Ted Tenold

I have to agree that this looks like a Shinshinto piece to me, and not Uda school. Uda nakago are very conspicuous with broad width, little or no sori, and nearly parallel mune and ha edges. This one has more taper through it's length than I'd expect for Uda. My internet is crawling today for some reason, so I didn't look through all the images for a better look. Maybe later I'll have a look at the other pictures.

Hi Brian, My pleasure. Glad to help. Here's another which although is not an arsenal mark, and also not actually on the blade, is rarely found on military tsuka and should be noted for it's special nature. These red kanji stamped on the fuchidai of the tsuka are important because it notes the work of a great tsukamakishi named Shukichi Yamaguchi, aka "Tsukahei". More about him can be found at http://www.bushidojapaneseswords.com/Di ... %20hei.pdf . I thought it important to note because most times the tsukamaki is one of the first things to suffer from deterioration or damage and thus removal or rewrapping. If the tsukamaki looks particularly well done for a gunto, look for this mark. If it's there, then don't disturb the tsukamaki and preserve it however possible. Please remove or prune this post if you feel inconsistant with the topic mission statement.

For the most part, koshirae parts are fitted using an adhesive called Matsuyani, which is basically pine pitch. Preparing it is a little bit of a chore, smelly (if you don't like that "pine fresh scent" :lol: ), and requires a couple ingredients. Andy Guy provided the recipe and preparation for it. You can find it courtesy of John Stuart at http://www.johnstuart.biz/new_page_22.htm .

Here is an example of the very curious "Matsu" stamp. It is a very rarely encountered mark, and its origin and purpose seems to be unknown. The pictured gendaito with this mark is a very nicely hand forged work by Munetoshi, who also signed Hidemune. He was a student of Kasama Shigetsugu. Other oshigata I have seen did not display this "matsu" mark, so it is inconsistently found on his works. My speculation is that this is an identifying mark for a particular shop or broker who may have ordered the blade on behalf of an officer. The mark is documented in Military Swords of Japan 1868-1945 by Richard Fuller and Ron Gregory. It is noted in this book that blades found with this mark were mounted in late 1944 Shingunto koshirae. This blade is indeed mounted consistantly.

Though it's not really an "arsenal" mark by definition, it is a mark of note in references. This is the Kikusui (floating chrysanthemum) of swordsmith working under the Minatogawa Shrine in Kobe. The forge was dedicated in 1940, and smith produced works until August of 1945. As a point of further note, the habaki that accompanied these sword also were supplied with the kikusui mon engraved on one side. The sword in this image is a work by Masanao. Detailed information regarding the shrine, it's history, and the smith working under it, can be found in Herman A. Wallinga's publication of Gendaito Made at the Minatogawa Shrine, September 2000.

Not too difficult to see. Here it is...

This is the stamp of the South Manchurian Railway factory, aka; Dairen Mantetsu blades as the factory was located in Dalian, Manchuria. This factory was the predecessor of the Koaisshin Mantetsu. Note the circular "M" over the cross section of a rail. Will not be accepted for Shinsa. A small number of tachi were made with the same factory logo embossed on the fittings. They are rare and were manufactured as presentation pieces. Interestingly enough, of the three original of this tachi I've seen, all had blades that were marked with the later "Koaisshin Mantetsu" signatures and not this stamp.

