Basho12

FWIW, I agree on the second kanji, probably "Toshi." The first is harder. If it's Mori it's got a stroke where one doesn't belong and one missing where there should be. It would almost fit "Mune" better, but then there are two strokes missing. Not well cut, either way. I'm curious what others think.

I'd agree with Stephen, maybe Kinmichi? Here's a link to an oshigata; see if the bottom two characters look like what you remember. http://home.earthlink.net/~ttstein/kinmichi.jpg

I'm fairly new, and while the more experienced members wouldn't need much more than a glance to be sure that a sword's a fake, I'm still at the stage where I need to look at specifics in a case like this, so I can name a few: 1) the shinogi line extending through the tang looks a little "wobbly." On a genuine sword this would be crisp and sharp, even on the tang. It's hard to see the mei properly, but from here it looks like it was cut with a dremel tool rather than a chisel. I haven't tried to translate it, but my bet is it wouldn't actually say anything. The kanji just looks "off. After you've seen a few more real mei, this one would jump out at you immediately. The fittings are almost certainly fake too. Quality of the koshirae aside, there's just too much going on. Several decorations that almost but not quite look like kamon. There are links from this site to sites that show authentic WWII period mountings for Army and Navy, a look at those would show why this one just doesn't fit.

Thanks. I wasn't sure, never having even seen a copy. Probably won't, until I have my own.

Very helpful. Thanks! :D

Does anyone have or know where I can find a copy of an oshigata showing the mei of a swordsmith who signed as "Bizen (no) Kuni Ju Osafune Shichibei-no-jo Sukesada (active from around 1580 to 1644)? It's probably in Hawley's but I haven't managed to acquire that one yet, only Slough's. I did find one oshigata of a katana online, but the resolution wasn't good enough to make out the mei clearly. I have no ownership or financial interest in the sword in question (and, alas, no pictures of the blade). It belongs to a friend's boss and I translated the mei as a favor to him, but now I'm curious and thought it would be good practice to compare the mei to a known signature.

As another newbie, I second what everyone else has said. I've been able to limit my own mistakes so far, but just barely. Or as the old saying goes, "He who hesitates is sometimes saved." Also strongly second the mention of the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. I was there in March and they had a really spectacular display of sword furniture/mountings. It was the first time I got to see really fine work that close.

Thank you.

Could someone tell me what the topmost character on the left in the first picture is? (A?) I saw the same one on a nakago recently and I couldn't track it down.

I'm no expert, but I don't see how you could do anything to the blade other than give it an honorable retirement. You can just see the (2) hagire in one of the longer shots, which I think puts them in the last third of the blade. Even without the deep rust pits, you'd be lucky to get a tanto out of it, imo.

Just when you think you've got it figured out.... :? I saw what I thought were casting bubbles on the seppa dai on the most recent example, and would have said "cast" if anyone had asked me. If Mr. Hallam believes this tsuba is not a cast piece I'd certainly trust his opinion over mine, so clearly I'm not seeing what I thought I was seeing.

Keep in mind that the tiger isn't native to Japan and very few people there had ever seen one. I lean toward tiger, especially since the effect with the waterfall is rather like "tiger in a thicket," which was a common motif. It's a gorgeous piece, regardless.

I've only done one saya restoration so far, so I can't say if my experience was typical, but the old cured lacquer didn't bother me. Still, there's always a chance of an allergic reaction to any fine organic particulate and a dust mask is a good idea. Also, you have to be very careful about not letting any grit/debris get inside the saya. Mask off the koiguchi during sanding and use horsetail rush as your abrasive if you can get it. No power tools, though that should pretty much go without saying.

Thanks! That's very good to know. I'll pass that on to my friend. Edited to add: Thanks again for everyone's help. She's decided to keep the sword, and now she has a much better idea of what she has and how to take care of it so it can be passed down in the family.

Thank you! I thought it might be a title but I couldn't find the right reference. At least I got the name right.

That's the translation of the first three?

This sword belonged to a friend's father (a Marine in WWII) who obtained it from the surrender of a Japanese officer. Now that her father's passed on, she's trying to decide what to do with it, and I've been trying to help sort out what she has. I've been able to tell her that it's a Showato (very clear Sho stamp), but I'm having trouble translating the signature. It's a five character mei and I'm pretty sure the last two read "Yoshimasa," but the first three have me buffaloed. I apologize for the separate pictures, but that's all I have to work with. I'd appreciate any help, including correcting my translation of the last two.

That stamp's come up before (http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=7430&p=59691&hilit=mune+stamp#p59691).

That's actually what made me hesitate. From the angle of the photos it almost looked like there was a section of hamon untouched. Upon closer inspection, yes, the etching covers the entire blade. Once you see it you can't NOT see it.

Hmmm. I have seen that sort of etching on a lot of fakes, but also on this board I've seen an example with a similar "dramatic" hada that I assumed was a fake but wasn't. I'm obviously not going to be much help but I'm curious as to what the consensus will be.

I haven't studied enough blades yet to just recognize a fake at a glance (maybe one day), but I can tell you what worries me about this sword: the cracking in the saya appears to be a lacquer effect and not age or stress cracking, the fittings look a little rough, the mei isn't well cut (parts looks like they were done with a grinder), and the maki, while not the worst I've ever seen, isn't that good and doesn't show what I'd consider to be appropriate wear. Take it all together, and the sword just looks "off." A clearer shot of the blade would help, but If I had to guess, fwiw I'd agree with Bruno.

I'm no expert, but there are aspects of this sword that make me suspicious. Do you have any good shots of the blade?

Thank you. That was extremely informative and helpful.

Thanks. It didn't make sense to me that there would be, so I had to ask. :?

I'm a little confused (ok, so that's my normal state). I've read that, yes, sometimes true gendaito have Showa or Gifu or arsenal marks, but what I don't understand is why the swordsmith would bother to hand-forge a blade to fill an order/contract from the military when the military was perfectly happy with oil-quenced showato. It makes more sense to me that any such blade would be a special order and, except for star-stamps (Juyo), would be unmarked. Or am I totally misunderstanding the procurement process?