Ron STL

Attractive little tsuba. The Yamakichibei call would had likely come from the radiating lines on although if Yamakichibei, I would think these would be made finer (not as bold). The tsuba does appear to have some age, so I'd call it more late Muromachi or early Edo as opposed to late Edo. It could be the work of a swordsmith but it is not like the classic tosho tsuba we think of when you say "tosho." Let's see what others have to say about it. Ron H.

When I saw 118 replies to this thread, I just had to check it out. The one thing that stuck out was Barry Thomas's comment about being into swords for 45 years! Mate, it's been at least half a century, right? I'm not that much older than you! As for polishes and quality of polishes, it took several trips to Japan to actually "see" and handle the quality of polishes one sees over there in museums and private collections. It's amazing! As was pointed out here, sometimes a lesser quality polish will at least "save" a lesser quality blade. Most important is that if something is beyond a polisher's level, he should admit to that and recommend the work to be sent to a more qualified polisher. Tanobe san has given that advice a number of times saying, only so-and-so is qualified to polish a particular sword. Prayer also helps! Looking back over the years, I've only been disappointed a very few times with a polish. Call it luck, whatever...or faith in who is placing the sword into the hands of a polisher. Ron H.

The most beautiful habaki came on my mumei Juyo wakizashi attributed to Sa Hiroyasu, found in old shirasaya, totally out-of-polish (10%-20%) but with this fantastic habaki! When sent for polish/shinsa I neglected to request the same habaki be used and of course, it came back with a newly made gold foiled dbl. habaki! Oh how I regret not knowing better, but I would bet the habaki ended up on the polisher's sword! Sadly, no photos. However, locally, there is a fantastic habaki on a locally owned sword (possibly later generation Kunikane w/cutting test) that we always wanted to be "right." Unfortunately, as fine as the carving is on this habaki the mei is just not correct for Nagatsune (as signed). This kind of thing will always puzzle me, how somebody can be such a good carver and not use his own name. It's been awhile since seeing this habaki and honestly, I don't recall the base material (photos seem an untrue color...) but it has shakudo inlay, gold inlay, fine carving...fun piece! Fortunately, I did save photos of this habaki (attached). Ron H.

Glad everyone got a kick out of seeing this habaki. The blade is mounted in an old shirasaya, so no koshirae to enjoy. I'll have to check out Kinko Meikan...haven't done that yet, but it's good to get some back-up on Terumitsu reading of the name. As to this representing a shishi as opposed to a tiger, hmmm...the teeth and gold fang sees strong for a shishi, but will check this out further. Thanks for looking! Ron H.

Hi - A recent purchase is being enjoyed, a handsome hirazukuri tanto signed KANENORI (HO nori) papered to Seki Kanenori, Tensho era. This tanto is listed in the 1979 Meibutsu catalogue (Chicago sword show exhibit) but is not illustrated. (#35 p. 18) This habaki (mentioned in the description) is of heavy shakudo excellently carved as a tiger's head. The catalogue says the habaki is signed HIDEMITSU but searching Haynes listing I see no such name for these kanji. However, I did find a listing for TERUMITSU (H.0960.0) which is identical kanji for the habaki's mei. Terumitsu was 5th son of Omori Teruhide. The habaki mei is a simple nijimei and does not include the Omori name, so maybe I'm onto the wrong carver afterall. Beautiful work that I'll share with a couple photos. Sorry the mei photo is not great, but after numerous attempts, I had to give it up for today. As always, any comments or thoughts on this habaki are more than welcomed. The tanto has two papers, a "green" NBTHK dated 1961 and NTHK dated 1969. Considering these dates, I suspect the tanto was papered and purchased in Japan...my guess. Ron H.