Andrew, It really comes down to a few succint factors. In order of importance; 1) Does the sword's present condition allow for restoration? 2) Does the sword's quality make it a candidate for the costs of restoration? 3) Are there any extenuating circumstances that might allow for a variance in either of the first two catagories? In otherwords; Is the sword of such extreme age, rareity, provinance, or sentimental value, that an exception might be made to any conditional or qualitative issues? Regardless of the esteem in which we all hold Nihonto, not all of them are "art swords" and not all of them are restorable by today's equations. Images on the internet rarely confirm a swords restorability, and rather are more apt to discount it. Beyond all the pontification of whether you should restore it or not is the essential arithmetic; Polish; 20 inch nagasa @ $100 per inch = $2000.00 Habaki; Basic Copper Hitoe (single piece, functional, well done, but nothing dressy) = $400.00 Shirasaya; Honoki with no frills = $600.00 Shipping costs back and forth to Japan with insurance, tracking, good packaging = $125.00 Brokerage fee in/out of Japan = $300.00 Torokusho fees = $65.00 Shinsa fees (if passed to Hozon) = $250.00 Total = $3740.00 Bear in mind that these are conservative numbers (the yen is trading at 88 right now ) and don't include what you paid for the sword. So, at the end of the day, what could a collector acquire for the same amount of money, and would this sword, if it were restored, be comparably equal, less, or more than those other options . Bear in mind that there's a time element involved which could run you into *years* of waiting for the various processes to be completed, not to mention the risk (and angst) of unforseen problems that could be encountered. So there's also measure of patience and anticipation that must be paid, because until it's all done and the fat lady has finished her aria, there's a lot of things that can go wrong and you will pay for processes performed to that point. I'm not judging this sword as posted and it's not my intention to interfere in any transaction. These are standard considerations for any restoration project.

Nearly all the references we use are "old data". :lol: Never-the-less, they are the data we employ regularly in our studies. Also the data I provided is very close to the same period of which the blade in question is dated, and thus is fairly concurrent. Just as logically, it dis-proves nothing either. Again, it was only a contribution of more data, and since one cannot prove a negative, I cannot prove that Ono Yoshimitsu did not do something. I will also say that the catalogs I have of the Shinsaku presentations for the years 1998, 2001, 2005, and 2006 all have examples of Ono Yoshimitsu swords and all have "Ono" included in their mei. So perhaps there was a transition in his career where he began to include it? I think this needs further validation from Ono Yoshimitsu himself. I cannot provide any proof of anything. I am only contributing more data to the conversation. When considering validity of any piece, I look at work first, and signatures second, but we don't have that luxury here.

I just looked through the book, "Ono Yoshimitsu's World of Juka Choji" which is a catalog illustrating 12 of his works. In every single example, including 2 wakizashi, the season noted is followed by "kichi jitsu", and none of the examples carry "Ono" in the inscription. This sword was in the catalog I've referenced; http://www.moderntosho.com/gallery2/mai ... _itemId=29

My suspicion is the former. There are so many "old" swords (that look like late showa or heisei period work) with "old" papers being offered that I suspect these are being made to this day. No different than any other period where the same practice has been occuring. As long as there is valuable and/or popular art, there will be counterfeits. Education such as this thread and beyond, is the best defense. But as long as there are folks willing to step up and buy in ignorance or passionate delusion, counterfeiters will earn a living. We must be ever vigilant.

Unfortunate indeed. Ono-san is a truely a gem of a man and to say that he is a talented smith is a great understatement. He also holds his work to a very VERY high personal standard. Any work out there with even minor kizu should be considered forgeries as he does not allow them out of his shop. Any sword that does not meet his approval for high quality is broken over the anvil. I examined one of his Yamatoriige utsushi at a past Dai Token Ichi. It was gorgeous, but not for sale. I assumed it was perhaps just the dealer's personal blade on display. Later I asked Ono-san about the sword and if it belonged to someone, and he said basically "yes, it's mine". I asked if it was for sale and he replied he could not sell it because during the polishing a small ware had come up. I had looked at the sword for quite a long time and did not notice anything and told him so. He replied that it was very small and not conspicuous, but still not acceptable to send to a customer. By the time it came up it was too far into the polish so now he just keeps it for himself and for display only and it will never be for sale. So as much as looking at mei is good exercise, again I just want to point out that the work must confirm the mei. In the case of Ono Yoshimitsu, if the work looks shoddy, it is not his blade. Thanks for bringing this up Mike. Great exercise. It didn't even occur to me that I'd never seen "Ono" as part of his mei.

The similarities with this contemporary maker are striking. http://www.moderntosho.com/gallery2/mai ... itemId=103 Sorry to be blunt Ken, but that patina is not only new but very poorly executed as well. My feeling is that this is a recently made piece that has perhaps had a mei removed. That in itself is not bad if the mei was dubious, but the patina really needs to be fixed if it is indeed a Shinshinto work.

