Can anybpdy help me with this? If so, a medal is in order.

[Marked Hamon]

Hi Guys and thank you for accepting me.

 

Could anybody help me translate this?

 

It would appear that somebody, a long time ago, has deliberately punched out with a circular chisel; the second kanji (shu?) from what I assume to be Oshu, the Ju and Fujiwara I get, then perhaps the uncommon Masa but after that, what looks like Kado or Hiro but has a tiny Dai or Yama where it shouldn't be. I can find no kanji of this kind.

 

The last kanji could be a number of options, impossible to tell by all the extra chisel marks to block it out. I'm hoping somebody might recognise the overall mei as something they may have or have seen, as I doubt that anybody could read between the vandalism.

 

I find the fact that somebody has erased the second kanji and the last of the Kaji's name very intriguing. Erasing or faking an entire signature is something we are all accustomed to, but I have never seen anything like this.

 

It's fully dated Kei-O ni, but I can't get the next kanji.

 

Appreciate any help. I want this sword, more so because of the enigma. The work looks very good and the vandalised mei is an untold story in itself.

 

A Samurai tantrum perhaps?

 

This is supposedly a Shinshinto katana and the work in the blade looks very good, or I wouldn't be bothering. It also comes in koshirae that is need of repair, but that's fine.

 

Thank you for your time,

 

David

[John A Stuart]

奥州住藤原氏関 Oshu Ju Fujiwara Ujiyasu, I think. The kanji after 'O' is obliterated. John

[Marked Hamon]

奥州住藤原氏関 Oshu Ju Fujiwara Ujiyasu, I think. The kanji after 'O' is obliterated. John

 

Thank you John.

 

I can't find a listing for such a smith.

 

I didn't pick Uji as a possibility, yet it is the most likely. I did entertain Yasu but that is not the final kanji. I thought more likely Kane as the very last kanji, which has so many extraneous chisel marks as to make identification near impossible.

 

There is also the kanji after Kei-O Ni which I don't recognise, though it is clear.

 

As stated, I'm hoping somebody will recognise the greater mei.

 

I can see 0(shu) Ju Fujiwara, then the next which could be Uji, Yasu or Masa or a number of others, the following clear but indiscernible (to me - looks like Kado but with a small Yama or Dai where it shouldn't be) then another, which almost certainly not saku. Which would make it Oshu (probably) Ju Fujiwara Masa/Uji/? Kado (?), then another kanji which doesn't look like it could be saku.

 

I don't know if anybody finds this as interesting as I do, but we're not dealing with age or rust here. The kanji were deliberately obscured. Why would anybody do this? Clearly they are not attempting to make a gimei out of it. There was a reason this Samurai (if he were still Samurai at the time - this is close to the Satsuma Rebellion), or a strong male of some kind, chisel in hand but only after specific kanji, deliberately obscured only part of the mei.

 

You can see where it is chiselled into oblivion with a small, round-head chisel.

 

I like this sword, but the intrigue is as intoxicating.

 

Thank you John. I include a shot of the blade.

 

David

[John A Stuart]

Hi David, Neither did I. 氏 can mean family, clan or lineage. 関 can be Seki. The next is really bad and could be 'Kane'. Is there another one after that? The date seems to be Kōō Ni Hei Tora Nen Yatsu(Hachi) Gatsu , 1391, Year of the Tiger 康応二丙寅年八 John

BTW, is there something after 土. I can't see it being Saturday kanji short form for 土曜日 , Doyobi. John

I noticed something strange, I think. In the zodiacal cycle there is no year of 丙寅, I believe. A few oddities with the inscriptions on this sword, eh? John

[Markus]

The year is "Keiô" (慶應), and the second year is "hinoe-tora" (丙寅), so this is correct.

The (土) is IMHO just the upper part of a following "kichijitsu" (吉日).

Unclear about the other signature, the last character seems to be "Kane" (兼).

[John A Stuart]

Thanks Markus, I stumbled on parts of that. Especially the Keio part. I wrote the wrong kanji. Am I correct that 應 is the same as 応 or is this simplified Chinese? John

Oh, I just realised why I thought there was no Hinoe-Tora. It doesn't exist in the zodiacal 60 year sequence, but, does in the Jikkan/Junishi dating system. John

[Markus]

Am I correct that 應 is the same as 応

Yep, the latter is the simplified form of the former but otherwise the same character.

I am curious about the mei on the sashi-omote. Maybe one can do a check-up in an electronic

smith´s list which smith working round Keio used "Kane" as last character

[John A Stuart]

Well, that drew some time. There ae lots of Meiji, Showa Gendai smiths with the 'kane' nanori, mostly the wrong kanji and lots preceeding the Keio period, but, only one I could find using the 兼 kanji and in the right period. It doesn't fit however. There must be some I missed. John

 

義兼 Yoshikane, Keio, Kozuke no Kuni

[Marked Hamon]

Whoa,

 

Thanks guys. A lot of help with a great enigma.

 

I'm still not sure where, if at all possible to tell, that leaves me. A question nobody can answer.

 

The price of this sword is around $1500 and it supposedly has a blister, but the work in it seems really good, judging by the photo of the hamon posted.

 

Let me ponder this purchase some more and thank you all for your valiant attempts.

 

 

All the best to you all,

 

David.