Jussi Ekholm

Thank you Moriyama for correcting the reading. I think very little features can be seen on the pictures and trying to identify based on them would be incredibly difficult. The signatures have good pictures and they can be the start of conversation. I feel we have been getting nice discussion in this thread overall, and I feel it is nice for the forum in general. We haven't even yet really touched on the koshirae (fittings) yet. That will be an interesting subject too as it is paired and themed koshirae. Maybe because of the current situation as I haven't seen swords live in long long time, I feel there are many very interesting items for researching popping up lately in the forum.

I think the first three are 傅駿州 - den Sunshū (Suruga province) and followed by Shimada Yoshisuke. NTHK tends to always use den in their attributions for mumei swords.

I think commercially NBTHK is the viable option. However off record I would personally value opinions of various people. As the information would be only for myself. Also NTHK offers shinsa option sometimes in the US, I think that could be something to look into too. Not sure when the next time will be when the team will be able to travel to US in the current situation. Lets see if I can do "tagging", for Taikei Naotane I know forum member Peter @BIG knows a lot. And for Jumyō I know member Malcolm @mecox is a good source. He is the author of English language book Mino-to: http://www.users.on.net/~coxm/?page=our_books you can also browse his website for some references. Unfortunately I don't have a copy of his book anymore as I intended to get one of the big Japanese tomes for Mino swords, haven't yet gotten one. I think this is the most elongated signature I was able to find with quick search: https://www.giheiya.com/shouhin_list/japanese_sword/katana/02-1110.html NBTHK specifies Shintō in brackets so they see this as Edo period work.

I don't too often comment on WWII stuff as it is so far out from my personal interests but I sometimes read the threads and I am usually amazed by the expertise you guys have with these items. Keep up the great work, it is wonderful to see your passion for the items

I think it is 水越 - Mizukoshi

I would be bit cautious about the Taikei Naotane. He is very famous smith and lot of false signatures bearing his name are out there. You can find lots and lots of reference signatures by him, I am not qualified to judge them as they vary a lot in form, style and execution. There are lots of different ones judged genuine by NBTHK that seem very different to my eye, so there is bound to be variation. One thing that makes me bit skeptical is the dating as it is dated to the month he died at the age of 79. I believe there are people who specialize in Taikei Naotane and can give you much better insight. I think the Jumyō might be from late Muromachi into early Edo period. Jumyō smiths were known to do that very long elongated stroke at the bottom character. However on yours it is even longer than on my reference examples. Perhaps that could be a thing to look for if some did longer one than others? I am just looking at the sword in overall and basing my estimation about the age on that.

It is wonderful naginata in full length Roy. I would second Geraints thoughts above. As this smith lineage is not famous there might not be too much data to base the information on. In general discussion chūjō usually means that he was given that specific ranking by Fujishiro in his book. I can not find this Naoshige (直茂) in Fujishiro and unfortunately I seem to find very few authenticated examples by various generations, the ones I did find are not dated but I focus on pre-Edo items and my references too. It could be plausible that the 1st generation did also sometimes sign in form that we are seeing on your naginata. Well worth further research in my opinion

Hello Alton, I do remember the discussion about Narishige. I had forgotten that highlighted page and that we probably discussed this sword a bit too. I wouldn't think gimei on this sword, just rather think it as (at least so far) unknown signature. I think the signature is legitimate on this sword. I think Michael has a point and it could certainly be pre-Ōei too, I see something from late Kamakura to early Muromachi as possibilities for this one. I believe the Bitchū Senoo Noritsune that Steve posted earlier is from Jūyō 53, unfortunately I don't have that book yet. That is the only (則常) Noritsune that has made Jūyō. The Noritsune (則恒) mei that Michael posted I believe it was judged as Ichimonji at Jūyō 18 but later revised towards Bitchū Senoo at Tokubetsu Jūyō 25. I think in general when Aoe smiths used 2 character mei, it was very rarely put so neatly near mune as on your sword. Later longer signatures were often on smaller characters and near mune. Have you tried taking an angled picture with a pointed light source, if it would be possible to see the actual hamon? This is an exciting sword. Do you have a picture of it with habaki on? Is this in shirasaya or in koshirae?

It seems like a very interesting tachi. As you said it seems to have signature Noritsune - 則常. However I think all recorded Noritsune smiths predate 1300, and I don't think this is as old. I do think Early Muromachi (c. beginning of 1400's) might be good viable age guess for this based on the pictures. I am liking the shape but unfortunately the condition might be bit lacking. Hard to estimate from the pictures but I am not sure if the hamon has changed a lot or if it was made in that way. I would think this tachi is in original length (possible slight machi okuri) and bottom hole being original and upper one added for katana style mounting. I think this is worthy of further research

I believe the sayagaki puts this towards Nōshū Seki jū Kanemichi - 濃州関住兼道 and dates this sword around Eiroku 永禄 (1558-1570). Thanks for posting this and it seems like a very nice sword. It is always very fun to participate in these and it gives a reason to tackle books.

Do you have a picture of the whole sword and tang & signature Alton?

They specify this as work of Nanbokuchō period - 時代南北朝 (Jidai 時代 - Nanbokuchō 南北朝)

I think my guess would be late Muromachi Mino - Sue-Seki, smith would be 兼X (some smith starting with Kane).