I'd say both are correct. The finite details that differ still carry the stylistic character of his hand. There was, within the past 15 or 20 years, a short lived trend of creating shinsaku utsushimono of older suriage and osuriage works, some of which even had elaborate (and very healthy) horimono deep into the nakago, yet signed by their makers in contemporary fashion. Seeing the works of these types was a bit bizarre. Looking at them I had to wonder what folks a couple hundred years from now would think about them. :lol:

As far as I'm concerned....

The ten rules was my contribution, so Carlo's must be your missing one. I wrote the ten rules two or three years ago to send to folks new to collecting (or veteran for that matter). It was originally titled "Ted's Ten Rules for Collecting Nihonto" and was built upon my experiences collecting coins and militaria for over 20 years. I left that gendre with a number of burned "friendships" and a really big chip on my shoulder for the way I was treated in the beginning, during, and in the end of collecting which retrospect brought into more clarity. It's by far not a perfect list, but was born more or less out of streaming thought. I truely hope it helps. I'm sure there's lots of things that could be supplimented such as Barry's and Jean's advice which are also very good. Perhaps something less about what not to do and more about first steps. Maybe something like "Getting Started; Checking the Depth and Temperature Before Diving In". Or maybe this which I think Guido sent me a long time ago Anyways, thanks to Brian and to all who are contributing to this effort. It's a great cause.

Masatsugu was indeed a very important force in the sword world. It would be nice to see that tanto again after restoration. Here's another for reference; http://www.legacyswords.com/fs_ant_daito12.htm

Lots of things that can be a concern with lacquer aside from the preliminary concerns of urushi. Any dust in the lungs is bad, but urushi often has other things in it for coloration or decoration that are also hazardous such as Cinnabar used for red color. Cinnabar is the mineral from which mercury is obtained. Also, Mother of Pearl aka; Aogai (Abalone shell). Dust is hazardous. Some folks are more sensative to this stuff than others. I have a friend whose hands swell up like ballons if he works with Samegawa for extended periods. So it's hard to tell what might happen even a material might look benign at first glance. Even with old materials it's not out of the question for lead or other heavy metals to be present as their hazards weren't known. Consider your pursuit carefully.

You gentlemen are making a good push for a large international contingent to descend upon this museum in force. I'd love to represent part of the USA delegation!

Chris, I searched the listing and had a look at it. The description matches one of a Gassan Sadakatsu in IJA General's Koshirae that was sold on Ebay a few years ago. It was quite the subject of talk on the internet while the auction was developing. The sword ended up being purchased by one of my clients. I can say with a fair measure of certainty from the images shown in the listing, that they, along with the description, are from the original Ebay auction. How certain?? I have the sword purchased by my client in that Ebay listing in my possesion. My client probably has a copy of the original Ebay listing as well, though I'd have to confirm that with him. The images on the craigslist listing may be tough to see from their low resolution, but the images I snapped just now (along with Friday's local paper, since we don't get a Sunday edition :-) ) are a pretty compelling similarity.

Ah, Morita san, you are correct. I just gave a quick glance and focused on Kanetsugu and didn't give the Maekawa picture enough consideration.

Though inscribed as such, not Izumi no kami Kunisada either.

Hi Jon, That looks correct to me.

It reads "Hoki no kami Fujiwara Hirotaka". This smith is indeed from the Echizen Seki group in the early Shinto period. Chujosaku rated in Fujishiro. The second image is not very good, but a cursory comparison shows both similarities and some differences in small details of the strokes. Can't say from the images if it's been shortened, but with that much of the mei left, any shortening would not have been extensive. Also perhaps could be machi okuri, but the rest of the blade and nakago needs to be examined to tell.

The inscription reads "Echizen ju" or "a resident of Echizen". Echizen province is located in what is now Fukui prefecture. If this is the only inscription on that side of the nakago, then there may be more on the other side. This practice was done among the smiths from the province in the Echizen Seki group.