markturner

No help from me with any information, I am afraid, but I was amazed at the transformation after the polish...no wonder you are pleased, the blade looks amazing now! Incredible to think what lies beneath the surface of such an apparently rusty ruin... Amazing and interesting story to go with it as well, regards, Mark

Hi, as part of my ongoing studies and learning curve, based on the study of the 3 swords I now own, I am trying to find out some information about a smith named Munetsugu, who made my katana. Now, I don't have the sword here ( it is having a tsuka made and a set of mountings fitted in the USA) so can't show you photos as yet. However, this is what I do know from the auction catalogue description ( quote) "shinshinto katana by Sanjo Munechika 16th generation munetsugu in shirasaya with sayagaki by Honami Heijuro" Dated a day in the 8th month of Bunsei (1819) . The sword is ex of the Bigelow collection and is described as: shallow koshi-zori, with chu-kissaki; itami masaji; sugaha komidare in nie and nioi with ashi; kaen boshi; tapering nakago with katasegari yasuri and two mekugi-ana; And the mei described as: Sanjo Munechika ju roku dai Munetsugu. Now, the only Munetsugu I can find references to was a famous Hizen smith, Koyama Munetsugu, but he born in 1802 and so would be a bit young to have made this... So, please can anyone tell from this information what they know of this smith, school, line, etc or where I could look for further information. I understand that sayagaki by the Honami are supposed to be good, also that both Munechika and Munetsugu are big names, but how do they relate to my sword, which while very nice, is not I suspect in the same league as them....Any information or pointers gratefully received. Regards, Mark Turner

Just a quick word to say how pleased I was with both the service from Tsuruta-San and the product. I recently purchased a Koto wakaizashi, Tokubetsu hozon papers and kaoshirae. My sword came in a lovely brocade bag, with separate silk bags for the koshirae, a lovely scroll for the oshigata and a nice laminated sheet with photos and full description and appraisal of the sword. The only fly in the ointment was that the sword was detained by customs as a prohibited import, despite documents attesting to its age and price and describing it as an antique being sent with it. It took me 4 weeks to get it after it hit the UK and getting the UKBA to answer the phone or emails was nearly impossible. Anyway, I am very pleased, and funds permitting will hopefully be using Tsuruta-San again in the future. I can recommend him and his shop extremely highly. Regards, mark Turner

Thank you all so much for your time and trouble! is it usual to have the "saku" at the end? AndHapy New year to all, I have been away, so a little late .... best wishes, Mark

That's great, thanks. What does the saku mean at the end of the smith signature ? does this help? Thanks again, Mark

Wow!! that was quick! Thanks! I will post up a picture of the real thing tomorrow. How easy would it be for you to match each character to the translated word or part word for me? When i tried to match the script to my samples of bishu or bitchu, none of them matched exactly to what I saw on the inscription. Is this just down to individual "handwriting" as we have ? Or are there other more subtle implications? I am going to make up a nicely presented sheet , giving all the information I can glean about the blade, for display, in the cabinet I am making for it. I have the sugata pretty well nailed, ( he says...!) the tricky bit is the mei and the description of the hamon and jigane etc. When I have a rough draft, I will submit for a critique from you guys, together with some photos of the blade. I was told the mei read something similar, but sukesada. I have tried to copy exactly the script, but I guess a photo tells a thousand words. I think I need a better camera!! Thanks again, Mark

Hi, I am undertaking an in depth appraisal myself of one of my swords, as part of teaching myself about the subject. Part of this is an accurate translation of the mei, which I am struggling with. I have a couple of books with various tables, mostly of smiths names and dates, but cant put the whole picture together. i would be grateful if one of you could assist? I have carefully copied the characters as well as I can, as getting a good photo was proving difficult. I will try and provide one if that is definitely required, but can you see what you make of my copy first? the first line is on the inside of the nagako, I think the first two are Ei-sho. The others are the the signature the other side. I know the gist of it, but if someone can put the correct translation to each character, that would be great. Hope you can help, Regards, Mark

Hi Guys, thank you very much, that's really helpful. John, your Mei does look the very same as mine. Is the rest of the sword similar? I paid £2300 for the sword, if that helps to quantify its value and wether I have paid much more for it than I should have. Thanks again for all the useful advice, regards, Mark

