mdiddy

Ludolf, Is there a sayagaki on the shirasaya by chance? If so, it might contain some additional info that the papers do not. With 9 generations of a Sue-Seki smith I expect it would be hard to track down info specific enough to separate them all. Matt

Hello, I would like to ask for help with the mei on a Kai Gunto. I make it out so far as 'Amateru Yama ___ ___ Ba Kitau Kore'. First blank may be Fuji(?) and second blank may be another form of Teru(?), yet neither makes sense to me unless I have interpreted kanji for Yama and Ba incorrectly. Usage of Ba makes me think it could be an elongated signature for Inaba, but would be the first to date I have seen. Any insight would be greatly appreciated and I plan to use this for commercial purposes. Thanks for the help. Matt

I have little more to add besides what's already been said so I'll just pile on and say that Mark and team did an outstanding job organizing the show. I thought there was a lot of foot traffic, some great bargains, and no shortage of opportunities to see and handle some good swords.

Chris, For the date you multiply the smaller number if it comes before the larger number and add it if it comes after. In this case the date would then be 1926 + (2 x 10 -1) = 1945. Can we see photos of the mei? If your drawing is correct I agree its likely Yasumitsu. I think there was one working in Seki during Showa period. Here is another to compare to: http://home.earthlink.net/~ttstein/yasumit2.jpg Matt

Hamabe used kesho yasuri. Was takanoha yasuri prevalent when these smaller wakizashi were popular in shinshinto?

I would suggest Edo period Seki Zenjo school. I have had a couple before with similar gunome midare that reached up to the shinogi.

This was a great and challenging exercise. It was hard to pinpoint a specific smith based solely on hamon (and maybe kissaki and bo-hi). Just knowing hada in conjunction with hamon would have been very helpful. For example, being able to interpret chirimen hada from Rai hada for #2 or observing matsukawa hada for #4. #3 was especially challenging because I think it shows conflicting attributes (maybe why shinsa gave it Den Chogi). I found it particularly confounding because of the yakitsume boshi with hakikake. I chose Enju for #1 because of the suguha and what looked like a second line of nie paralleling the boshi. Aoe Sadatsugu for #2 because of chu-suguha, nezumi ashi, prevalent yo. Shizu for #3 because nothing else seemed to encompass Soshu and Yamato and because I did not think Grey would have the gall to post a Masamune oshigata (psychology did play a failing part in my answers). #4 was a bit of a stab with Shikkake and considered a suguha based gunome with threads running through.

1. Enju 2. Aoe Sadatsugu 3. Shizu 4. Shikkake

Takayama-to Tanrensho ni oite Ujifusa Tsukuru kore.

Looks to be signed 'Bishu Osa...' and dated to Meio period (1490's) if legitimate. Could we see pictures of the blade and the rest of the nakago? Maybe also zoom out and show us the tsuba and kozuka too. Matt

Maybe it has to do with the connection to a museum giving the items legitimacy that they did in fact come from Iwo Jima. That at least is a departure from the standard eBay auction stating the same. Pretty incredible results though.

The NBTHK official mentions star stamps and western steel usage, but doesn't mention Showa or Seki stamps much less show a clear distinction between Showato and Gendaito in his letter. Its seems like the NBTHK official may not know a Star stamp from a Showa stamp. I agree. Given the Japanese market, I expect the rarity in Japan of any stamps on swords contributes to a lack of robust knowledge on which stamps mean what. We are spoiled to have access to so many Showato! And it's not as if the Japanese dealers didn't have the opportunity to buy in bulk for dirt cheap large quantities of Showato and RJT blades throughout the 70's and 80's.

Maybe not all star-stamped swords are able to be licensed because they lack "artistic value". The author of the letter says as much by saying 'most' instead of 'all' in his last sentence, acknowledging the system is not foolproof and some do get licensed. There is a wide range of yet-to-be determined artistic quality of star-stamped RJT swords. Kazu-uchi mono are traditionally made too after all.

I wonder if shinae (cracks not wrinkles) along the mune could come from issues during yakiire or adjustments to sori after yakiire. I inspected a well mounted unokubi-zukuri tanto by a Jo Saku Shinshinto smith once. The tanto had deep sori, however the unokubi-zukuri portion of the mune was strewn with cracks along the mune. I assumed it must have happened during yakiire or after if the smith tried to adjust the sori but I do not know for sure. I might have saved some photos and if I can find them I will post them.

Art or artifact? I remember it being fairly hadatachi.

Joe, Here are some pics of the Masayasu that I had as an example. I would be curious to see Jon's too. Matt

And you are very insistent that the blade is Sue-Soshu. Could the blade not be polished down? Not all Kanbun era Bungo swords have thick kasane. As you say there are no clear absolutes. Like a Shinto wakizashi?? Show me an ubu example. Your previous examples to justify Sue-Soshu school had great sori. Many schools have running itame hada with jinie and chikei. Kantei is meant to separate not aggregate. What sets this blade apart that confirms it is Sue-Soshu? It certainly is not hamon, it is not sugata, it is not even hada. So only the not-so-agreed upon opinion of this thread confirms it is Sue-Soshu?

Based on the observations you listed - iori mune, 21 inches long, itame hada, suguha hamon, nioi-deki - the only resemblance to Sengo is that it is nihonto. These observations describe many, many, many schools and swordsmiths. Without a Sengo connection and trying to back into an answer from it, how could you arrive at a Shitahara kantei based only on your observations??

Per the blades in the sample links, the blade in question has nothing to do with katate-uchi or Sengoku timeframe based on sugata and sori:

Mei: Bishu ju Masayasu Kitau Kore Mano Masayasu - Slough pg. 108. I think he made mostly gendaito. I had one sometime back that showed a prominent, yet coarse, itame/masame hada and an active suguha.

Per Kokan Nagayama, Bungo swordsmiths tempered in nioi deki and nie are seen sporadically. See here: http://www.nihonto.com/abtartbungo.html. Bungo school thrived in Edo period. Many, many, many schools made suguha hamon. Why not consider some of them too, particularly if the kantei point of Shitahara style O-hada is not present?

Fumbari is usually a little more pronounced I think. Here is a good example of fumbari: http://www.sho-shin.com/biz3.htm

1. Ubu, ha-watari of 53-54cm 2. Little to no sori, straight like Shinto 3. Looks like typical early Edo wakizashi Consider the lack of sori in your sword as compared to the examples in the two links you share. Notice how the older blades have deeper sori. I think this is more in line with expectations of Muromachi period katate-uchi. Hamon is a pretty big missing characteristic. But I do not know Sengo school well enough to comment about suguha examples. Kokan Nagayama does not mention the possibility in his book. However, adding sugata to the list of missing characteristics should start pointing us to a later time period in my opinion.

What similarities do you see with Sengo school? Just the nakago? When I think of a Sengo school blade that is not katana length, I think of this:

What led you to Shitahara to start?