No problem saving this example for future reference...what it's all about. It is a different "haru" as you can see, but the kao is surprisingly similar, yet different. This tsuba was saved off of a very nice mumei wakizashi that I found perhaps 30+ years ago, not far from my home. I recall the sword because it has strong "mizukage" on it and figuring it was a retempered sword, saved the tsuba and sold the sword. It went quickly at a show to a Japanese dealer who obviously knew more than I did about the sword. I've never forgotten the sword and often wished I had researched it more before laying out on my table. In those days, knowledge was hard to come by in those pre-internet days! So many "stories" remembered after so many years! Ron H.

Attached shows an iron sukashi tsuba that I've owned for decades...signed: Nakagawa Yoshiharu (kao). In my notes I have this ~ identified as the work of H.11516.0 Yoshiharu who worked in Soten style. I also make mention of another Yoshiharu with a "similar" kao that Haynes listed so worked in late Edo; I would guess this would be the Meiji Yoshiharu of this topic. Interesting...I thought he name "rang a bell" when reading this topic. Totally different workmanship as you can see. Ron H.

Okay, both sides of the Naotane's nakago. As for the hori, it really is very finely made and so detailed when viewed in-hand and may lack some of the crispness in the photo. I mention Yoshitane because years ago when viewing either this sword or one owned by the late Rad Smith, the finely detailed hori of Yoshitane came up. One unusual thing about it is the lack of a "frame" around the hori; I believe Naotane typically carved within a framework. Ron H.

Not sure what happened to my other photos, but will try again...Ron H.

Naomune...I don't recall reading that name anywhere but it's been awhile since reading up on Naotane. I just like his work (and Jirotaro Naokatsu), I've taken a few quick shots of the wakizashi to share. It is a beautiful sword and does have his "whirlpool" hada clearly shown in places. Signature: (omote) Taikei Naotane (with kakihan). (ura) (dated) Tenpo ju ni hachi-gatsu hi (August 1841); also states that it was one of “ten copies (fukoto)” made at the request of a Mr. Kakiuchi. Ron H.

This origami refers to a Naotane wakizashi papered at Minneapolis last year. The worksheet has a notation saying ~ "dai saku (by son)" Today, with the completed origami in hand, I can see nothing that jumps out at me that says anything about this being a dai saku sword by Naotane's son (Naokatsu?). But then my Japanese is limited as one might expect. Another question would be on the comments made about the horimono. I understand that this describes the diety but is there anything said in this column about "who" carved this horimono? (I often suspected it was carver Yoshitane, if I have the name right.) Any clarification of these details would be most welcome...and thanks! Ron H.

This looks more sue-koto to me, but rather course work in for the jigane. I would call this large itame mixed with mokume, all with nagari-itame (running itame), with masame showing in the shinogi-ji. The masame appears to be rather loose (open). The sword appears to have a nice sugata (shape) but the forging seems pretty course. Saying this, I would be surprised if this would be a wise place to spend your money for a polish these days. Having just paid for a Japan polish (at 79 yen/dollar) it is an investment to be thought over. (In my case, it was well worth it, but not all swords are worth that sort of spending.) Just my humble opinion of the sword from what I see from the photos. Ron H.

Just to notice of this subject of what is being represented on these early tsuba. I can't help but call these critters, "squirrels." If a "fox" I would think they would look more like a fox and also, being on such ko-kinko era tsuba, the squirrel seems more what one would expect to see. I'll also add that this is the first time I've seen an "animal" on this age tsuba; designs are usually less specific, if that's the correct word to use. These menuki photos are old "35mm film prints" so excuse the lack of digital quality. What this discussion did bring to mind are two things. First, a pair of early menuki that have been in my collection for many decades. For years I decided the "badger" war represented by these menuki (because of the punched "spots" on the menuki and the "flattened" nose) but today, well, I suspect they are indeed, squirrels. Second, I wrote an article about the often seen "squirrel and grapes" motif we see quite often; this appeared in the Jan. 2010 JSS/US Newsletter (42.1.16). If anyone would like a copy of this article, email me and I'll be happy to send you the file. An last, I am thrilled to see such interest in tachikanaguchi and ko-kinko tsuba. An interest of mine, I've gathered a number of these over the years. Typically, they are overlooked by the typical collector because of their "rustic" look. Nice stuff, I say!!! Ron H.