Hi Jacques, I have done some googling, if you notice, in the original post I linked 2 swords I found by doing just that. My comparison of mine with those was what initiated my post, I could see differences, but being a rank amateur, did not know what they signified. I was hoping that being knowledgeable enthusiasts, you could answer my queries. I have books I have brought and am studying and I have some swords, already I know much more than when I started, which was zero, but I am not going to be able to teach myself "the knowledge" overnight. I see my hamon differs, but know not what this tells me. I see other similarities, but again, dont know what they mean. I just need a little help here... So, I know the signature on my sword is not right, its "gimei"...I know the fittings are unusual, I also now now what "sagama no kami" means - apart from that, I have no idea wether the sword is good , bad or indifferent. Opinions on merit, value and worthiness are requested so I can decide whether to keep it or not or go back to my friend and renegotiate. I like the sword, but if its not what it is supposed to be, I would like to know. It's like being in class, you never learn unless you ask the teacher questions. Hopefully they get answered. yours, respectfully but a little frustratedly, Mark

Hi Jacques, in that case, the false signature is on my sword, (As the other sword had papered )yes? Comparing them carefully, I do notice differences in the way the kanji are drawn on each. Do you think that is the case? Is it a point to fake a signature of a relatively minor smith? What do you think the hamon and other characteristics of the sword are telling you? It would be good to know wether or not I have got myself a good sword or a lemon.. thanks, Mark

Thanks Jacques, what does this tell you then? The nakagojiri is the shape of the tang, yes? the ji kuni and tsuna are the characters of the Mei ? So what does this mean? cheers, Mark

Hi, so I can say from study that my sword has several very similar traits to the second wakizashi I linked from aio art, the saya is the same shape with rounded end, the go katana is nearly the same, the Mei seems the same and the area the same. The shape of the blade is very nearly identical as well. The only thing that stands out as different to me, is the hamon. Would you learned people say that the sword is the same smith? If so, then that is very useful for me, as there seems to be lots of information I can glean from the description etc given by aio art. Would any you please also be so kind to describe and comment on the hamon and jigare of my sword and tell me what you think of it please? Curran, I to very much liked the fuchi-kashira, one of the big reasons for me buying it. I have not been able to see inside the fuchi to see if it is signed. Are they unusual in style? many thanks! Mark

Ahem... indeed, I was reading the sizes the wrong way around..apologies for my stupidity..!! so here are the pictures, first without thumb, hopefully complete enough to see the shape..? and here is a picture of the Mei on the Kunistuna sword I linked in the OP, it looks very similar to me, but I am no expert!: I promise to engage brain before typing in future... What does the smaller inscription on the reverse side of the tang say please? Is that the date? Thanks, mark

OK, I have some pictures here: Sorry for posting just a link, but despite me resizing all the photos to 1280 x 960, it wont let me post them says they cant be more than 1200 pixels wide...... which they are not..... anyway, hopefully you can see from the direct link to the album. http://s499.photobucket.com/albums/rr35 ... e/Nihonto/ Hopefully you can see the mei properly, I have also included pictures of the Koshirae and Ko-gatana ( thanks Ken!), so if any of you could confirm the smith and provide and information from looking at the blade, hamon etc. Any comments and opinions on the sword welcome as well. many thanks, Mark

Hi, I have recently acquired a nice ( I think so anyway!) wakizashi, attributed to Fujiwara kunitsuna approx 1661 Firstly what does "sagami no kami" mean? Is it a title ( I googled and found "Iga (no) Kami" is a title , so presumed similar? ) I also searched here and found 2 posts that seem to be referring to the same smith, here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=407&hilit=fujiwara+kunitsuna I also searched and found this: http://www.nihontoantiques.com/fss317.htm and this: http://www.nihontoantiques.com/fss368.htm Is it the same smith? My hamon looks dissimilar, but interestingly, the small knife (sorry cant think of the correct term !) that came with mine has the same horses motif. I will post up some pictures of the Mei and blade as soon as I get home Thanks, Mark

Hi Martin, apologies if I did not put it across correctly, I was not questioning the style of the Mei, rather the actual words as translated - all 3 are slightly different, but ( I am assuming) all mean made by a Sukesada smith in Osafune. I guess my question relates to the fact that in the description, he is saying that the swords are quality swords, despite the fact that there were many " mass produced" swords made at the time. So, we can assume that the "mass produced" swords were not signed ? Or if so, only way to tell, is by judging each sword by the quality of the hamon and jigare? Regards, Mark

