Older blade in Gunto mounts

[bhhltf]

I recently bought this sword from a guy who's uncle brought it back after the war.  It has a lovely active hamon and the nakago is profusely marked, with two holes, but I haven't had much luck with reading it.  I really appreciate the quality of these traditional Japanese blades, but am very new to determining age, school, province, or reading the mei.  Any help will be greatly appreciated.

[Ray Singer]

The blade is proposing to be by Chikuzen Daijo Taikei Naotane and dated Tenpo 8. This is a very famous late Edo period swordsmith and there are many gimei (fake inscriptions) purporting to be his work. Compare with authenticated examples. 

[xiayang]

荘司筑前大掾大慶藤直胤 = Shōji Chikuzen Daijō Taikei Fuji Naotane

 

天保八年仲秋 = mid-autumn of Tenpō 8 (1837 CE)

[bhhltf]

Many thanks for the translation Jan!  Would you have any information on this smith?  

[Ray Singer]

As mentioned above, this is an extremely famous swordsmith. If you search online you will find a great deal of information. Search 'Taikei Naotane' and go from there. 

[Ray Singer]

Please see below. This is the same Tenpo 8 date as on your sword. 

 

https://iidakoendo.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/naotaneall.jpg

 

Best regards, 

Ray 

[Jacques]

Obviously gimei,  NBTHK oshigata (same sword the one Ray posted)

Edited December 31, 2025 by Jacques

[bhhltf]

I'm pretty new to Japanese swords, but very familiar with European ones.  The European swords also have a lot of fake signatures, but even within the same workshop of the original smith, those signatures often vary.  Because of that, those blades are generally judged by style and workmanship rather than by the signature itself.  I would think a Japanese smith could far more easily fake an exact signature than make a blade of the same style and workmanship, as that is where the real skill lies.  And I seriously doubt that a hand chiseled signature would be exactly the same from one sword to the next, even if it is the same smith.  So wouldn't a blade need to be judged by its style and workmanship rather than just a signature?

[Ray Singer]

Yes, swordsmith mei did vary from one sword to another and there is an acceptable range of variation within authentic examples. Some swordsmiths are known for this, for example shodai Tadayoshi. And also yes, evaluating the workmanship is a part of the shinsa process, in addition to judging the mei (inscription).

 

However, you would not expect to see a legitimate Naotane mei so radically different from the juyo example above with an identical date. And there is a crudeness in the execution of the mei that raises doubts compared with legitimate examples from Naotane and his students.

[Ray Singer]

You can see an extended discussion below which deals with the evaluation of a tanto mei, and range of variation across the smith's atelier (the students working together in his shop, assisting and sometimes signing on behalf of the master).