Ray Singer

My understanding is that the cutoff is either 1868 or 1876 depending on your reference. So, early Meiji perhaps. Different authors treat this differently, with some ending Shinshinto with the Edo period and others using the Haitōrei. Diego, if you have any books to share which indicate Taisho period falls within shinshinto I would welcome seeing them. - Ray

Yes, I am sure. Meiji and Taisho period blade are not shinshinto. Best regards, Ray

Diego, I think you may have misread the standards. - Ray

Nice find Jon! - Ray

I don't understand what you are referring to. Which Masahiro dai-mei pieces at auction and what is this new scholarship based on? Best regards, Ray

I would consider the preservation of a nakago in its ubu signed form as a factor in evaluating its condition. I also agree with the NBTHK that more leeway should be given to older swords in this respect, and that modification in Muromachi and later swords is less acceptable. Tokubetsu Hozon and Juyo are also about the rarity of the sword and its value as an important reference example. That is why tired early koto swords will sometimes pass Juyo, if there is valuable reference material contained in the nakago. Ray

The latest standards do seem to indicate that allowances will be made for famous smiths, however this sword was papered in 2013. At the time I believe Hozon was the best it could achieve and it may not have been resubmitted this year to attempt higher papers against the amended rules. http://nihontocraft.com/2015_NBTHK_Nionto_Tosogu_Shinsa_Standards.html - Ray

It is a mumei Muromachi period sword, which disqualified it from receiving Tokubetsu Hozon. - Ray

Please see attached. Best, Ray

Very beautiful, thank you for sharing. I likewise have a sandai dai-saku dai-mei which is of the same large proportions. He made a very beautiful jigane. Best regards, Ray

My guess is Tashiro Yamato (no) Kami Minamoto Kanenobu Saku Best regards, Ray

The mei is Kawabe Gihachirō Fujiwara Masahide, which is not the signature of any other smith than Suishinshi Masahide. - Ray

Reference link for comparison. http://nihontoclub.com/sword-images/16761/16808 http://nihontoclub.com/smiths/MAS102 - Ray

I would love a clearer shot of the nengo but I will go out on a limb and say it looks like an Eitoku date, which would place it with the Shodai in Nambokucho (if authentic). Best, Ray

I believe there is a nidai not present on the link above who worked circa Eikyo 1429-1441. Best, Ray

Appears to be Bishu Osafune Sadayuki. http://nihontoclub.com/view/smiths/meisearch?type=All&mei_op=contains&mei=Bishu+Osafune+Sadayuki Best regards, Ray

Unless research has been done regarding the nuances of his signature in different years, I do not believe that you can date the sword so precisely to 1942. There is no nengo (date inscription) on this sword. Regards, Ray

A while back (13 years ago?) I was considering a very heavy daito by Enomoto Sadayoshi. It was a blade with a thick Kasane and had a shinobi-ana. When I asked why, not having seen this feature on other works by Sadayoshi, I was told that the smith made this particular piece for use in tameshigiri and wanted the extra reinforcement. Best regards, Ray

That was my thought at well. It looks like a beautiful piece from the sandai. My impression is that it is not totally ubu though. The nakago appears to have been reduced (shaved back) from the nakago-mune side. Best, Ray

Yes, quite a beautiful sword. I shared this one on Facebook last night as soon as I saw it listed. Interesting to see the sashikomi polish. As far as what it might be lacking to achieve Juyo, wakizashi are always more difficult to pass. Best regards, Ray

There was also a 'Best of' list on the discussion thread below. http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/13791-ebay-shibata-ka/?hl=%2Bakimoto+%2Bakitomo&do=findComment&comment=145445 Best, Ray

Hi Jean, I admit it may be a stretch. I have a yari here that is exceptionally thick, perhaps 1.5mm. It was when held in hand that I could see that a reduction past the current hi would leave a sugata like the example here (the more 'normal' Kasane of a small ken). I would be interested in knowing the thickness of the sword we are discussing. Best, Ray

I have seen yari in which the piece was so polished down that the original hi was nearly gone. It is not impossible to imagine that this was a longer piece, the original hi has been eliminated, and a new hi added after the o'suriage process. Looking at the belly-effect (concave areas mid-blade) it is evidence that this piece has been greatly degraded over time (much metal removed). That would be my guess, a yari (not a ken) in which the kerakubi is gone and the current nakago was originally part of the blade. - Ray

Sounds a great deal like a sword I own. The commentary for this piece was that it greatly resembled Rai Kunitoshi, except for the o-maru boshi that is uncharacteristic for Rai, instead papering to Enju. Considerable difference in market value. Best regards, Ray

Sorry for the confusion, I should have simply checked the Archives from the beginning. I misremembered the sword in question and in fact it was a So-den Bizen Kanenaga rather than a Yoshikage. The Kanenaga is below. https://web.archive.org/web/20101213012623/http://aoi-art.com/sword/sale/10229.html Thanks, Ray