The carving on this kozuka is quite nice as I mentioned earlier. Reverse side is simply polished yellow-brass (shinchu). The back plate is attached with the C-shape front plate which seems interesting. (I need to refresh my memory on what this means; likely Edo era method.) A friend not on the forum suggested Omori school, mid-Edo, and I think that is a good thought. He also referred to the dragon as being made in the style of Omori group, pointing out a similar dragon/kozuka on nihonto.com (FW site). If of Omori group, it is not as fine as if from Omori Teruhide but above just average I would say. Belongs to a good friend who will likely keep it for himself. Ron H.

This inquiry is both about confirming the reading of this mei and it is indeed as it appears to me KAGEMITSU SAKU, to see any anyone has ever seen this rather unprofessionally made (or just very early) signature before. KAGE seems to have an extra diagonal stroke through the horizontal stroke. Could this be something other than KAGE? Ron H.

Just seeing if anyone has an opinion on where to place the maker of this very well-carved male dragon. Material is a yellow-brass (to my eyes) and my first thought was late Edo work but very well done work. Any thoughts guys and gals? Ron H.

Jean, I really don't this that is the case (why this sword is unsigned) since this lose of hamon would appear to have happened later in the sword's life. Had the clay fallen off the sword at quenching I think this area would look different than it does. Let me correct something...yesterday I remarked that an off-line friend suggested Soden-Bizen. That was incorrect; he came up with Naoe Shizu. Hmmm...checking out Yamanaka (V2-N9-p13) I must admit, lots of things do connect. Everything except that strong utsuri. Ron H.

Sorry to be beating this topic to death, but I just captured a couple shots of the bottom of the sword, both sides. Poor quality pictures but they might be good enough for sharing. You see how the hamon runs off on the one side whereas on the other, it stays intact to just past the ha-machi. Okay, back to you BBQs...Ron H.

Thanks Peter, you may have a point here with sticking with shin-to. As for retemper, I did look into this possibility as late as this morning but honestly, I do not see any indications of retempering. The first thing that made me even go that route was seeing how the hamon drifts off on one side (the other side being totally intact with clear nioi-guchi). I still do not see why this happened on one side and not the other, but I see no mizukage or funky nie going on and the nakago does not show any dryness to it. The shape does not bother me at all and feels as it should, in the hand. A friend off-list viewed the posts and felt it looked Soden-Bizen. My first inclination was naw...not enough Soshu nie activity showing but, looking again at the hamon, there is some lines of nie activity within the hamon if you look for it. It sure is not "in your face" Soden-Bizen in my opinion, but it could just be which would put us into early Muromachi over end of Nambokucho. The extended kissaki still pushes me into that time frame. If I can borrow the sword again sometime I'll carry it to a KTK meeting and get some in-hand opinions of it. As for those puzzling yasurimi, I'm going to disregard them for now; Lord only knows why they are as they are. Fun study though!!! Ron H.

Years ago with the English Token Bijutsu was being published I did the kantei regularly and surprisingly, did rather well. Somewhere along the way I neglected to follow the Japanese Token Bujutsu kantei feature. This is something I should get back into doing on a regular basis. I've suggested this practice to our small local study group but "serious study" is limited to ~ three of us. I planned on using the old English versions as a start but life is busy and well, the days fly past! (Even in retirement) Somebody mentioned tobiyaki on this sword; actually, it is more like spots of nioi-kuzuri, similar but different than tobiyaki. As was said, it is quite possible the blade has some added features that are not common to the swords age and maker. I wish it were my sword; I'd send it for Japanese shinsa for opinion. I wish you could see the mountings but maybe later when I can get my hands on them. Ron H.

