Help identify my father's bringback sword?

[thirtycal]

My dad brought this sword back from WWII. The blade appears to be hand made, but I know very little about these swords. Can any of the experts here identify the markings? Besides what I've shown, there are no other markings on the blade and I've looked very carefully with a magnifying glass. I'd love to know more about this sword so I can tell my dad while he's still capable of understanding. He might find it interesting. I'd really like to know how old it is.

 

 

Thanks everyone-

Philip

[Surfson]

Looks like Nagahiro to me. B

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Philip,

I think Nagahiro also. While the mounts date to WWII (standard Japanese Army Shin Gunto) this appears to be an older blade that has been shortened (from the bottom up, thus the abrupt end to the tang). I don't know anything about the smith but a good guess would be late Koto (old sword period) from Mino Province. 15th or 16th century and Mino because the temper line looks like what smiths in Mino did back then.

But, someone is bound to have a better idea.

Grey

[loiner1965]

nice blade....certainly seen some action with the big chips on the edge

[cabowen]

There are two smiths listed in the Meikan signing with a two character Nagahiro mei. Both are from Mino, Akasaka. One dates to Kansei and the other Bunmei.....

[Toryu2020]

Phillip -

No expert here but I have to agree this looks like Nagahiro or perhaps Nagafusa. The stipling on the end of the tang may be evidence of artificial aging, hard to say without the blade in hand. Given that the yasuri-mei, the file marks are takanoha or inverted V shape, I would venture that this may be an older blade by a Takada smith.

 

What little we can see of the hamon might also suggest Seki school work (as already noted) and the Yasuri fits that area as well. If you can provide a detail photo of the other side of the tang at the butt end and perhaps one of the hamon above the habaki (ferrule) we might tell more but judgement from photos is always a guessing game...

-t

[thirtycal]

Wow you guys are fast! Ok thanks for the replies so far. Since I didn't know what would be 'important' to photograph, on my first round I thought I'd just post some generic photos - but I figured that once you guys saw the blade, you'd tell me what I needed to photograph for better ID (good thing I didn't put it back together yet).

 

I'm astounded to think that my dad just pulled this out of a pile and happend to pick an old blade (so far some guesses have placed it as early as the late 1400's? Jeesh that is crazy). He has two of them, and they both look very similar, although I suspect the other is machine made since there isn't much of a hammon. I can't get the handle off that one very easily so I don't know if it has any markings.

 

Anyway, here's more photos of the blade, and I tried to get shots of the areas you guys seems to be asking about... Oh and by the way, there are no chips on the blade - the original photos were shot on terry cloth, and that made the blade look chipped - here's some photos taken on a hard surface:

 

 

By the way, this symbol is on the handle:

 

thanks again guys!

Philip

[Surfson]

There's a family crest on the butt end of the handle (kashira). I suspect that it is probably silver. If you think this is true, you might try a small dab of silver cleaner on it and see if you can bring the color back. Slightly reminiscent of the Takanoha (crossed feathers), but a little different. You can check references and find out what family it is. This would be the family of the former owner who carried it in the war. Your Dad did well!

[uwe]

......"Nagahiro". Machi okuri with some kitae ware.

Uwe

[thirtycal]

So not being a sword guy, I want to thank everyone for their help identifying this blade.

 

Of course the one thing that I was hoping to tell my dad was how old it is. Since the concensus seems to be that this is a Nagahiro, then we're talking about a blade made sometime around 1500 - is that correct? He's going to have a hard time believing that (since dimentia has set in) but hopefully he'll appreciate the fact that he picked up a 500 year old sword back in 1945 - and since then it has sat on the wall of our family room since about 1958 (he still lives in the house I grew up in). Just last year he gave them both to me (as youngest son to pass on to my children). I want my kids to know what these are so they can preserve them.

 

thanks-

Philip

[kusunokimasahige]

Thats a great sword and a great story, from what i can see definetly worth restoring by the hand of a proper Japanese trained polisher. Would try to preserve the nicks in cutting edge of the blade, because they add to the story.

 

KM

[Grey Doffin]

Sorry; I have to disagree. There are a few defects in this blade which, with the shortening and relative unimportance of the smith, will mean that the cost of restoration will exceed the value once done. Also, the sword doesn't need a polish; it's close enough to be appreciated as is. Also also, I'm guessing Philip would like to keep the blade in the military mounts which he couldn't do if the blade were polished (it would be mounted in shira-saya, plain wooden mounts).

Pay attention to the care manual you've been linked to, and keep the sword in a safe, dry place; nothing else is necessary.

Grey

[thirtycal]

Sorry; I have to disagree. There are a few defects in this blade which, with the shortening and relative unimportance of the smith, will mean that the cost of restoration will exceed the value once done. Also, the sword doesn't need a polish; it's close enough to be appreciated as is. Also also, I'm guessing Philip would like to keep the blade in the military mounts which he couldn't do if the blade were polished (it would be mounted in shira-saya, plain wooden mounts).

Pay attention to the care manual you've been linked to, and keep the sword in a safe, dry place; nothing else is necessary.

Grey

 

Yes definitely the goal is to preserve it as 'captured'. Hopefully my kids will be reponsible enough to keep both swords in our family - they've got a long ways to go though :-). I checked the other blade tonite and definitely can tell it's machine made, even though it's in a virtually identical mount (tsuka/saya).

 

You said something interesting though - you say this blade is from a relatively unimportant smith. Does that mean that this is not likely to be a late Edo period blade with gimei? Other folks that have looked at this suggest that the sharp edges on the original peg hole and the file marks under the mei could be evidence of gimei. Any ideas?

 

thanks-

Philip

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Picture below is from the Mino-tô-taikan. This book lists two generations of Nagahiro in koto . Oshigata shown is from a sword said made around Eiroku (1558-1570) .

 

Fujishiro lists only one Nagahiro working around Bunki (1501) (maybe the shodai) this smith is rated chu-saku.

 

 

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Philip,

Chances are you wont be able to learn much more about this sword unless someone knowledgeable can see it in hand; too difficult to tell from pictures alone. Do you live in the States? If so, which state? Maybe you could attend one of the 3 or 4 annual Japanese sword shows (Tampa, Chicago, San Francisco, and Minneapolis). There will be people at the shows who can help.

About your 2nd sword: it may well be machine made but I'm not sure you know enough to make that call yourself. Feel free to post pictures here and get other opinions.

Grey