Ray Singer

The blade is signed Tomotsugu. It is unclear which specific smith this is.

Sekishu ju Uji (suriage Ujishige)

Thank you Michael, I was not aware that the Toshiro had been revisited as far as saiha. Separate to that specific sword, there is an openness to award juyo and higher to a sword that is felt to be saiha (if it is otherwise deserving and an important reference example).

Juyo Shintogo Kunimitsu (saiha) and Tokubetsu Juyo Toshiro (saiha).

Noshu Seki ju Yoshisada saku

https://www.google.c...rome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Seki ju Niwa Kunihide

Josiah Boomershine. https://www.facebook...m/josiah.boomershine

A skilled sayashi can craft a rough tsunagi based on the shape of the koshirae and then adjust to fit by seeing where the tsunagi has contact points. I have done this process myself. It is achievable without the original blade to work from.

Agreed, thanks for the correction Steve.

The blade is signed Nagayoshi. The tsuba is signed Shoami Sadashige.

Asano Kanezane https://www.Japanese...dex.com/kanezane.htm

Please see below for information on this swordsmith. https://www.google.c...=mobile-gws-wiz-serp

Echizen ju Kinai saku

In 'terms' of Koto. Simply a typo.

And for a blade, it is typical to have had many mountings over time (shirasaya and koshirae). In almost no cases would a blade of this age have its original shirasaya or koshirae from the time it was made during the Muromachi period.

I'm terms of Koto, this refers to a time period. Please see below. https://www.touken-w...through-the-ages-en/

A sword with a gimei (fake inscription) will not receive kanteisho (certification papers). I would enjoy the sword as it is.

Hi Gus, it may be easiest to keep all the photos in one post rather than managing several parallel posts for the same sword. These papers attribute to a koto Sukesada working in the late Muromachi period, circa Tensho era. Bizen Osafune school.

Bizen no kuni Osafune Yasumitsu.

Kanekage

Signed Tanba (no) kami Yoshimichi. Unfortunately though this does not appear to be an authentic example of his inscription. The blade looks to be Showa era, and it is not uncommon to see gimei ( false inscriptions) purporting to be famous Shinto swordsmiths produced at that time.

While this article does not specifically refer to tsuba, the truth holds. https://web.archive..../20-go-80-norishige/

The last thing that I would want to do is discourage an incoming new enthusiast, so please don't take this in a discouraging way, however there is no final authority who can give an answer that conveys absolute truth. If a piece is not signed, then there is always some degree of uncertainty on an attribution. In the sword world, there are attributions which change from one level of paperwork to another. With fittings and swords both, there is some degree of bucketing where an item may receive a safe attribution if the answer is not entirely clear. Collecting Japanese swords and fittings needs to come with some acceptance of the fact that there may be no absolutes and that sometimes it's enough to own a masterfully made object even if you'll never know with certainty who made it.

Here are two books which give insight into the process and timelines. The latter for WWII production. https://www.amazon.c...n-Kapp/dp/1568364318 https://www.Japanese...auty-by-tom-kishida/