Jump to content

Help with my Katana


acrual

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

This is my first message here, and this is the second forum I'm visiting hoping for some help. I come from Spain and have inherited a very beautiful Japanese Sword, together with a picture. A relative of mine was Ambassador in Japan and got it from Emperor Hirohito together with his picture signed in Japanese (no idea what the signature means) around 40 years ago.

 

Is there anybody here who could give me some help and tell me what kind of sword is it, or who can I talk to in order to know more? Also if I would think about selling it, what is the best place where to do it?

 

You can check it here (forget the first 6 pictures, they are different stuff): https://picasaweb.google.com/contreras. ... zH0vaArwE#

 

Thank you very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The blade is from the koto period and is in the form called nagamaki naoshi. It is unsigned and retains a trace of an attribution. Most of this has come off and is illegible. The blade looks to be from the Yamato tradition....It appears a bit on the tired side.

 

The koshirae, or fittings, are tachi style. They are probably late edo or early Showa period.

 

The photo has the name "Hirohito" written on it.....

 

I nice inheritance....

 

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sr Contreras,

 

Please sign your post with your real name or easier first name as per Forum rules.

 

You have a nice ito maki no tachi (scabbard/Koshirae), the blade is probably a nagamaki naoshi suriage with a kinpun mei (attribution in gold writing) unfortunately barely visible, probably forged in the 14th Century.

 

edit to add, I saw Chris already answered

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was assessing this sword in the SFI and advised the poster to have it seen to by a RELIABLE expert. As well to preserve it with some TLC and oil. There is creeping red rust. The only character I could make out was 'mune' as in Xmune. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Si Adolfo,

 

Just a clarification, a Nagamaki Naoshi was a pole arm, some kind of Haleberd with a very long blade of which the greatest part of the tang has been cut off so as to have it mounted like a saber. The back of the blade near the tip was shaved as to have less curvature

 

For this kind of pole arm the Tang had more or less the same length as the bmade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, The blade needs to be lightly oiled with some good quality machine oil (like used for sewing machines) and kept clean. Don't oil the nakago (tang). Since your sword is stored in the koshirae be very careful not to use to much oil as it will compromise the saya. Check out this for some detailed info; http://www.jssus.org/articles/7.html Where are you located? We can direct you to some good people perhaps, to help you. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John C asked

BTW why is it a nagamaki naoshi and not a shobu zukuri?

 

Good question...... Nagamaki were also made in hira zukuri and shinogi zukuri styles..... There is no such thing in any of my books as a nagamaki naoshi blade style. The term is a 'collectorism' and very misleading. This blade is shobu zukuri. It may or may not have once been a nagamaki.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question...... Nagamaki were also made in hira zukuri and shinogi zukuri styles..... There is no such thing in any of my books as a nagamaki naoshi blade style. The term is a 'collectorism' and very misleading. This blade is shobu zukuri. It may or may not have once been a nagamaki.

 

I am assuming then that you do not have a copy of Nakahara's book, "Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords", wherein he lists nagamaki-naoshi-zukuri as a blade style on page 20 and explains why they are different than shobu-zukuri....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chris.

 

You're right, I dont have a copy of Nakahara's book. However, the nagamaki naoshi designation is I believe only of fairly recent advent and that traditionally there was no such type recognised, as it was seen as a modification to the shobu zukuri style nagamaki, in order to make the blade usable as a sword.

 

As always I stand to be corrected. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith and Curgan, you are mixing things , you are confusing the type of arms with the kind of Tsurikomi:

 

Type of arms: Nagamaki, Nagamaki Naloshi, Naginata, katana, tanto ... (Nagayama - p.48/49)

 

with

 

Tsurikomi: Hira zukuri, Katakiriha, Moroha, shinogi, shobu (Nagayama : P. 53)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jean.

 

I am not confusing anything....... How can a description of a type of arms be applied to a style of blade, when the style denotes the form of the blade? This is exactly what you and the honourable Nakahara San are trying to do here. Nagamaki naoshi simply means nagamaki shaped or outlined. Nagamaki (the weapon) came in several blade styles not just shobu zukuri. This being so, which blade style is nagamaki naoshi? shinogi zukuri...... errr no. Hirazukuri?.... errrr no. Shobu zukuri....... errr no. Nagamaki were made in all three of these styles . Which one is nagamaki naoshi? All of them? None of them? Is nagamaki naoshi simply a way of denoting the blade may once have been a pole arm of whatever kurikomi? the sword in question is perhaps a nagamaki that has been cut down to make a tachi. It is also perhaps a blade that has been deliberately made to look like a nagamaki blade .

At the end of the day, perhaps we are just dealing here with the Japanese love of a multiplicity of technical terms with fine almost indistinguishable variances in meaning.

 

Sorry, I just realised this is probably hijacking this thread. If you prefer, we can make it a separate discussion. :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith,

 

I am afraid that Nagayama sensei is also probably trying to do the same as Nakahara sensei, because the examples I have given are directly issued from the Connoisseur's Book of Japanese swords.

 

These are people much more qualified than I am.

