Mikaveli

Funnily enough, the Tadayoshi gimei was one of the main areas of my concern. There's a reference gimei (in the Nihonto koza?) that is a very close copy to the authentic mei. With the differences laid out side by side, I can see the delta - but being honest, I wouldn't have drawn the conclusion of gimei. So, I've seen a few obvious gimei, and I'm confident enough to identify them as such - but once things get "close enough" - the blade is plausible, the mei is very similar - I don't know enough to say with any certainty that it's genuine.

Just a guess, but if the intention was to hide the crack, they could have carved more material out. Instead, to me it looks like a crack formed along the horimono, not the other way round.

Indeed. 🙂 In my case, I'm trying to build a collection of particular smiths of the same school / lineage. Previously I've only bought papered blades, but I've just recently taken a punt on an un-papered blade. Sugata, workmanship and condition all look very good - but I'm only 60% confident on the mei. It's going to shinsa in June, so fingers crossed 🤞 At the very least, I'll have a very nice blade - but if it's gimei it doesn't really have a home in my collection.

So, do we have any idea how many gimei blades are out there? For example, do we know how many swords fail NBTHK Hozen (for that reason)? Do we know which smiths are most frequently targeted (Masamune 🙈 Kotetsu 🤔)? Also, is it common for naginata and yari to have gimei? Finally - do we have a rough idea (anecdotally is fine) how many are "good" fakes - showing research around the smith's style and mei, trying to fool experts - versus "bad" fakes - where the blade and signature are very obviously wrong, and would only fool the most ignorant?

Mine's only a fairly novice opinion, but the horimono appears very quickly done (mass produced), the edge / "hamon" looks artificial, the tang narrowing like a kitchen knife is unexpected - as is the belt holster. Other than pitting/ rust, I can't see any surface pattern or workmanship that would lead me to think it was traditionally made. What's the history of the item? Why / where was it described as a "seppuku knife"?

I don't think that's a Japanese blade / holster. Looks Chinese/ made for tourists to me?

The ebook is available on Amazon (at least in the UK) - however, due to rules about buying ebooks through apps (a Google Play policy), you have to go to the website to buy the ebook: https://www.amazon.c.../gp/aw/d/B0BXLT7VRN/

I would love to display bare blades, but both from concerns about oxidisation / rust and safety / security I eventually decided against it. In the end, I bought some oak mounts that screw onto my wall, and just display the koshirae (and NBTHK certs). The actual blades stay in their shira saya and only come out for cleaning and appreciation. 👍

I have seen that mentioned at times - where, for example, no stated percentage or composition is given (is it "pure" nanban tetsu, or does it just contain a tiny "sprinkle", for want of a better term) and it's really just a marketing ploy.

That's an interesting question. I've seen plenty of his blades where the ura side of the tang mentions being forged with nanban tetsu (lit. Barbarian steel). I've got swords of his with and without that information on the tang - what I don't know is whether only the blades that mention foreign steel on the tang use it (or if it was a general thing for him). Visually, for me, I've never been able to tell by appearance whether it's nanban tetsu or not (just read a lot online about its suitability/ effect of higher phosphorus content of imported steel)?

I was drawn to the gunome hamon, as all the examples I have of this smith in my collection are suguha. ...but being a shinto / early-Edo smith, I'm thinking there's probably a very nice (TH etc) example out there 🤞

Thanks, this would be atypical for the smith (Terukado), based on all the other examples I've seen. Interestingly (for my level of knowledge), the sword is still NBTHK hozen, which surprised me a little.

Ok, thanks - that was broadly my thinking too. Tired blade, polished until the core comes through.

What are these dark patches between the hamon and ridge line?

Ok, that's good - that's a starting point around what I had in mind.

So, on my internet travels I've found: http://asanokajiya.com/en I notice his kitchen knives have been discussed here. I wondered what the cost of a katana from him is (either direct or on the used market, if any are available). I'd assume they're expensive and with a waiting list - but if anyone has any knowledge I'd be interested to hear it.

Can't read the era, but it's 18th year of... Presumably showa period (1943)?

Seki arsenal stamp, smith is Kaneyoshi? Not certain - but I'll get my guess in before the experts arrive ☺️

Ha ha, well, I'll take the word of Markus Sesko over Wikipedia any day... For example, on the Wakizashi page it states 1638 (citing the Connoisseurs Book of Japanese swords) as the time when social groups were restricted in what swords they can wear: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wakizashi I'm assuming 1683 is a typo of 1638, and that 1638 was when non-samurai were prohibited from wearing daisho. The Wikipedia page you linked to cites no references, so without a more primary source, this seems most likely. In 1668, the muto-rei, that's when the length of the wakizashi was restricted to that of ko-wakizashi. Before that, non-samurai could wear o-wakizashi (if I'm interpreting it correctly).

Slightly off topic, but in another topic the standards around TH was being discussed. I'd already guessed that the standard varied by smith. I.e. it's more a "how important is this for preservation" rather than a strict, uniform standard of condition. The quoted text from Darcy Brockbank confirms this. ...and it's definitely something important to understand. Many new collectors (including myself initially) think of TH as a very high standard of condition - when in reality it can be relative (age, smith etc.).

Definitely looks reshaped to me. The hamon touching/disappearing off the edge is certainly a no-no for most collectors, sadly.

I'm not sure about all the sword laws, but according to Sesko, it wasn't until 1668 when the Tokugawa-bakufu issued the muto-rei, restricting non-samurai to (ko)wakizashi. So until then, merchants could have fairly long swords.

Could it be 七九 (79)? If it is メ九 ("mekyuu") this is basically equivalent to "M9" in English - just an alphanumeric code, I would have thought.

Interesting to hear, thanks. I'll pay more attention the next time I'm looking at it. 🙂

Do they ever do the inlay in a black / dark plastic? I've got a shirasaya with that inlay - and the same material where it closes together. Never crossed my mind it could be horn.