucky dragon on tang

[Janrudolph]

Good day all. I'm new here and apologize beforehand if I mess up my thread due to inexperience. I hope to get up to  speed ASAP. I have a Japanese nihonto sword with an Edo era date on the nakago, and the last two kanji characters are confusing me. They are the kanji for "lucky dragon". I would be pleased to know if other date inscriptions on sword tangs also have these closing kanji. I might have to learn how to post pics if more information is required of me. Please help me out with this dragon thing. Thanks.

Johan

[Geraint]

Dear Johan.

 

Welcome to NMB!  It is really going to help if you post a picture of the nakago.

To post pictures go to 'Reply to this topic', click in the text box and the reply box will open.  Then to the bottom left you will see an option to 'Chose files'.  Locate the file and then click on the + sign to add it to your post.

 

Looking forward to it.

 

All the best.

[SteveM]

Never heard of "lucky dragon" on a sword. Lucky (or, auspicious/blessed) Day is very common. Maybe its part of a zodiac year and "lucky day"? Need pics to see what the writing is.

[Janrudolph]

Thank you, Geraint and Steve. Of course you are right about the pics. It seems I was overly worried I would not master the technology, but it's easy, so here goes. If I am correct with my interpretation, the date inscription reads: ENPO ERA, EIGHTH YEAR, EIGHTH MONTH, LUCKY, DRAGON. Which makes me think it means: Made in the Enpo era (starting 1673) plus 8 years (=1681) in the eighth month (August, or perhaps "after the summer solstice") and then the mysterious two kanji which I guessed is 'lucky' and 'dragon'. Please help!    Johan

[SteveM]

You got it right, but I think Enpō 8 converts to 1680. August is correct. Bear in mind there is not a one-for-one equivalence here as the historical Japanese calendar is slightly different from the gregorian calendar. And yes this says 吉辰 at the end, which is pronounced kisshin, and means "lucky day". (←This I discovered just today. Apparently its not as uncommon as I thought, and I can find several examples on the internet with just a casual search... which goes to show you learn something new every day). 

 

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBD_jaJP935JP935&sxsrf=ALeKk02shewXOzXkS9MRKdd0cdXRik7Qpw%3A1615737453013&ei=bTJOYOALnLzQ8Q-3rpaQCg&q=吉辰とは&oq=吉辰とは&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgjELADECc6BAgjECc6BAgAEEM6BggAEAQQJToCCABQ8nxY35oBYKidAWgCcAB4AIABzgGIAYQHkgEFMS41LjGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6yAEBwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwig9r6Hk7DvAhUcHjQIHTeXBaIQ4dUDCA0&uact=5

 

[Janrudolph]

Thank you, Steve. Would you or anyone else please explain to me what the purpose or significance might be of the adding of a phrase like "lucky day" to a nakago date? Surely the smith must have added it with good reason, or even just habit like with a good luck exclamation. I'd really like to know. Johan 

[SteveM]

Could be a number or reasons. Maybe the day the sword was finished was an inauspicious day. The number "4" is considered unlucky, so perhaps "lucky day" was a way of avoiding the dreaded number four. Other calendar days also have bad luck associations depending on Chinese/Buddhist traditions, and so the vague "lucky day" may be a way of avoiding these superstitious days. Or maybe the sword was handed to an apprentice to finish, and therefore the "day of completion" could have simply been unrecorded. At any rate, Its very common to see this kind of inscription on swords.  

[Janrudolph]

Steve and you others who have responded, I want to gratefully say: coming on to this forum is a great experience. I have searched the internet and gone though borrowed samurai sword books, but nothing beats making contact with you guys. I'm new at nihonto; I have three (katana, waki and tanto), as well as one relatively high-end Longquan reproduction, and one shin-gunto Type 98. 

The pic below will show the signature side of the nakago. My own "research" has brought me to believe that the katana was made by Nobuyoshi (2nd gen). He was permitted to use the chrysanthemum 16 petal emblem, and was honoured by the title kami (lord) of Shinano Province. His clan name is Fujiwara. Now please forgive me for spouting all this info as if I know it all. Before meeting up with you guys on this forum I had been on my own, and all I was able to do was dig, dig, dig. This is what I have come up with. You might agree I've got it right, but please feel free to shoot me down if I'm imagining things!

An important question, please: the second-last kanji is RAI. That means "trustworthy", if I am not mistaken. Why does this signature include the RAI when other mei of the same smith does not. I see that his brother Echizen has on occasion also added RAI to his signature. Please help out, I'll be so grateful. Johan        

[Brian]

Forged on a lucky day in xxx is very common on swords. Was just traditional. Especially on wartime swords.
Rai Nobuyoshi is a smith's name. Don't try literal translations of smith names or tang inscriptions, they don't work that way. Bear in mind that without papers, the odds are 90% that it is gimei to this smith.
Echizen is also a location, place name. Not part of a name.
No worries, you are getting there. This stuff is not easy and asking is the best way to proceed.

[Janrudolph]

[Stephen]

I for one am glad to see it is a old blade.

I would consider getting a shirasaya made for ii.  Or go a full restoration on the mounts. The saya ha some nice things going for it. I wont speak of the rest. 

If you can find John Yumotos the samurai sword you may find deccusion about a lucky day.

https://www.amazon.com/Samurai-Sword-Handbook-Illustrated/dp/B0050CMGVO

You should be able to find for around $10

Steve n Brian pretty much covered it.

