Basho12

I'd wait until the experts weigh in, but that mei does look questionable. Could be a shoshin mei by a smith who wasn't a good mei cutter. Could have been added later.

Crystal Skull. Definitely.

Another vote for Bishu Osafune Ju (?)-yasu. I can't make out the next to last kanji at all. Maybe another picture, just of that one?

If the boshi isn't suguha, wouldn't that point to koto?

The more times a bottle of alcohol is opened and used, the more moisture it can retain. Even if the alcohol evaporates quickly you would be repeatedly exposing the steel to moisture percentages higher than the atmospheric rate. No problem if you dry the blade very thoroughly, or, as I've seen suggested elsewhere, only use an opened container of alcohol once or twice but no more. Why take the chance? Grey suggests using microfibre, and I think that would be less risky. I've tried it myself and it seems to work very well.

I'm no expert, but I was an industrial chemist (paint) for twelve years, and the problem with any alcohol is that they tend to pick up atmospheric moisture, which can rust a blade. Personally, I wouldn't use alcohol for this.

Oddest menuki I've seen so far was a pair of old stick-pins that had been repurposed. One side showed the mask of Tragedy and the other, Comedy. I'm guessing those were fairly late period, though.

I can't translate it, but the artist is Kuniyoshi. You can find out a little about the print itself here: http://antiquesandthearts.com/2010-04-27__14-47-15.html&page=2 I've had an interest in woodblock prints, too, for some time, but I'm a little more familiar with the Shin Hanga movement of the early 20th century.

Dan, FWIW, I was given similar advice when I first joined this board and it's absolutely spot on. You look at enough good quality examples and after awhile the fakes stand out like neon. Recently I was helping a friend who had three swords: A showato in good condition, one really nice Hizen wakazashi, and an absolutely hideous Chinese fake NCO sword. When he asked me how I knew it was a fake, I just lay the three swords down side by side and told him to look. Sometimes one picture really is worth a thousand words.

Obviously I need to look at them again.

Interesting comparison on the nakarishi mei(s) on Rich S's link, and importat to note how the same cutter who was doing Nagamitsu's mei was also doing the signatures on plain Showato as well. I think the date translation is spot on: June 1944 (Showa 19, sixth month)

Definitely not. I'm leaning toward Seki Sukemitsu Nobumitsu (Slough p 135), but don't go by me. My track record isn't the best. :?

I just meant the link you'd already referenced. There are some differences, but both of the ones on Rich Stein's site (Nobumitsu 3 &4) look like they were cut by the same person who did the mei on this sword.

I'd also check Nobumitsu(s) 3 and 4 at the link above. They both look like nakarishi mei by the same cutter.

Length aside (I've found one Yasuyo only 3mm longer than mine) the yasurime should definitely be higaki, so that's a point. Looks like I'm 0 for 2. Disappointed but not surprised. Thanks, everyone. Back to the books. Funny you should mention that. Ujifusa, who started that Satsuma Shinto line of smiths, was trained by a Mino smith. I'd expect there to be differences from the native Naminohira school. Not that it necessarily means anything, but it's interesting. Edited to add: I also agree about the shape of the nakago; there should be more taper toward the end than you see in this one.

Show of hands: All things being equal, who doesn't want a shoshinmei blade by a famous smith? :lol:

