Mark

kiku ichimonji. you see that on some showa dirks and swords, think that signature is in reference books

munechika

Jan-Wouter Thijssen ---- a manji symbol and a swastika are different, they are reversed. But i understand if someone has strong feeling they look similar at a glance i don't like short (under 15") shinogizukuri wakizashi, at shorter lengths i like hirazukuri. not sure it is a deal breaker but not something i like. Same for shinogizukuri tanto

looks like Masayuki showa 18th year 9th month september 1943

News of the Las Vegas show was well received in San Fransisco. There was a lot of interest and a number of tables were booked. Now that it is the next show on the calendar i will be working to promote it. If anyone has questions please email/message me.

Thanks Steve and all who assisted. i appreciate it

since you mentioned Sa i will try Sairen

Tom It is b gunto mounts couple of inches suriage

ok, with further clues i now guess Kongobei

i would have to look him up but just from the picture i would say Showa era circa 1940

i have a katana. it is suriage. on one side i see Tempo 9 th year 8th month then "Michi" or something, i don't understand what that may mean after the date, maybe more that was cut off? the other side is a challenge for me i can make out a few kanji but can't understand the meaning, again maybe some is missing any help appreciated mark

i will guess tametsugu

did you ask the polisher for recommendations? Usually the polisher has a relationship with habaki makers and shirasayashi. The polisher deals with a lot of blades that need shirasaya so it seems reasonable he has options, who has he been sending his swords too?

Steve thanks. that is helpful. It is hard for me to figure the purpose and motivation for doing the inscription. If someone in this country did it recently i would think they would copy a simple known example. If the 無持之所拷胴落 was done then the date added later why would someone add the date where they did, they would start with 享保 so why put it on the polished part, they could have written it next to the other inscription. Its not like they started then ran out of room for the end, i guess they could do it backward and end up on the blade but seems strange. And why add a date, the inscription could stand alone and i don't see any benefit to having that date added. Anyway a conundrum. I always think of the motivation, if someone is trying to "tart up" a blade to increase value there are plenty of references to copy. Anyway maybe eventually i will come to some conclusion. I do appreciate your patience helping mark

Steve is it possible to get the romanji for the kanji, it is challenging to try and get anywhere with the questionable kanji. Probably never figure out what it is intended to mean but i will work on it.

Steve thanks! I had not thought of the date being added after the inscription, interesting idea. The whole inscription is inlaid with copper (maybe) so i thought it was all done at once but i guess the inscription after the date could have been just carved and when the date was added (if it was) then the whole thing inlaid to give the idea it was all done together. But why add a date? And why that date? Doesn't seem to have any logical reason. I had guessed it was done by someone who was not an expert, like maybe a samurai or someone in the "sticks" and that is why it is like that. i am probably wrong. It seems so strange that it would cause more concern than increase value so can't see the upside for whoever did it. I thought it may be a test but also wondered if it was information about an owner, i just coundn't make anything from it. Thanks for the look and suggestions. I will keep working on it, any other suggestions welcomed mark

the sword is signed Bizen norimitsu (sue koto). on the other side is this inscription --- it is inlaid with a soft metal, maybe copper. Strange that it starts on the polished part of the blade. I can read Kyoho 11 3rd month (written without the kanji for year), but i am lost with the rest. With the date it was clearly added after the sword was made. Any help appreciated!! Thanks mark

yes i agree it is clearly just a poor gimei. I only posted it as it is the first i have seen with a stamp. i knew what it was when i got it, no worries about being gimei. i know it is not the signature of a Showa era smith, i noted in the title it is a gimei of a big name. I have seen many of these, just strange it would have a Showa stamp. Just thought it interesting so i posted it. Has anyone else seen a Showa era sword with a signature of a famous older maker with a stamp?

has anyone seen something like this before? Maybe i have just missed it, but it seems unusual. I came by a katana signed Tsuda Sukehiro, looked obviously gimei but i was surprised to see it had a Showa stamp. Is this unique or have i just been missing them before? I have seen plenty of Showa era swords with big name signatures but never one with a stamp of any kind

i don't recommend removing the handle of an NCO sword. there is nothing on the nakago that will help and too much chance of damaging the sword. the handle looks like it is brass. if so the only NCO swords i know with brass handles are post war copies

thanks Ray and Steve. good to know. i appreciate it mark

i appreciate you taking a look. thanks!

Ray thanks! does it have any meaning? maybe the name of the owner or similar? seems a bit unusual. appreciate it mark

thanks in advance. i was going to skip asking as the habaki is not that well made so i figure maybe it is nothing, but it would be nice to know appreciate the look and any help mark

the second does look like kanenori to me