Kantei is a great learning tool, something we here in St. Louis seldom get to to with good kantei swords (in polish, papered, etc.). A few months ago and friend and I were invited to visit an old friend who opened his collection to us...good stuff, shall I say, all in polish and "identified." We decided to first kantei each sword and only afterwards to remove tsuka or learn of their attributions, if mumei. It was a humbling experience, believe me. But we left for home feeling satisfied with the experience knowing that we learned something useful. Oh how I envy those of you who are in a location that provides kantei sessions with fresh material on a regular basis! Ron H.

Good to see that I'm not the only one bouncing around with kantei options. About its sori, it is koshizori and the deepest point (measured) is at 33 cm from munemachi and 41.5 cm back from the kassaki tip. As I pointed out yesterday, the sori does continue through the kissaki and does not become minimal (flattening out) as one would expect on very early tachi. Yasurime are the same on both sides of the nakago. Nakago-mune is flat and ha is rounded. As for the hamon at the ha-machi, on one side the hamon drifts off the blade about 9 cm above the ha-machi with only remnants continuing. The other side is very healthy and the hamon clearly continue to the ha-machi and then end. I'd get a picture of this without the habaki but the habaki only slides back a little and not being my sword, I don't want to force it off. Attached is an overall picture of the blade taken outside in sunlight. It at least shows the overall shape of the blade. At this point I feel this sword is not O-suriage, possibly very early Muromachi, it still looks Bizen to me...but those odd yasurime continue to bug me. Such is life, eh? Ron H.

This is definitely koto, believe me. These were quick photos at best but I'll try a "daylight" shot of the overall blade tomorrow. The utsuri is real, not hadori application. Honestly, the utsuri reminded me a great deal of my Hatakida Moriie tachi (now on exhibit in Louisville, KY), it is that strong (for those of you who have handled the Moriie at Tampa/Chicago in the past. Everything else considered, I still wonder about those yasurime being made so well and a combo of higaki & suji-chigai. I was reading in Token bijutsu today a talk by Dr. Homma saying that to make finely made higaki yasurime was very difficult and if made well, shows the maker's skill. As I said earlier, there is no "answer" to this kantei...just two of us St. Louis "locals" trying out our skills. Too bad Tanobe san or Miyano san is not resting in my spare room!!! Ron H.

Okay...the pictures, hopefully! Ron H.

Yes, I do go through the steps for kantei but when seeing the yasurime I thought that might unscramble some of my confusion about this blade. I've taken some photos and will post them here if all goes well. The blade is mumei but I question that it is O-suriage, again because of what appears to be the original yasurime covering most of the nakago. Blade measures 74.3 cm with 19.6 cm nakago (kiri end). Width/thickness is 3.3 cm/0.75 cm x 2.2cm/0.50 cm. Sori is koshizori measuring 2.5 cm at deepest point. There is sori all the way through the end of the sword (as opposed to flattening out). Kissaki is what I would call extended chu-gissaki with fukuru. Jigane is notari-masame (a bit course) in the shingi-ji and a somewhat running itame with some O-mokume in the ji. The blade does have some problems from polishing making the jigane appear a bit rough (open) on one side; the other is more intact. The hamon shows up fairly well on the photos and is representative throughout the blade. Most evident is the very strong gunome utsuri. My initial thinking was absolutely early Bizen work, possible mid-Kamakura but seeing the extended kissaki and the sori not flattening out, now I am more into thinking early Muromachi Bizen. What contridicts this thinking? Well, those odd-ball yasurime and that very vivid utsuri which I would be surprised to find on an early Muromachi sword. I'll go ahead and post these comments and post the photos next since they may need to be adjusted by size to be submitted. (I need to write down those requirements...ah, old age memory!) By the way, this sword is mounted ensuite with high quality shakudo fittings, all with heavy gold double mons, so it was certainly somebody's treasure, even with its wear problems. Ron H.