Ted Tenold

Glad to help with a shared thought!

Heh heh :lol: Then again....you might win it back!

Shan, the machis are off set a bit, and there's some distortion in the contunuity of the mune line leading up to the munemachi. I believe the piece is slightly machiokuri, but not suriage. FWIW...

Okay guys, be nice. Let's face it, the same subjective lines of delination between "Art" and "Not-so-Art" are often as blurry as those between blunt identification and guidance. Cultivating the eye to see and appreciate increasingly better work is very important. But it takes time, effort, guidance, and a huge investment of time and resources. Who here can say they started at the top? Even if one were able, would they be able to really understand that level? Doubtful. Learning how to appreciate is just as important as what to appreciate, and this is where the guidance comes in. The distinguishing disadvantage in today's world is that this simply cannot be fully conveyed on the internet. Personal guidance and tangible study is the singular effective method of education on this stuff. We advise folks to get a "good entry level sword" all the time here and not buy junk. What's a good entry level sword? Is it dictated by price? Absolutely not! People (especially newbies) can blindly overpay. Is it dictated buy quality? No, because quality sets the price and can place that beyond the reach of entry level, and what newbie knows the difference in quality anyway. Is it dictated by type? Length? Smith? Koshirae? No, no, no, and.........no. Furthermore comparing pieces between catagorical (i.e. junk and masterpiece) levels is a bit unfair. They need to be identified *within* their own levels first. What are most swords compared to the likes of Ichimonji, Mitsutada, Kunihiro, or even Go Yoshihiro? What is that 5 year old child's drawing on the refridgerator door compared to Van Gogh's "Irises". Ask the parent of the five year old. Arguably, some will say that Bizen Kazuuchimono swords are not "Art swords", but who here would say it would be acceptable to stake their tomato plants with them because they are not "Art" swords? They did afterall, make it this far in history. Also remember that in their day, these things were weapons first and foremost. Junk killed opponents just as fast as Juyo. We have the luxury of looking at them in a completely different light. So, Fritz, it's difficult to add much more your sword other than the aforementioned. But here's my opinion; The signature is dubious looking and likely gimei. That's okay, collect work, not signatures. The nakago rust is on the red side which is a concern because it's active and may be a product of either efforts to age the nakago, poor storage conditions or both. Because the polish seems unaffected, the former would be the natural conclusion. The work in the sword is impossible to fully identify from the images. This is what you should focus *your* study on. Anything we propose will be of limited value without having the piece in hand. Although it does not appear to have any glaring disparaging flaws, it cannot also be confirmed that it does not, nor can the quality be fully assessed. What is visable to us appears well forged, and the yakiba well formed and consistent. The polish looks clear enough to identify the features of the sword and the shape of good form. However from the images I don't get a feeling of higher level quality of materials or workmanship. Maybe just average work. Average is okay for it's own level. The mounts are also average off the shelf looking. Nothing spectacular, but functional and suitable. This sword is obviously a "working man's" sword. The best that he could afford for what he needed. Certainly not a masterpiece of a top craftsman, but still an example of Japanese sword craft and worthy of care and appreciation as such.

You mean one that shows the implements of a "nice long root canal"? (Sorry all, but it's been a longtime inside joke between Doctuh Pete and I :D ) Very interesting tsuba. I can't recall ever seeing one either. As an interesting excercise just for fun; If Rich had not already identified this piece as Bungo, what would some kantei be? Yeah, yeah, yeah, Shoami is bound to raise it's grinning head, but don't forget to comment on why. For myself, I think I would have called it Hizen. The texture and color of the iron looks quite Hizen to me with a sandy russet appearance. The composition somehow drives me into the kind of thing Hizen might design and the gold vine work also looks like a Kyushu element. Also, Rich; Is there any points of "Bungo-esque" identification that you can help us with?

Yes, indeed! Very kind and generous of you to offer Dirk.

Steve, I think you need to put a leash and a muzzle on your whim, because that dog can't hunt. From a collector's view, it looks to have no redeeming qualities. It's very banged up, looks like it was thoroughly scrubbed and even perhaps treated with an etchant. Sorry to be blunt, but intervention is the act of a friend.

You know, Ford, you really should learn to open up a bit and avoid sequestering your feelings so much. As a resource I agree it's of limited value, but as an affordable one, it still has it's merits. Folks have been bashing Hawley's for years, but everyone seems to have a thumbworn copy of it. :lol: Henry, I'd also recommend that you apply for membership (if you have not already) in some of the Nihonto based clubs. The Northern California Japanese Sword Club often does some very nice articles and illustrates examples of fittings, and is quite affordable even for international membership. There are others that also supply valuable information on a monthly or quarterly basis. Have a look at http://www.ncjsc.org .

I agree, looks like Mori to me too.

Tom, They come up on occasion so keep looking. There's also the occasional bits and bobs with the same logo on various things on Ebay, so you might do a search under South Manchurian Railway, or SMR, of Dairen Railway Factory. Good Luck!

