nakago translation request

[yanteedog]

Hi to all , is there a chance of translation . My next door neighbour has had this sword in his loft for fifty years or so his grandad bought it back from ww2 . I offered to see what I could find out about it for him. I haved looked at quite a few other requests for mei translation but nothing looks similar. I was given this translation from another sword site( seki ju kane sako) then I was advised to try your site, any info would be gratefully recieved.

 

Thanks in advance

 

Ian r tudor

 

[Brian]

˙pɐoldn-ǝɹ puɐ ǝʇɐʇoɹ ǝsɐǝlԀ

˙uʍop ǝpısdn sı ʇI

 

Brian

[hxv]

Kaneyoshi????

 

Hoanh

[Stephen]

Brian...LOL i knew you were good with the PC but thats funny!!

[Gabriel L]

Kaneyoshi????

Hoanh

 

Definitely Seki (?) (?) Yoshi Saku.

 

I'm not entirely sure of "ju Kane," I want to keep looking...

[kunitaro]

岡田 兼義 作

Okada Kaneyoshi saku

[Gabriel L]

岡田 兼義 作

Okada Kaneyoshi saku

 

 

I was about to say I thought the second character was Ta (Da), which would mean the first wouldn't be Seki. But I was still looking for possible readings.

 

I still find the "Kane" character odd, but that is more likely because I am still a beginner at reading mei, and not because there is any good reason to doubt it.

 

Thanks!

[cisco-san]

Of course the Kanji for Seki (関) and Oka (岡) are quite different - but on a tang they seems sometimes very similar, especialy for beginners like me

[yanteedog]

Many thanks for the speedy replies , is there a date and positive id here , is there truth in the saying that the hamon on the blade is as identifiable as a signature or unique to each smith.

My ignorance shows with the upside down picture

[Gabriel L]

Many thanks for the speedy replies , is there a date and positive id here , is there truth in the saying that the hamon on the blade is as identifiable as a signature or unique to each smith.

My ignorance shows with the upside down picture

 

Ian,

 

Assuming the reading is correct, and that the difference in mei quality from the example posted is due to typical wartime variation (kazu-uchi mei, nakirishi mei, etc.):

 

The style of the mei, the state of the nakago, the name used, the fact that it is a WWII bringback, etc. all suggest that it is a WWII gunto (military sword) by the Seki smith Okada Kaneyoshi. There is little reason to suspect gimei (false mei) in this case because it is a lower-value smith making gunto. To be more specific he was rated chu saku (middling quality, 5th rank out of 7) by Kurihara Hikosaburo, and 4th seat out of 5 by the 1941 Shinsaku Nihonto Denrankai. Many such smiths in Seki mass-made swords for the military; a few of these swords were made via traditional methods (folded tamahagane steel, water quench), most via hybrid or shortcut methods (unfolded mill steel, oil quench), and quality varies greatly from smith to smith and sword to sword. Generally though these blades are significantly less valuable than an average traditional sword.

 

I am of course assuming there is no inscription on the back of the nakago (or surely you would have posted it).

 

Although workmanship (hamon, hada, shape, nakago, other details) can absolutely be distinctive enough to kantei (appraise) a sword to a specific smith, that is generally more true for art-grade swords, in polish, by established traditional smiths. Gunto, especially mass-made swords, often are not in good polish and not distinctive / well-made enough anyway to allow for easy kantei. Still, a given sword is compared against known examples by the same smith to make a determination.

 

It is never possible to say definitively how good a sword is without seeing the actual sword, and you have only posted one side of the nakago. Why don't you post more photos of the blade? Nothing more can really be said until we at least see it. Mounts too, if it has any.

[yanteedog]

Many many thanks for your help ..this is the sword in its entirety.

http://s962.photobucket.com/albums/ae103/yanteedog/?action=view&current=20131010_144508_zpsd5e867c5.jpg

Thanks again

Ian

[Gabriel L]

Thanks for the photos Ian.

 

I'm afraid I don't have much substantial to add. These photos confirm that it is definitely a WWII gunto (as in, the blade and mounts were made for each other, it is not an older blade remounted), which in turn solidifies the identification of Okada Kaneyoshi (there wasn't really any doubt before, but making an ID solely on the mei is not ideal). It seems to have a genuine hamon, but as is unfortunately often the case with WWII bring-backs, the poor condition obscures any finer detail. It is accordingly difficult to say for certain if it is an oil quench or water quench, if it has a hada, etc. However if I absolutely had to bet, I would suspect oil quench, non-traditional make. That is not an appraisal, just a hunch based on the information available. An experienced person might be able to tell more in person, but maybe not.

 

Anyway that's all I can really offer. Regards,

 

—Gabriel

[yanteedog]

Thanks for the photos Ian.

 

I'm afraid I don't have much substantial to add. These photos confirm that it is definitely a WWII gunto (as in, the blade and mounts were made for each other, it is not an older blade remounted), which in turn solidifies the identification of Okada Kaneyoshi (there wasn't really any doubt before, but making an ID solely on the mei is not ideal). It seems to have a genuine hamon, but as is unfortunately often the case with WWII bring-backs, the poor condition obscures any finer detail. It is accordingly difficult to say for certain if it is an oil quench or water quench, if it has a hada, etc. However if I absolutely had to bet, I would suspect oil quench, non-traditional make. That is not an appraisal, just a hunch based on the information available. An experienced person might be able to tell more in person, but maybe not.

 

Anyway that's all I can really offer. Regards,

 

—Gabriel

hi again, just a thankyou gabriel for your help and the information.

regards ian