SteveM

The sword should be pointing with the tip up. (Otherwise the signature is upside-down). 越前住日向守藤原貞次 The translation is mostly correct: Echizen-jū Hyuga-no-kami Fujiwara Sadatsugu 日向 can also be pronounced "hinata" in some cases, but in this case it is a certain location, pronounced Hyuga. There are no less than three smiths who signed using this name and title. I don't know which one signed this. Could also be a forgery, as forgeries are very common in the world of Japanese swords. More pictures of the sword might help. The fittings are a hodgepodge of antique, samurai-style fittings, and a wartime leather scabbard: interesting, but not nearly as interesting as the sword itself will be.

I think you got a very nice and collectible piece of WW2 memorabilia. Signature on the sword is 関住星谷義長 Seki-jū Hoshiya Yoshinaga （Made by) Yoshinaga Hoshiya of Seki The fittings are in good/very good condition, the sword is in good condition for a WW2 sword, and the sword has a distinct mei, and is from a known smith...its all good. I think if you Google the smith's name, you can find other threads discussing other swords by him. The issue of the surrender tag is a side issue, but I think its probably OK, just a bit less worn than we normally see. With a WW2 sword and fittings in good condition like this, the presence (or lack) of surrender tag has minimal affect on the value of the ensemble. I think most people would like to have the tag as evidence of the sword's history, but, really, the condition of the sword and the scabbard are the important things - which is why I think think its a side issue. In any event, it is a real location in Japan, so if you ever wanted to research the presumed former owner, it can be done.

Wakayama's Index of Metalsmiths https://www.amazon.co.jp/刀装金工事典-若山-猛/dp/463900379X

二コ一 would normally mean "one of two" (one of a two-piece set). The name looks like 関場正志 Sekiba Masashi. Not sure about the first character.

Reverse side of your sword says 皇紀二千六百年五月 護国 Imperial year 2600, May. Protect the country Imperial year 2600 is 1940

Here's another papered example. Showa-era smith. https://nihontou.jp/.../katana/1565/00.html Edit: Your translation is accurate. But your paper makes no mention of the mei on the opposite side (which looks very much like the inscription on the sword at the Nihontou.com link above. So, when I first posted this I didn't have any doubts about your sword or paper, but now, I'm not so sure. The sword you posted has the same inscription as the one on the "nihontou" site, but the paper is different. The one on the Nihontou site has a paper that correctly matches the inscription on the sword tang, and notes a size of 2 shaku, 2 sun, 1 bu. Your paper doesn't match your tang, and your paper notes a size of 2 shaku and 2 sun (but its a funny notation for the 2 sun.... its got an inexplicable "0" in front of it). And...weren't they using actual photographs in Heisei 29 (which is the date on your paper) and NOT hand-drawn oshigata? I think your paper may be, um, problematic.

There is one Hirashige listed in Wakayama. Metalworker to the Tokugawa. Died in Meiji 12 (1879) at the age of 51.

明治三午年二月日　1870 (horse) year, a day in February

平重造（花押）　Hirashige zō (tsukuru).

Here's something about the metallurgy. https://markussesko....-thoughts-on-utsuri/

Marking on the bottom sword (2nd picture) is the smith's name: 兼吉 (Kaneyoshi) The marking on the top sword should also be the smith's name, but part of it is obscured (or missing) so I can't make it out. Something + 國之 (～Kuniyuki), but the part before that is unclear, so I don't know if Kuniyuki is the smith's name, or if those two characters have some other significance.

Looks like a peony.

The chances would be pretty high, I think. Looking online, I can find 8 people named Abe living in what was that section of Wada city (now part of Takahata city). I wouldn't go cold-calling them, but if I wanted to repatriate that sword I might send a letter to one (or more) of them and ask if they were related to Shuichi. The problem is that if this is a real guntō, you couldn't return it to them because it couldn't be registered, or even imported. If its an older blade, you could do it, but I don't think Mike has repatriation on his mind, and its dicey to try to contact these people out of the blue unless you wanted to return the sword.

Hi Michael, The translation is accurate. As for the sword... as you guessed, we need to see it in order to make any comments that might be useful. From the pictures here, the fittings look to be in very good shape. Nicely preserved wrapping on the hilt/tsuka. The tassel also looks nice, but it could well be a later addition. I don't quite follow militaria much beyond translations, but tassels in good condition seem to be a much sought-after item. However the ones that collectors love are different from the one on your sword (I think, hopefully someone will help me out here). The scabbard is wrapped in leather, which is common, but we can't tell anything about the scabbard underneath the leather. With militaria, condition of the blade and of the fittings, is king. You'll obviously want to look for a signature on the tang. But just having a signature won't tell you too much unless you can read it, or post a picture of it here. The sword could be an old heirloom sword that was fitted with Imperial Japanese Army furnishings. This would be nice, but it changes the whole valuation/appreciation equation because it almost ceases to become "militaria" at that point, and instead becomes a sword antique that gets judged by a different set of criteria. The fittings become almost irrelevant, as most of the value will be in the blade itself. But just having a signature on the tang doesn't mean its an old sword. It could be a military sword that was made by an arsenal smith in the 1930s-1940s. These are kind of mass-produced blades that still had some element of human labor. The smith in charge of production will put his name on the tang. Anyway, if you can look at the tang and take some pictures, that will be helpful. If not, look for matching numbers on the metal parts if possible, as these are a good indicator that the sword isn't assembled from parts found on ebay. I note your comment about the provenance of the sword, but its always good to buy the blade and not the story. Anyway, too many variables to judge from the photos above, as

Hi John, are you looking for comments on the activities, or on the shadow (or bubble? or dent?) in the middle?

