Nihonto student

Dear John, I agree with your opinion in general, but my answer as specified was not aimed at judging this case, it is only for completeness of information... you have all the experience to make these considerations but Minh does not yet, so it seemed right to inform him of the story behind green papers...for me the key word regarding a possible purchase is "awareness" if you are aware then some choices can be subjective, but you will not regret it. Regarding the blade: The price is not that low, it does not make me scream at the deal of the year. The blade is in Japan so as always I see no reason not to have it papered, so I would ask the seller for mediation by paying a deposit fully refundable if the blade doesn't pass, if the blade pass I would pay the related certification costs + extra for the service (Obviously estimated beforehand) if the seller refuses I would pass. Kind Regards Giordy

Dear Minh, without going into this specific case of attribution, I think it is useful for you to read this article since I think it is the real answer to the title of your post: https://web.archive.org/web/20210123052725/https://blog.yuhindo.com/green-papers-no-papers/ You will find many posts about this argument on the forum... the advice I want to give you is therefore to focus on the study of blades with reliable certification and only when you have gained skills move on to the dubious ones. Regards Giordy

I'm not very experienced with nengo, someone else can possibly correct me but I think it's December 1631 because I consider 1624 in the count, if you look at the link info it says that Kunitsugu received an honorable official title of Echizen Daijo in the 11th year of the Kan-Ei era (1634) so 1624 falls into the count. I understand well what you mean, we all want perfect blades but then we have to deal with the wallet...

Hi Adam, Full translation: Heianjo Fujiwara Kunitsugu https://nihontoclub.com/smiths/KUN1550 Nengo should be: twelfth month of the eighth year of the Kanei era. His master was Dewa Daijo Kunimichi (Some accounts say he was Kunimichi's son) you can find other info here https://www.samuraimuseum.jp/shop/product/antique-Japanese-sword-wakizashi-signed-by-kunitsugu-nbthk-tokubetsu-hozon-certificate/?srsltid=AfmBOoobMbF1o3C2xoHmmAPGYjaiHHMkrxpubv6eMDoKOv2ZjazyQ2Qq Nice blade though, shame about that opening on the kissaki. Regards, Giordy

As always accurate and punctual like a clock

I didn't find anything about it except a Morikuni mentioned on Shoshin https://www.sho-shin.com/sai13.htm in the Eisho period, but in my library I don't have much on Bungo maybe someone else in the forum has more references... in any case some photos of the sugata and closeup on hamon/ hada would be useful maybe to contextualize it better, it doesn't seem like a target for Gimei, although anything is possible, it might simply not be listed. Giordy

Dear Minh, the translation is Taira Morikuni, no time to check but given the signature: School: Taira Takada Period: Muromachi (Second half to late), Province: Bungo Generally the Muromachi Bungo blades have Taira writing, while the later blades Fujiwara. All the best Giordy

From what I see I agree with Jacques, nakago and yasurime match for me but the mei seems to have several inconsistencies with 1,2,3, 5 gen. (I would exclude shodai in any case because used ha - agari finish) however I would like to see the blade to verify if there is coherence.

Dear Philippe, it would be helpful to have detailed photos of the sugata, hamon, hada, boshi and nakago mune which is an important point for the Nobutaka line. Regards, Giordy

Dear Lev, just my opinion: to me nakago looks ubu so if we add the machiokuri difference (+-) to the current nagasa we get the classic uchi-gatana nagasa (Around 65cm). Shinogi-ji looks masame, while in the Ji mainly itame...for me = Muromachi Mino, the hamon reminds me Shigaseki school. I think I see some remnants of a signature? If so, the starting position seems unusual to me compared to the machiokuri, it could mean that the signature was added after the shortening. Kind Regards, Giordy

From the photos it is not so clear to me but regarding the notes the only thing with which I feel like disagreeing is the hada, in the salient characteristics of this school the Masame is found in the shinogi (In this case as there is a double groove it cannot be appreciate) while in the Ji I would expect mostly Ko Itame as typical for the Settsu region. All the best

Regarding the Kissaki, the one on your blade is to be considered O kissaki https://swordis.com/blog/types-of-kissaki/ , the broken tip is not a negligible flaw in my opinion, while I don't want to go overboard on the opening in photo 1-18 because it is too blurry. There are people who can live with defects, others just want perfect blades... in any case the defects are inevitably reflected in the evaluation and for Shinto blades in general the defects have a greater specific weight than a Koto blade.

Left : almost Suguha with ko ashi. Right: Fukuro choji with ko ashi and yo

Hello Cronos, paper attributes the blade to Tango no Kami Kanemichi Shodai (1 gen.) Mishina school, around the Kanbun era Hawley rating: 60 points Fujishiro: Jo saku From what I see: Koshirae and fittings are of good quality and in very good condition, the blade is in good condition but far from excellent, I seem to see that the tip of the kissaki is broken then I don't understand if the one towards the center of the blade is a superficial scratch or something more serious, however from a sale point of view I would consider a polishing to reshape the kissaki and increase its attractiveness, as a Shinto O suriage blade in general does not tend to be very attractive on the market. BTW I like the hamon some traits remind me a of an O Kanemichi that I treasure, Thanks for sharing. Giordy