Same for me, looking at items is just so fun That particular wakizashi is far above my current budget but I find it interesting. NBTHK made the specification towards Naoe Shizu in brackets. Sometimes the differences between Shizu and Naoe Shizu attribution might be small sometimes big.

You guys are putting up amazing show

I think this might be the most interesting item of these Georg, do you have measurements for this sword? Few years ago at Samurai Art Expo in the Netherlands a Japanese dealer had a tachi signed Yoshitsugu (NBTHK stated unknown province and early Muromachi for it). Although the signature on that seems bit different to this one in style. There were many different Yoshitsugu smiths working during Muromachi and most likely some unknown ones too. I feel this is definately worth researching as it is interesting.

Very interesting item Georg, I would think it might be late Muromachi Masatoshi 政俊 who has been listed as Odawara-Sōshū smith. I think the 2 generations worked roughly between 1550 and 1600. Here is one reference item: https://tokka.biz/sword/masatoshi2.html

I am guessing I might know what item you are looking at if it is currently for sale with Japanese dealer. Very nice and wide profile but it could have lot of wear and condition might be iffy, the pictures are not the best but it is very interesting item.

I would guess it reads - 文政十一年仲春 - Bunsei 11th year (1828) mid spring (I am bit uncertain of my translation of this end)

This falls bit off my interest as I am into early swords, I don't have too much study material on these newer swords as they are not my focus. However I got intrested in this and took a look, and I am not exactly sure of the result. Someone more skilled in Japanese can make corrections. Here is history part of the Jūyō 42 katana entry - and my rough translation. 備中守康広は, 富田五郎左衛門といい, 紀州石堂派を代表する刀工で, のちに紀州から大坂に移り, 大坂石堂派の始祖となっている. 作風は, 御家芸ともいうべき備前伝で映りの立った鍛えに, 丁子乱れを得意としている. 銘文は, 初期には (於紀州康広), 或は (紀伊国康広) などときり, また (紀伊国當一康広) と當一を冠するものもある. 備中守を受領してからは, 表裏に銘をきり分けたり, この作に見られるように裏に菊紋を刻している Bitchū no Kami Yasuhiro was Tomita Gorōzaemon, swordsmith from Kishū Ishidō school. He later moved from Kishū to Ōsaka and founded Ōsaka Ishidō school. He is very skilled in Bizen style chōji midare and utsuri. Early signature styles were (於紀州康広) and (紀伊国康広) [This next part is relevant for the sword in question but I can't quite understand it], there is also style of signature (紀伊国當一康広). After receiving the title Bitchū no Kami, signature is now on both sides and Kikumon is engraved on to the back as seen in this work.

It is remarkable sword. However a small correction to Aoi Arts English description, NBTHK states in Tokubetsu Jūyō entry that it is Middle Kamakura Period. Unfortunately there is no clear and large picture of sayagaki but Aoi's English page state that Tanobe wrote it to Middle Heian, however their Japanese page has in description that Tanobe wrote Middle Kamakura Period in sayagaki.

I think there are lot of good things going on this sword, that can be said even without seeing it in hand. I feel often on average swords passing Jūyō in early sessions have quite high overall quality on average. Bit of "bro science" but I think there is also bit of data to back it up. Also I just found out that it had good praise in sayagaki by Kanzan as there was a thread about it too, this is also interesting provenance, (translation provided by Moriyama-san) - 宇土藩細川家旧蔵之一 – One of the collection of Uto-han Hosokawa family. Unfortunately the text entries in the Jūyō books on earlier sessions are often lot shorter than in more modern sessions.

Dont you just love it that they don't post a picture of the certificate, guess that serves a marketing purpose?... It should be NBTHK Tokubetsu Kicho (I think it translates to that in English) Daishō koshirae attributed towards Omori Teruhide based on the information provided by the auction house. Seeing the certificate would be nice to see what specific info it provides.

I think there might be some miscommunication with Aoi due to the language barrier. I am not too well versed in later smiths but I think the following. I have always grouped all of them under Tegarayama, perhaps wrongly (but it makes it easier for me to understand). I know some sources like Fujishiro list the first generations as Yamato no Daijō (大和大掾) because they used that title. From the 1st generation Ujishige (氏重) the lineage lived in Himeji city in Harima province. Himeji castle is probably the most famous in Japan. Now when you look at Himeji map, there is Mt. Tegara (手柄山) [Tegarayama/Tegarasan] in the middle of the city. This group of swordsmiths worked in this area. I think Tegarayama is in some sources only used after the 3rd generation. When Aoi is replying to you they are indicating [3rd gen. Ujishige (氏重) / 1st gen. Ujishige (氏繁)] in their answer. So they are not mentioning 1st and 2nd generations that signed with Yamato no Daijō as a possibility in their opinion. That is why they are saying only the 1st generation used 氏重. There is lot of marketing buff for it in the ad but I feel it is a nice sword in overall. Unfortunately I lack sources on the later swords but you can try to google Tegarayama 手柄山, Masashige (4th. gen Ujishige 氏繁) 手柄山正繁 who is the most famous and well regarded smith of the group, Ujishige 手柄山氏繁. The smith in question that changed the character is ranked chū-saku by Fujishiro. For Jūyō swords by Tegarayama smiths I believe 1st gen. (Yamato no Daijō) has 1, and Masashige has 14 items (including 2 daishō & 1 attachment Naginata for koshirae).

Here is the book entry for those interested of it. It passed long time ago in session 11. Congratulations of the item Jiri.