Hi, I was hoping that I could find about about the differences between the quality of swords made in Bizen and signed "bizen koko ju osafune sukesada" such as shown here: http://www.aoi-art.com/sword/katana/11159.html also "Bisyu Osafune Sukesada Saku" as shown here: http://www.aoi-art.com/sword/katana/11308.html and then "Bishu Osafune Sukesada saku" as on the wakizashi of mine, mentioned here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11476&p=98013#p98013. I know now thanks to the help of you guys here, that it was a period of high output and that many swords produced in that time are of poor quality. What do the small differences in the above signatures mean? Reading the descriptions from the text in the 2 swords described at Aio art, they mention 3 quality levels and explain the large output of swords in that time and from that school that was kindly explained to me in my first thread, but don't seem to indicate how to tell between them and what class the blades they have fall into. The price of the blades I linked would indicate to me ( am I wrong?) that they are of good quality. Also the price I paid for mine from my dealer Don Bayney likewise, ( he also has a good name and I trust I paid a fair price for the blade) but I am interested as to how these distinctions are made. Many swords of quality were also produced, so is this judged purely by the hamon and shape? I have been studying the books I have and have learned a fair bit, for example I can see that my wakizashi is polished in the older style that renders the hamon more transparent and I can also see that it is a good hamon, with no breaks and some nice activity. The other question relates to the fact that my blade is not osuriage , it seems to have been made as a wakizashi from new, this must be just about the time that such blades were produced from new at that length, correct? A sizeable majority of wakizashi seem to be suriage, cut down from longer blades. All in all, its a confusing time and seems tricky to navigate in terms of separating out good swords and lesser ones for someone like me. Rgds, Mark

LOL, just goes to show doesn't it... apologies, I should have linked the whole page, would have made it easier. Cant believe how much of this stuff is out there... Cheers, Mark

Hi, I wondered if anyone could say what age / smith is shown on the Mei pictured here? http://www.motka.com/01.03a/066%20007.jpg I found the sword on e bay and it looked a nice clean blade at a good price. Thanks, Mark

Well done, it looks like a nice sword at a good price. Kevin, thanks for the advice. Cheers, Mark

Genuine blade in your opinion? I just don't think I could trust anything on e-bay. So many fraudsters out there. All of his feedback relates to selling hot parts for cars and suddenly he has a very nice blade for sale, that is not described in laymans terms. No returns accepted... always a bad sign. Seems to good to be true.... Nice if it was..

Thanks Grey, I do have my head in several books at the moment, but I fear the path of enlightenment is a long and winding one....!!! Best, Mark

I liked the age, ( for me very important, to have something that old in such nice condition and from the "golden age" of swordmaking is very nice, even though it is mumei ) condition, the papers ( which indicate that it is at least a good blade) and the fact that it also has a nice set of mounts including shira-saya as well. It's kind of the complete package. Plus , it fits nicely in my price range. Other than that, being a novice , the finer subtleties of what makes a "nice" blade, stand out from any other are proving somewhat harder to pin down. I have a hold on the item, do you all think it is a good purchase? They seem like a good dealer from what I can see of them mentioned here. Best, Mark

Hi Grey, I am a complete beginner, so hence all the request for advice. I hear what you are saying, my trouble is, I don't know the meaning of patience! I have always struggled with this! There is so much to learn, I guess the fittings can always be viewed as separate and interesting and valuable items in their own right. Generally, then, a blade in shirasaya, the same price as a blade in koshirae, for the same price, should always be a better blade, assuming its priced correctly? How much would be added to the value of a typical blade if it came with original authentic fittings as opposed to shirasaya? In a nutshell, you are saying keep my blades in shirasaya, ( unless I have money to burn ) and perhaps look at acquiring my next blade in mounts, correct? Thanks for the help, Mark

OK, thanks guys. Grey, I was thinking of using appropriately ( to the era of the sword) aged and nice antique fittings wherever possible, ( rather than new fittings) will that point re the value still apply then ? Or did you mean that the original koshirae would add more value to the sword than putting together a set in the way I described. I was advised by Don, the dealer, that it was fairly common practice to change the wrappings and rayskin as they got damaged and worn etc and also that a Samurai might have various Tsuba etc and dress his sword with varying finishes, rather we would today have several pairs of cufflinks etc. Obviously , I am hoping to add not only to the visual appeal of the sword, but also the value. Do you mean the Koshirae would be more valuable off the sword? Sorry for the questions! I did rather suspect the Tsuka would have to be made, as all the Nagako I see vary considerably. Thanks again, Cheers, Mark