Yes, they are lucky treasures. There's 9 of them (or, at least 9). I don't think they are affiliated with the 7 lucky gods. Called "takara zukushi" 宝尽くし https://www.koboku.co.jp/news/日本の吉祥文様　『宝尽くし』/

Lots of nice eye-candy lately on NMB. Gary is it possible to get a shot of the Tanobe-sensei writing on the scabbard?

The residue might be cosmoline, or might be some old oil. Either way, I would remove it from the sword with denatured alcohol and a soft cloth. If you have any lens-cleaning cloths (like for cameras or glasses), those will work very well. Clean off the old oil, then put a very thin layer of lightweight oil (sewing machine oil or electric shaver oil) on the sword to stop it from rusting. You don't need to drench it in oil. A tiny film of oil will be fine. The wooden scabbard (called a shirasaya) is a plain scabbard used for storing the sword, and they are still made and used to this day. We all store our swords in them. Yours is well past its "use by" date, so at some point you should get a new one made. (You don't want an antique sword resting in a scabbard that has a hundred years of old grime and oil and dust and muck in it). If yours is clean inside, and just has tape residue on the outside, it should be OK to continue using for now. Also OK to tape it back up so that it actually works as a protective case for your sword. These things are meant to be renewed when they start getting dirty and falling apart. If it has some old writing on it, you'll want to preserve it, but if its just a plain, dirty, wooden scabbard that's falling apart, it's OK to tape it back up and use it until you can get a replacement made. The sword looks to be just under 24 inches from tip to notch, so it's right on the border between "wakizashi" size and "katana" size. These are the official size designations used by Japan today. Anything over 60.6 cms is classified as katana, and anything 30.3 cm - 60.6 cm is classified as a wakizashi.

Hello Andrew, I've got good news and bad news: The bad news: I'm afraid this isn't a WW2 sword. The good news: It dates from several centuries before WW2, potentially from the 1600s. The inscription is 近江守藤原継 (cut off) Ōmi-no-kami Fujiwara Tsugu... (cut off, but probably Tsuguhiro) It means 近江守藤原継廣 Ōmi-no-kami　= Lord of Omi Province (Omi province is present-day Shiga Prefecture in Japan. Fujiwara = this is a clan name. Not really to be taken as a literal name of the swordsmith. Its the swordsmith declaring he has a lineage to an ancient aristocratic clan. Tsuguhiro = is the swordsmith's name. Not his real, given name, but more or less a professional name. Your sword was originally longer by a few inches, but it was cut down at some point. Shortening the sword is very common. It was always shortened from the tang. So the tang was shortened, and the notches where the brass collar sits were moved up. Could have been done a couple of hundred years ago, or a hundred years ago. There are many swords with fake signatures, and yours too could have a fake signature. Faking signatures was (and still is) very common. Regardless, the sword itself is still a genuine Japanese antique, and could still be several hundred years old even if the signature turns out to be fake. So what I'm saying is, the sword should be preserved, shouldn't be subject to any amateur restoration efforts, and is probably worth showing to someone who knows a lot about swords. It will be hard to authenticate it just by looking at photos. And, the condition probably precludes anyone from making an accurate assessment. But, as I said, the sword is a genuine antique regardless of the authenticity of the signature.

Yes, Ryūbun-dō.

Tried to find a post by Darcy that listed what he considered the variable criteria for cutting efficiency, including what Jacques mentioned above, but also things like skill of the cutter, and the object being cut (leather armor vs. some other thing). If anyone has that, or can remember where it is, it would be useful for Al. I think he listed something like 5 or 6 factors 1. Shape 2. Sharpness 3. Skill of the cutter 4. Hardness of the target 5. (I think there was one other, but can't remember. Maybe the weight of the sword.) And I don't recall if the hardness/durability of the sharp edge was a criteria; i.e. the sword that makes the best initial cut may drop in the rankings for the 2nd or 3rd cut because its edge is now blunted. Anyway, it was a good read and very appropriate to this conversation. If I find it I'll post it here.

There was a dealer with quite a few Nogawa cigarette cases at the show in Las Vegas. Very nice works. I was very tempted. I don't even smoke.

Looks like 松華梼主人好, and it would be a dedication, "Made for Master/Lord Shōkatō" Shōkatō would be an art name of someone, but that name doesn't show up in any results.

Not a mon, but a surname. 稗田 Hieda, Hieta, Hida, etc...

Pretty sure its 大清乾隆年制（製） Da Qing Qianlong Nian Zhi - Made in the reign of Qianlong during the Qing Dynasty. Not really made in the Qing dynasty. Probably 20th century