Jump to content

Nobuyoshi blade


Janrudolph

Recommended Posts

Glad to hear from you, Jesse! So, can anyone please inform me what KIND of suguha I have on the blade? Someone had said this was not a "pure" suguha, but I still don't know what that meant. Looks nice and straight and uniform to me, barring that nioi-gire. The turnback on the boshi looks good to me, too. Johan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot to acknowledge Francois R's very helpful comment. And thanks for that, although it is bad news. Otherwise the hamon seems to be in good shape; nobody has stood up to say different. I'm repeating my post #4 pic here below for your convenience, friends. The black spots I assume to be pitting. Under 10X glass they appear to be minute black depressions/scars in the metal. The blade had probably, over many years perhaps, acquired some rust while in storage or under inexpert care. Obviously the blade has been restored. It has been said in an earlier thread that the blade is in an amateur state of polish. Now about the hada on the blade: It was said: "Grain is closed, so hada can't be seen." What I see on the ji seems to be some kind of hada to my inexperienced eyes. If it isn't, what is it then? They look to me like little islands stretched lengthways. There's quite a lot of them all along the length of the blade. Can anybody suggest what we're seeing here?    Johan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Johan,

 

What we are seeing here are rust pits and kizu (flaws) of a sort called tateware (forging flaws along the grain).  Furthermore the whiteish banded appearance is most likely shintetsu (core steel) showing through the kawagane (skin steel) either through over-polishing or poor quality forging.  It would be helpful in this regard if you could present a photo of the tang taken directly above the back and including the munemachi (back notch).

 

BaZZa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barry, I don't know if the pics I am providing are exactly what you requested, but please respond. You and all the other kind forumites might ask why I am going to such a lot of trouble to research this blade, having already established that there are various serious kizu. Well, apart from the unhappy fact that I cannot afford anything of a higher class, this one that I do have, possesses a unique personality, as do all nihonto. I cannot imagine myself declaring "Well, it's not perfect, so why waste time on it?" At least my nakago is ubu, whereas some other nihonto had been altered yet are still held in respect. The tip is nice kurijiri. There is only one mekugi-ana, which means the tsuka before rewrapping might be its own period one. Other nihonto have multiple ana yet are still highly respected. The mei plus kiri-mon is well executed with no signs that it might be gimei, like suspect positioning on the tang. It compares REALLY well with genuine papered Nobuyoshi blades. And the dating? Even if I ignore what the date says, by looking at the blade shape & characteristics, and all the damage that time and human intervention has wrought, can I be confident that this blade is of Empo age? 

Please let me have your comments, guys! Johan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jan,
There is NO way anyone here can easily say the mei compares well with genuine Nobuyoshi blades. You would need to read up and study gimei for years before understanding what is involved. It is not like gimei is only identified by obvious differences. You need to becomes somewhat of a handwriting analyst and be able to detect subtle pressure changes and stroke angles and the way the mei is carved fluently to even begin to understand gimei. I've only been studying Nihonto for about 18 years, and I wouldn't even attempt to make that call. Perhaps someone here will post a pic or 2 of the chapter on gimei from the Nihonto Koza volume, showing how tiny the differences are. The average person is incapable of just comparing 2 signatures and saying they look the same.
I won't make a call on whether yours is shoshin or not. But I can say that I regard any sword with a biggish name without papers to be gimei and treat it as mumei until proven otherwise. Remember there are supposedly more gimei swords out there than real ones. If I were you, I would focus on the sword and not the signature. You are never going to know if it is right or not anyways, since neither you nor I will likely have $4000+ to polish and send any of our swords for papers. So I learn to focus on everything else and not the signature. You cannot be certain of age either, and any guesses are going to be just that...guesses. Without confirmation ever. Suffice to say it has a few hundred years on it, and that should be enough to enjoy.
We all like to put things into neat little boxes, but one of the first things to learn when collecting or studying Japanese swords at an entry or low-mid level is that you likely will never know for sure and it shouldn't affect your enjoyment.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Commenting on Brian's kind assessment, I wish to state that I am not factually in disagreement with you. And thank you for coming in. I was fearing you have lost patience with me :). Considering your first sentence, I have seen in many threads that forumites are willing to exchange thoughts on mei comparisons and it made enthralling reading to me, for one. One need not take every little opinion as proven fact, but use it to exercise one's mind in the lengthy process of becoming more experienced. Now in the matter of guessing, I would find more enjoyment in saying "there is no reason why my blade should NOT have been made in the 8th year of Empo" like the dating reads, instead of merely saying, "the blade is likely a few hundred years old". Isn't it much like saying "the glass is half full", instead of "the glass is half empty"?  

And then, as you rightly stated, "focus on the sword instead of the signature". That I have already agreed upon in my post #21:  "I have to study the blade as to authenticity". But I want to focus with positivity and not allow my enthusiasm to falter. 

Barry might have some interesting observations after viewing my pics above.....? Johan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bryce, John L & Michael, thank you for coming in! I really appreciate your contribution comments. As usual, I will re-read what you all have said and try to get behind the "history" of my sword! It is like a scene in the mist gradually forming into something recognisable as one contemplates all the accumulating comments and informed opinions. What fun! Much obliged.

Johan 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one, unless your post is really relevant and adds to the topic..

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...