Thanks. I'll try to track as many of those down as I can, whatever happens next. I hope the more experienced folks will weigh in once I’m through making a fool of myself, but I’m looking at a sword which claims (I’ll get to that in a minute) that it’s a Shinto blade forged in Satsuma province some time between 1722 and 1728. This isn’t so much kantei as reverse-engineering, since I know what the blade is supposed to be and, as an almost complete beginner and using only those tools available to a beginner, will now try to decide if it’s telling the truth. Bear in mind, I have never seen a real Satsuma blade in my life, other than pictures and oshigata. Also, I’ve not been able to study nearly enough good quality blades in person to have that almost instinctive knowledge of what a blade is or isn’t at first sight. Maybe someday, but for now I’m going to have to quantify everything I do, so this is probably going to read like one of those test essay questions where you have to show your work. I apologize for that in advance. From reading kantei of other Shinto Satsuma blades I have some guidelines on what to look for, and these are the measurements on this blade: 1) Nagasa: 68.9cm (2 shaku, 2 sun, 7 bu). 2) Nakago: Funagata, ha-agari 3) Sori: 1.2 cm (4 bu) 4) Sugata: shinogi-zuri, chu-kissaki, torii-zori, ihorimune. 5) Kisane: 6.5mm. I’d even call it beefy. 6) Motohaba, sakihaba: 3.2cm and 1.8 cm, respectively. The sugata is consistent with Shinto blades of the Genroku transitional era (the b/w photo above is a known example from Satsuma of that period). Satsuma blades tended to have a shallower sori even after the rest of Japan was moving to a deeper curve, and 4 bu is a good match to known examples. The motohaba is wide and that’s also consistent with Satsuma. The blade is out of polish and the hamon is hard to make out, but in the photo below I’m seeing what looks like imozuru (“potato vines”), which is another characteristic of a Satsuma hamon/hada. The kisane is relatively thick at 6.5 mm, another characteristic of Satsuma blades. This sword is signed “Shuma-no-kami Ichi-no-hira Yasuyo (sometimes rendered Yasutoshi). So if the blade had no or few Satsuma characteristics, I could easily conclude that it’s gimei. Yet it’s my beginner’s opinion that this sword was indeed made in Satsuma province. Assuming I’m right, is it really a Yasuyo? It stands to reason that there are a lot of gimei blades for this Juyo smith, and this could easily be one. Kisane, sori, motohaba, nagasa, mune, and sugata are all consistent with a Yasuyo (Yasutoshi) sword. While maru-mune was common in Satsuma blades, Yasuyo was not a Naminohira school smith and he tended to use ihorimune, which is what I expect to see on one of his swords. Hamon: a bit hard to make out, but I make it suguha mixed with gunome, one of the two hamon styles Yasuyo preferred. If I’m right about the imozuru in the hamon, that’s indicative of a Satsuma blade but not necessarily of Yasuyo’s work. The nakago is more ha-agari rather than kuri-jiri, which is a point against. Any meaningful details of the hada are just not accessible with the blade in this condition, so all that’s left to consider is the mei itself. I only have pictures to compare to (and thanks to Jacques and Brian for the links), but if it’s gimei, it’s a decent job. The way the “yasu” kanji is formed, the direction of the strokes, the curve of the horizontal strokes, everything I know to look at looks right to me, except the rightmost stroke in the third kanji (The "Shu" isn't showing).. It’s curved on my sword, and in the only two shoshin examples I’ve seen, it’s straighter. I had some concerns about the thickness of the strokes relative to the real thing, but once I was able to get a picture from about the same perspective as a good example, that matched up too. I also wonder why the hollyhock leaf is missing. Since this is the Shuma-no-Kami mei this would have to date after 1722 and the Shogun’s competition, so I’d expect it to be there. Conclusion? A Satsuma blade that may or may not have been forged by Ichi-no-hira (Ippei) Yasuyo. Not much of a conclusion, but of course I want this blade to be shoshinmei, and that’s almost certainly the filter through which I’m viewing the evidence. But realistically? I know it probably isn’t. I want this to be what they call a “teachable moment,” so if anyone wants to weigh in to explain how this couldn’t possibly be any of the things I think it is, I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Great! Thank you.

Does anyone have access to a good-quality oshigata for this Satsuma province Shinto smith (sometimes read "Yasutoshi")? I've found a couple of photos online and there's one in "Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords," but nothing in enough close detail for a good comparison. I have a katana blade in my possession that's allegedly by him, but I realize there's a good chance it's gimei. I don't have pictures yet but I'm working on it.

Thanks for passing this on. I knew from experience that rice glue is great for gluing saya/tsukas but to attach buffalo horn or copper fittings? Not so much.

Ah! The light dawns. I picked the wrong reading. Edited to add: I also picked the wrong smith, so I'm 0-2 on this one, but there may yet be another round.

Mr. Morita, I think this one signs Yasuyo like this: 安 代 After taking a closer look at the JSSUS listing (and I couldn't get the kanji to display properly earlier) I'm starting to think that the signature is probably referring to an earlier smith, possibly Yasuyo of Satsuma province, 18th c. Without anything else to go on, though, my idle curiousity may not be satisfied this time.

That was my suspicion as well, but I wanted to double check with the better informed. Thanks.

Nothing so useful, I'm afraid. Just the JSSUS listing. I had thought that the Yasukuni smiths were pretty well documented, which was why I was surprised that this one didn't turn up in the usual sources.

I'm trying to track down any information on a Showa-era smith named Masauda Yasuyo. The JSSUS database lists him as a Yasukuni Shrine smith, but I haven't been able to locate him in any of the literature or online lists, and he's not in Slough's, unless he was signing under a different name. If someone can point me in the right direction I'd really appreciate it.