[Janrudolph]

We all know and appreciate that the blade of a Japanese sword is the "soul of the samurai" and the soul of the whole blade-plus-koshirae combination. The blade is all important, it is said, even more than the inscriptions on the nakago. So I have read in various works. So here goes; I would like to post a few pics of the blade to round off this thread, which has been to me a truly great learning experience. I'd love to hear your comments on the blade with its hamon and hada. I've tried to take the best pics I am able. I have been led to believe that a straight hamon is an older type and a more difficult one to create. Please correct me if I have said anything which does not hold up. I know very little about identifying hada. Please advise. Johan 

[Janrudolph]

[Janrudolph]

[Brian]

Lack of replies is perhaps because of the fact that there really isn't much that can be said from it currently in that state of polish. It's an amateur polish using acid/ferric chloride, and sandpaper. Grain is closed, so hada can't be seen. And hamon activities don't show. Can't really see what is going on with the hamon. Fairly typical of SA swords imho. Suguha isn't automatically seen as "better" just that a very well executed one is difficult to do. This isn't pure suguha though. It needs a proper polish to tell any more about it.
Assume gimei and enjoy it as a nice old Japanese sword. I have plenty like that, that I just preserve for the day someone can have it polished.

[Janrudolph]

I'd like to rekindle my enthusiasm after hearing the bad news, Brian. How can I do that - well, by summarising what I have learnt: You do acknowledge it's a Japanese sword, and if made by a Japanese smith, it must be true-blue nihonto. The hamon is suguha, even if not pure. You acknowledge "old", but advise me to assume gimei. The fact that you say "Assume gimei" is to my understanding a major turnaround. I've read the Cutting Edge blog on gimei, where it states gimei swords bear a fake signature. I'm asking myself what signs or clues are there on this nakago that suggests fake. Are there enough indications to warrant apprehension on that issue? The date (if genuine) interprets as 1680. Do I really need to dismiss that date?

Please understand I'm not questioning anything you or anyone else have said, and I'm truly grateful for all the comments and advice I have received so far, it's just that I need now to metaphorically wrap up the package for what it is.  If the blade were properly in polish and the hada and hamon better observable, would that have made the sword not gimei? I willingly accept that somewhere along the line of years from then till now, someone has inexpertly treated the blade. Please correct me in what I have tried above to summarise.

With great respect and appreciation.

Johan    

[Brian]

The first thing a new collector of Japanese swords needs to accept, is that gimei is a) Not a train smash and b) More common than shoshin (genuine)
Smiths have been adding fake/false signatures for hundreds of years, for many many reasons. Please check above under nihonto info --> FAQ for some write-ups on this.
There were many reasons for going this. The fact that a signature may not be real doesn't change the fact that the sword is, and it also doesn't affect quality.
You have great swords with false signatures done 600 years ago, and you have ones done 50 years ago intended to deceive. Swords by good smiths often have already been through verification over the years. So if someone is buying a sword with a big(gish) name on it, you want papers. Otherwise, assume it is gimei. The bigger the name on the sword, the more chance it is gimei. One has to be an expert to say for sure if a mei is false though. But of the strokes don't match, or the work doesn't match...it's usually an indicator.
In your case, look up the smith's work, and compare hamon etc to yours. There is no 100% guarantee it's gimei, but without proof otherwise it is best to assume so. That said, it remains a genuine Japanese sword with age similar to what you assume in all likelihood. There is no way to verify anything unless it goes for papers. And that would require  polish at about $2500+ which isn't usually worth it.
So, like many if not most of my own swords too, we just look after them and study as much as possible.

[Janrudolph]

Brian, Geraint, Steve & Stephen, I want at the close of this thread to voice my sincere appreciation for the advice you have generously given. I have learned a lot in these few days. I'm new to Nihonto, and I must say I never thought I would ever be able to get hold of one here in SA. But like you have seen, the opportunity DID present itself for me to get one, and I am fortunate the blade is (as you have volunteered) "a good one". I feel convinced the tsuka itself with its same (without ito, fuchi and kashira) is period (c. 1680). The saya itself I cannot say, because the lacquerwork plus blossom applique is so pristine, but the kojiri and koiguchi are new. The fuchi and koiguchi are 925 silver (so hallmarked, I have just seen) but I am not sure about the metal of the kojiri and kashira. Seems silver, but I don't like the greyish tinge. The tsuba I believe to be period, but while I had thought it to be solid silver, it turns out (as kindly pointed out to me in the Nihonto-related forum) to be iron, by Echizen Kinai.  So that's the wrap. Old sword, grand new koshirae. Thanks once again, guys! Johan

[Karusk]

I just watched an obvious sagami no kuni  sadamune gimei go for around 4500. 

[Janrudolph]

 Hi Karusk! That's Hikoshiro Sadamune 1298 - 1349, is it not? Great smith, I see. It's true what they say: it's all about the blade.

Johan 

[Karusk]

From what I understand whoever did it and the sayagaki was trying to say it was masamunes adopted son/direct apprentice. 
 

It was quite lovely with a fish belly nakago age appropriate sugata. I figured something that old was actually done to hide the true maker more than to try and defraud someone. 

[Janrudolph]

It's clear why we are so interested in nihonto! Johan