Geraint Posted January 26 Report Posted January 26 Dear Damien. You might have a look at this thread, Ignore the first one and take a look at the second example posted. Not sure how much you already know so please forgive me if I state the obvious. When a sword is signed by a well known smith there is always a high percentage chance that it is gimei, a false signature. The placement of the signature on the nakago, the style of the cutting, the file marks and the shape of the nakago all come into play. That may or may not be the case here but whatever the outcome this is still a nice sword and mounts. A picture of the whole of the nakago/tang might be helpful. Enjoy. All the best. Quote
Damian Posted January 26 Author Report Posted January 26 thankyou Geraint, most helpful. I should have probably explained more about the sword in my opening post. It belongs to a work client of mine, who has sent me the pics and asked my opinion of it. The photos he sent weren't great. I promised that I'd ask folks with far more knowledge than me (and who can read Japanese). I hope to be able to see the blade myself in a few days, and if so, I'll post better pics of the whole blade. It's currently in gunto mounts. Thank you once more. 1 Quote
Bruce Pennington Posted January 26 Report Posted January 26 Made in 1840. Commonly called a "Kiku Ichi". A few smiths used the style, but apparently Sukenaga used it on all his blades (Ok, I have 10 on file, but all have it). Quote
Damian Posted January 26 Author Report Posted January 26 Thanks Bruce, that's great. I'll start reading up on Sukenaga. Really appreciate the help help. Quote
Damian Posted January 30 Author Report Posted January 30 Some additional Photos for people's interest. Thoughts and opinions welcomed. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.