 

For me a Nagamaki Naoshi is a kind of reshaped pole arm what ever its construction

 

Reinhard, Guido, Chris, Ted and a lot of people much more qualified than I am can elaborate on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might make for an interesting discussion, even if I was hopelessly outnumbered by such knowledgeable members. I was always an easy mark for a good gum grind. ;) There must be some fault in my personality that drives me toward the glorious last stand. :crazy: I dont mind being proved wrong at all, as long as I learn something from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without trying to assist in the hijack of the thread.. :oops:

 

My understanding of the term Nagamaki is that it refers to the *mountings* of the blade and not the shape. Nagamaki were wrapped the length of the ebu (hence the term inferring "long wrap") while naginata were not. So while all nagamaki were naginata, not all naginata were nagamaki. The term "naoshi" just means "corrected or altered" for alternative implimentation. Taking into account the shape differences between a naganata with a shobu-esque shape, and a naginata blade with the beveled shinogi and naginatahi, I think the confusion mounts, and compounded even moreso when the occasional defined okissaki is seen. The best of my knowledge, both blade shapes are classified as Naginata.

 

I think we can too easily let ourselves get lost in the terminologies and efforts to sub-catagorize for convenience and clarity. Yes, probably a good starter for a new thread of discussion. :lipssealed:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Nagamaki is a katana with an extended nakago to facilitate the long winding 長巻 and is a type of Nodachi. It is often a shobuzukuri katana with an extra, the long nakago. Sometimes there are other little differences, the mune for example. However most nagamaki nagasa are over 2 shaku while naginata are less than. In my mind, I think of a nagamaki as a long pommeled sword and the naginata as a pole arm (glaive). Any nagamaki of whatever kurikomi that has had it's nakago shortened is nagamakinaoshi whether it's other aspects have been altered or not. Labeling an original katana as nagamaki kurikomi is, I think, misapplied. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still can't see why the particular blade is considered a nagamaki naoshi and not an originaly made shobu zukuri katana. I am sure more educated and eye-sharp forumites will be able to shed some light on this.

 

My own -and not fool proof- rough guide (I know some will jump on me for this) is examining the sori, as usually nagamaki naoshi have a more exagerated one. This one seems gentle enough for a normal shobu. The blade geometry in my eyes seems like it was an originaly made shobu blade (shortened however). Better pictures would be much more helpful, for me at least, to see what I might be missing.

 

P.S. This is evolving to a most interesting and educational thread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get back to Adolpho's sword, there is perhaps evidence to suggest that the nakago has possibly been shortened, although I cannot say for sure. Ergo, it may have had a longer nakago at some time, but we dont know how much longer, or if it was a pronounced length as in a nagamaki blade. EquallyThere is not an indication in the photographs that the mune of the kissaki has been ground back or altered to give less saki sori. This is no indication in any case, since nagamaki blades did not necessarily have a pronounced saki sori. Equally, this blade could have been made originally in shobu zukuri form with a squared ichi monji nakago jiri. There is in fact in the last three pictures in the series, nothing to suggest that this blade is anything other than a shobu zukuri blade.

 

Nice blade incidentally Adolpho, personally I find this blade style very attractive. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Franco.

 

I have a similar shobu zukuri blade to this, (Shimada) papered by the NBTHK as Tokubetsu Hozon (not suriage) and the papers do not mention anything about it being naginata or nagamaki naoshi. Have their classifications changed in the last few years?

 

What I am getting at here, is would a blade of this type be classified as naginata when it does not have the distinctive short hi and obvious look of a naginata blade that has been cut down/altered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith, if a piece is O suriage and determined to be previously a pole arm, then the paper would most likely come back reading naginata naoshi. If a piece is not suriage and was never a pole arm, what would be the reason to give it a naginata naoshi designation?

 

additional examples to consider http://japantrip.tripod.com/Japan/osafune2.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Franco, I think you rather missed the point of my question which was " Would a blade of this type be classified as naginata when it does not have the distinctive short hi and obvious look of a naginata blade that has been cut down/altered?"

 

In the case of my own blade it was not an issue, but in the case of the blade that is the subject of this thread, it may be so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess Masa Mune, John :D

 

actually in picture 44, if you stare at it for long enough, the traces left my the gold ink do look like "Masamune"

 

Is it possible that Hirohito gave away a Masamune sword, perhaps in a moment of drunken confusion combined with blissful ignorance?

 

By the way, simple googling shows that your Hirohito's signature does look right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Franco.

 

Forgive my ignorance, but I have never seen a naginata that didnt have a naginata hi. I have seen swords that do have it but never a naginata without. I have seen and handled nagamaki blades that didnt have hi.

 

The presence or lack of a naginata hi makes no difference.

 

So if I read this correctly, and taken in context with your previous statement, then a blade that is Osuriage and shows evidence of having been used as a pole arm with or without a naginata hi could be classed as a naginata? What if it were possibly a nagamaki blade? Or, is it the case that in the presence of such doubt, the classification is simply a default, and all such blades (O suriage, nagamaki naoshi , naginata naoshi, et al) grouped together under the naginata heading?

 

The reason I am asking this and pursuing the matter, is that I have a couple of blades that I intend to submit to shinsa. Since they fall into this general description, then I would like to be aware of the possibilities. :)

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...