Ah, thank you very much Reinhard!

John, yes better than a bundle sword. Quite nice actually, with sparse konie, but a lively and active yakiba with bright habuchi. Better than most, but still only a shadow of Soshu's former glory.

Thanks Jacques. The form does make it look like it could be Nori, but the work, shape, age, and signature rule out those listed by that name. Thanks Markus. I suspected it was some form of Tsuna, and wanted to make sure it wasn't something really obvious I wan't seeing, you know, like turning the house upside down looking for the car keys for only to find them sitting in plain sight. :lol: There is one Tsunashige in Hawley's but only one. No other info I can find so far on this maker. Just one of those guys with a career of obscurity I guess.

Can't seem to make out this kanji. Any thoughts?? Soshu ju (X)shige. Darned if I can figure it out. :? Thanks in advance!

Tom, Here is another image of the early South Manchurian Railway stamp to suppliment the link Moriyama-san posted. These are somewhat rare and predate the "Koaisshin Mantetsu" signatures. Best I can tell this early stamp was used up until about March or April of 1939 at which point the Koaisshin signatures were implemented. However the zodiac dating system was initiated with this stamp and continued thoughout production.

Very nice Jean! I enjoy seeing these. Interesting that the nakago is signed on the upper one. Very unusual. The other has a quite nicely finished nakago too. There are so many that lack that kind attention to finishing that it illustrates the higher intentions of the smith to create a quality work.

Franco, I don't know if you've seen this before. I posted it some months back in another thread, but thought it would be a good comparison for all to see with your kogatana. Kogatana (at least nice examples like yours) have been overlooked for far too long. Smiths made some stunning examples of their normal work in miniature.

Lovely piece Franco! This is the Chikuzen Nobukuni group, and the work certainly looks like it. The horimono style is a good trademark to them too. Congrats!

I read about it this morning. Our thoughts and prayers to everyone there.

I think you make a good point. It is interesting, and I'd agree it was probably made to fill an order for an Omamori. The time period this one was made would suggest that if more than one were made the smith would certainly want to maximize his return on output by signing all of them. In pre-Meiji the smiths had a much larger market to facilitate selling their unsigned pieces. This could also just be an example of a smith providing the client with several truely completely finished works (including mei) to choose from, with the unchosen one(s) left with odd placement mearly a consequential result. Interesting, and though we can speculate from the placement, the intention and reasons are still a bit of a mystery.

John, Not necessarily, but for the most part, it's a logical first consideration until other elements are added into the formula. Look at some blades from the Kaga province and you'll see many examples of long stringy sunagashi. Also some Bizen pieces can exhibit this. The other points of recognition then start becoming the difference between them such as deki, jihada, utsuri (or lack thereof), shinogiji hada, etc. Magoroku, does not have prominent masame in the ha, nor sunagashi, though a kantei point of his work is scant bits of nie in the tani (valleys) of the gunome.

Lovely work Ford, lovely. I like the accent of the blade lying gently along the radius of the kashira's rim. A very nice and subtle touch that keeps the top of the kashira from being just a "frame" for a picture. The patina you've acheived on the iron is wonderful. Thank you for sharing this.

A quick "goog" comes up with him as a painter. Passed on in 1994. Maybe same guy? Info is kinda scant even on a Google search.

I guess the only complaint I have is that the title of this thread mislead me. I thought it was an opportunity to complain about anything, not just Reinhard. :lol: No disagreements here. A good debate is healthy as long as the aforementioned "rules of engagement" are respected. If not, then Brian initiates the tribunal. This subject is universally too big for anyone to claim omnipotence, and old thinking is still challenged with new approaches to thinking and study. None of that happens without debate.

Joe, As Arsenal/Factory made pieces go, they will all look very much similar. They were mass produced and even the signatures will look greatly alike because they were inscribed by an individual with that job. As I understand it the variable are; A) One smith who signed for other smiths as well as himself, the signature then being call "Daimei". These are generally range in quality of inscription from quite nice, to at least legible. They tend to be on better works of more prominant smiths. B) One particular who's job it was to inscribe the blades that were made by smiths in the factory. This "specialist" (and I hesitate to use the term for fear of the context) is called a "Nakarishi" and these types of signatures are called Nakarishimei. These look choppy and angular but are still legible even if not particularly pretty. These tend to be on medium to lower quality productions. C) Either of the above that inscribed swords with a downright ugly style of mei called "kazuuchimei". "Kazuuchi" means mass produced with little attention to any real quality at all. These signatures generally resemble a chicken that has tracked ink across the nakago. The kanji look like a series of arrows that point in various directions and can be difficult if not impossible to discern. These are on the lowest quality blades and become more common as the war progressed and quantity really began to trump quality. Someone more versed in Gunto may correct me on the particulars, but these characteristics have been a point of observation to me over the years.