Suriage blade? Learning, but need guidance!

[jensen6865]

Hi all,

 

I am loving this site and the information and exchange. This blade I began post originally in "Dad's Japanese...". Hopefully I have a little more understanding and vocabulary now to intelligently express thoughts and questions.

Hopefully I have attached a set of photos showing enough to began to understand this blade. Its nagasa is 26 5/8". Nagato is 8". Motohaba is full 1 1/4", sakihaba is full 1". Sori is strong 5/8'. At first I couldn't see how some instantly could tell by sugata an idea of age/period.

I ran a 12" ruler along the mune and it is much more curved toward munimachi. Definitely koshi-sori.

 

Question- I am correct that this is an o-suriage blade, perhaps cut down from a Tachi. Does the distance between the mekugi ana give a reliable indication of the original length?

 

Question- Some of the pictures show a little of the hada of the blade. One member mentioned a lot of polishes over the years perhaps. because of how small the ha mamachi is,would the motohaba have been considerably wider originally?

 

Question- Is there a relatively easy and safe method to bring out the boshi, to see it?

 

Please feel free to correct and enlighten me as I learn. Oh, the blade weighs 1 lb, 15 oz or .90kg. Sure feel substantial!

 

Thank you , Dan

[b.hennick]

Hi Dan:

Try looking in different light for the boshi. I have found that sometimes the boshi shows better with some oil on the blade. I use choji oil but a light machine oil (sewing machine oil) works OK.

[jensen6865]

Hi Barry,

 

Thank you! I will try some oil and see if I can identify it.

 

Dan

[Geraint]

Hi Dan,

 

As with almost everything about this hobby there are no simple answers but here are some thoughts. Almost all swords of any age have seen a number of polishes and as this does remove metal then it will reduce the motohaba slightkly. However if the sword is not suriage then looking at the mune will tell you more, the thickness of the polished part of the blade can be noticeably less than the nakago. As we are looking at a suriage sword this probably won't show; if it was evident then the nakago thickness would probably have had to be adjusted when it was shortened.

 

A lot depends on what period you decide the sword comes from. Before shortening the sword would have been polished to a a point just a little below where the habaki covers the blade. Can you see where the surface of the nakago changes? If so then this would give you some idea of the length before suriage. It is possible that the lower mekugi ana is not the original as another may have been lost with the portion of the nakago that has been removed. So lets imagine that the lower one is the original and looking at the images your sword has been shortened by between 2 and three inches. That looks to be about the amount from the image. If so the total length will be in the region of 29 inches. Now if that agrees with the expected length of the sword given it's period of manufacture then we are in the money.

 

A koto sword of about this length with a full kissaki and a narrow shinogi ji compared to the overall width would suggest a late Muromachi sword, hence katana rather than tachi.

 

If nothing else this will at least have given others something to shoot at. If you have not got it then "Facts and Fundamentals of the Japanese Sword" by Nakahara is worth the modest investment.

 

Have fun.

[jensen6865]

Hi Geraint,

 

I see what you mean. I went and measured and the distance between is 2 1/4", which would give a nagasa of 28 7/8".

I'll see if I can find that book-Thank you for the direction.

 

Dan

[Geraint]

Dan, don't rely on measuring the gap between the mekugi ana, look at the nakago surface and look for the changes in surface and patination. They should tell you where the suriage has taken place.

 

All the best.

[jensen6865]

Hi,

 

OK... Looks actually like it a little more than just the distance between them.

 

Question- Did they ever reforge just the nakago end to soften it to work it more easily? This nakago is so thick and wide compared to so many I have looked at. Might the tempering color at one point be the result of it?

 

Alright, actually questions! Thanks Dan

[jensen6865]

Hi all,

 

Was doing some more comparing of sugata. These two look very, very similar to me. One is listed as a Ko-Mihara ca.1350 on http://www.nihonto.ca. When they are sized the same and brought next to each other (I'm sorry I couldn't get the picture of both together to work) they look identical in sugata and although the sori may look slightly different when these two photos are viewed the listed sori is almost the same.

 

What elements are used to determine period? Are they used in a list of priority or is the result of lots of experience? I am pretty certain I know the answer to this one... but can't a guy hope?

 

Thanks, Dan

 

P.S.- I found and ordered the "Fact and ..." Book.

[Geraint]

Did they ever reforge just the nakago end to soften it to work it more easily? This nakago is so thick and wide compared to so many I have looked at.

 

Bear in mind that what you are looking at is part of the original blade and not the nakago as it was first formed. The hardened edge, ha, is often softened so that it can be worked, the nakago is often reworked but not reforged.

 

If you look at the oshigata of the Ko Mihara you will see that the suriage has been done well, not so on yours I fear. Look at the finish and the way the mune of the nakago relates to the hi and mune machi.

 

What do you think the original length of the Ko Mihara might have been?

[jensen6865]

Hi,

 

Yes, after looking at the Ko-mihara nakago I really how roughly done this one is! I am afraid the original sword maker would have probably rolled over in his grave! Busy or not very good-who knows, but just how the filing is done..., but the actual hammer work(?) to reshape thickness and taper is pretty good.

The Ko-Mihara nakago is only about 6 1/2"+ long, this one is about 8".

 

Question-Is there commonly a big difference in them?

 

Answer-(OK- this sure feels pathetic, me trying to answer a question) That Ko-Mihara blade only shows polish just a little onto nakago, so at first I thought it was not much suriage, but then I thought, tapering/reshaping nakago could get rid of polish lower down, then looked at the mekugo ana and I don't have a clue now.

 

Question-Is it possible they betray much suriage?

 

Thank you so much, I really appreciate learning and being directed. Dan

[Marius]

Dan,

 

it would help a lot if you posted some decent pics of the nakago...

[jensen6865]

I will get on that and try to get some good views as quickly as I can.

 

Thank you, Dan

[jensen6865]

Hi all,

 

I got some fairly good pictures of the nakago. Hope the angle and light show what is needed. Getting better at pictures that are in focus.

 

Thanks, Dan

[jensen6865]

Hi all,

 

I finally got around to cleaning and oiling the blade and I can just make out that the boshi is Ko Maru. The hamon and boshi are the same line heading through the yokote onto the kissaki.

I have read Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese swords and learned a lot.

Question- Is it really a possibility that this blade is not really o-suriage at all? It doesn't seem to fit anything I see on the blade at all. The hamon runs so far down into the nakago and how it is all shaped wouldn't fit if I understand what I am looking at.

Question- Is it possible that the machi being small is not just from polishing, but because they wanted the original habaki to fit? Sure seems from what he says about the thickness that this one is not really polished down after suriage.

 

Thank you, Dan