Lars

Thank you everyone for your thoughts on this sword! Very helpful and much appreciated! With the help of some non-abrasive tools I managed to loosen the habaki enough that I could tease it off. I'm attaching a few photos and hope it's possible to discern anything useful in them. I guess I don't know what I should be looking for here so this was literally a shot in the dark... Regards, Lars

I tried taking a few more photos though my wife gave me some very strange looks when I started fiddling around with her sword and a lamp in our bedroom... Most of the pictures didn't turn out well, but i think it's possible to see at least something of the hada in one of them. Unfortunately someone seems to have thought it a good idea to crimp the habaki in place with a pair of pliers, so I only managed to slide it back a few millimeters without making too much of a mess. I'm attaching a picture of that as well. It's obvious that someone (or someones) made a bodge job of 'restoring' the sword. The scratches/poor polish, the poorly placed mekugi ana, the crimped habaki... In addition to that the shirasaya has been crudely adapted to fit the sword. That being said I'm still happy the sword has found its way into our family. Regards, Lars

Thanks for the answers! Unfortunately I'm not a good photographer and my camera is just a 'tourist style' compact. I'm having problems getting crisp images without strange reflections. I tried to take a few more pictures today in natural daylight and I think they turned out slightly better. The sword is not dated. I seem to remember to have read somewhere that swords with this longer type of mei often were dated, but unfortunately this one isn't. Regards, Lars

Hi, This sword has recently come into my wife's possession. I'm very much a novice when it comes to Nihonto and would like to learn as much as I can from the sword. However, I realize that the condition it is in makes it less than an ideal study object. If anyone cares to share any thoughts it would be very welcome. I have tried to build my own opinion, but might be completely on the wrong track and wouldn't mind being corrected. The sword isn't in good polish, especially in the kissaki area, and I'm having trouble following the boshi all the way. I'm not sure, but perhaps the kissaki has been reshaped? (The kissaki actually looks worse in the photo than in reality...) I have given mei translation a go and I read it as “Bizen Kuni Ju Osafune Sukesada Saku”, i.e. Sue-Bizen style. The rust inside the chisel marks seems consistent with the rust on the rest of the tang. I haven't been able find any references to signatures with exactly the same style of chisel strokes etc, but there seems to have been a large number of Sukesada smiths that signed in a similar way during a long time period. However, my feeling is that this probably is a 16th century sword, but I have no idea as to the exact era. Measurements: Nagasa: 51.3 cm Nakago: 13.9 cm Kissaki: 3.2 cm Sori: 1.0 cm Motohaba: 2.9 cm Sakihaba: 2.0 cm Motokasane: 6.9 mm Sakikasane: 5.3 mm Weight: 535 g I'm attaching a few photos. I was having trouble highlighting the details I wanted, but I hope that at least something can be seen. Again, any thoughts would be very welcome. Many thanks in advance. //Lars

Thanks for your help and advice! There is no set price for the sword, but I would expect having to pay somewhere around EUR 1100. However, I'm a bit put off by the circumstance that it is likely gimei and the dealer didn't even think to mention the possibility, though I wholeheartedly agree that one should be buying the sword and not the mei. I think I will stay away from this one due to the insufficient information provided and the lack of detailed photos and just regard it as a good mei translation exercise for me. Lars

Hi, I'm considering buying a sword from an antiques shop. Unfortunately they are some 850 kilometers away, so I haven't been able to see the sword with my own eyes and they aren't exactly forthcoming with details other than that they believe it is a 18th century sword. (It is a reputable shop though, but they don't specialize in Japanese weaponry.) As I am a novice myself this could prove to be a learning experience in more ways than one. The dealer has not translated the mei but has provided some photos. (The photo of the blade isn't very good, but I'm attaching it anyway in addition to a shot of the mei.) I have given translation a try myself and my best guess is that the mei reads 大坂丹波守吉道 - Osaka Tanba (no) Kami Yoshimichi. (Apparently Osaka can be written 大坂 but 大阪 is more common?) According to info I have been able to find online there were 11 generations (circa 1634 to 1853) of swordsmiths in Yamashiro that signed with the mei Tanba (no) Kami Yoshimichi. That they normally wrote Tanba in the shape of a boat's sail ties in nicely with the mei on the attached photo. There were two main branches of this school, one in Kyoto and the other in Osaka. The way Kami is written (the "dot stroke" pointing downwards) leads me to believe that the mei could have been written by an Osaka smith. As my real-life experience of appraising nihonto is virtually non-existent I might very well be completely on the wrong track here. In addition to that I haven't been able to find any references to mei that actually read Osaka Tanba (no) Kami Yoshimichi - only Mishina Tanba (no) Kami Yoshimichi or Kyoto Tanba (no) Kami Yoshimichi. I would value any opinions you guys have. Many thanks in advance! Lars