Wakizashi Blade (Yoshimichi 吉道?)

[Fleck]

Good evening gents,

 

Any toughts on this blade? 

It measures about 40 cm in total (from the point to the end of the nakago) and about 31 cm from the point to the ha-machi/notch.

 

The mei looks 吉道 to me, so I guess it's made by one of the Yoshimichi's? I've noticed that there were many smiths that signed with Yoshimichi, is it possible to find the right one?

 

Can someone tell me how old this blade might be plus any other interesting details?

 

Cheers and thank you very much,

 

Fleck 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SwordGuyJoe]

Search for oshigata for the different smiths and compare against your mei (which you got right with Yoshimichi). The blade looks late Shinto-Shinshinto. That may help limit the pool.

[Fleck]

Morning Joe,

 

Thanks for the info! I've done some searching on the internet and stumbled upon site's like japaneseswordindex.com but wasn't really able to find oshigata for smiths named 'Yoshimichi'. Any tips were I could search?

 

Thanks,

 

Fleck

[DirkO]

Hi Fleck, try the Mishina school, lots of Yoshimichi there, however your kanji michi seems off....

[Jean]

First, try to pin down who is this Yoshimichi. Use Markus Sesko book, list the Yoshimichi signing nijimei and you will narrow your research.

[Fleck]

Thanks guys, will try to check it out!

 

@Dirk: What do you mean it seams off? Something wrong with the mei?

 

Do others agree that this blade could possibly be from the late late shinto/shinshinto period, based in how it looks in general and the appearance of the nakago?

 

Fleck

[Jean]

Fleck,

 

The nagasa is 31cm. It is a wakizashi but could be classified as a sunobi tanto and surprisingly, it is shinogi zukuri. It is perhaps machi okuri due to the ware at the level of the mune machi. Totally atypical as such swords generally are hira zukuri. I'll say Shinto.

[Fleck]

Fleck,

 

The nagasa is 31cm. It is a wakizashi but could be classified as a sunobi tanto and surprisingly, it is shinogi zukuri. It is perhaps machi okuri due to the ware at the level of the mune machi. Totally atypical as such swords generally are hira zukuri. I'll say Shinto.

 

Thank you very much again, Jean!

 

What exactly does machi okuri mean?

 

So the shape is indeed common for a wakizashi (shinogi zukuri), but you would suspect a tanto shape (hira zukuri) since you think it could be a sunobi tanto as well?

Is it to small to be classified as a wakizashi? I read that blades from 30cm long are concidered as wakizashi's? It could be a ko-wakizashi though, since it's not much longer than a tanto...

 

Just for my own understanding, should we consider this blade as a ko-wakizashi, or just a regular wakizashi? The shape of it 'confirms' that it can't be a tanto, since they mostly feature the hira zukuri instead of shinogi zukuri, like this one. Besides that, the blade length just fits (by 1 cm!) into the wakizashi-category.

 

Is it a cheap/poor blade, or has it just been used/sharpened a lot over the years? Any suspicions that it once was much longer?

 

 

Fleck

[paulb]

Fleck

Sunobi tanto/ko-wakazashi tend to appear interchangeably. one describes a small wakazashi the other an oversized tanto.

Machi Okuri means the border between blade and nakago (tang) has been moved forward towards the point.

If your blade had been greatly shortened then the original signature would have been removed as blades are shortened from the nakago. If it has been greatly shortened then the mei would be a later addition, either attempting to record the original smith or more likely just purtting a well known name on a fairly ordinary blade.

regards

Paul

[Fleck]

Fleck

Sunobi tanto/ko-wakazashi tend to appear interchangeably. one describes a small wakazashi the other an oversized tanto.

Machi Okuri means the border between blade and nakago (tang) has been moved forward towards the point.

If your blade had been greatly shortened then the original signature would have been removed as blades are shortened from the nakago. If it has been greatly shortened then the mei would be a later addition, either attempting to record the original smith or more likely just purtting a well known name on a fairly ordinary blade.

regards

Paul

 

Hi Paul,

 

Thanks for the explanation of machi okuri.

Does it seem like it was once greatly shortened, or does it look alright? At least to me the proportions (lenght of the nakago compared to lengt of the blade) look quite right.

So do you guys have the feeling that this is a sunobi tanto/ko-wakizashi, or just a normal, although at the bottom of the lenght-scale, wakizashi? Or can it be considered all 3 at the same time, depending on how one looks at it?

 

Does it look used/sharpened a lot? If so, for which purpose could this blade have been used? I understood that there almost weren't any real wars in Edo period (especially during Shinto), so what would you use such a weapon for then? Were they heavily used during training, or maybe for other tasks?

 

An finally, could this blade have been used in a daisho-setup together with a katana, or would it have been to small/short for that?

 

Sorry for the many questions, but I'm new to this field and like to know as much as possible...   I really appreaciate your time to answer me!

 

Fleck

[paulb]

Fleck

Part of the problem in helping is you are  looking for definitve answers and regretably I dont think they can be given. What can be said is the following:

 

1. The condition of the blade prevents a great deal of assessment as to what it is. To make such a judgement you need to see the hada (weld pattern of the steel) and the hamon (hardened edge) Neither of these are visible in your images. So you are left with the shape. One way to tell how much a blade is polished down is to look down on it along the top edge. look at the difference in thickness between the nakago and the blade. The condition of the nakago makes it appear to be late, i.e shinshinto. If there is evidence of heavy polishing i.e. the blade is greatly thinner than the nakago it means either it has been hugely abused in a short life, or it is the top end of something else with a nakago reformed and mei added.

2. Many more wakazashi than long swords exist. This is because only Samurai were allowed to carry long swords but merchants et al could carry wakazashi. They were made in great quantity in the Edo period with the top work being lavishly fitted with very high quality fittings. These were purchased not only by high ranking Samurai but also wealthy merchants. (Remember much of the national wealth was held by the merchant class, while samurai were often impoverished.)

3. You own sword looks like a run of the mill work with lower end quality fittings. Just looking at it  statistically it is more likely to have been carried by a merchant than a samurai. The fittings would suggest they were not at the top end of their profession.

4. Daisho come in all lengths and some have tanto rather than wakazashi and some have much longer secondary blades, it was just down to the  preferance of the samurai carrying them (provided they remained withn the laws governing maximum length) I think it very unlikely that your sword was ever part of a daisho.

Sorry if the above sounds negative. It isnt meant to. What you have is an authentic Japanese blade which is at least 150 years old and may be a lot more. It isnt a national treasure, but equally it is not a Chinese fake which often appear here as peoples first buys. So well done on that score.

I am sure many others will have already suggested this but if you are keen to understand the subject more can I suggest your next investment should be in one or some of the very good books recommended on various posts on this site. They will help you understand what you are looking at and where they fit in the overall scheme of things.

regards

Paul

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Fleck,

Other than Boy's Day swords, nothing (or at least nothing worth owning) was ever made 31 cm nagasa and shinogi zukuri.  Your sword doesn't look like a Boy's Day (they tend to be minaturized tachi or katana with a more slender profile and greater curvature) so I think it is greatly shortened and your signature must be gimei.

I also can recommend books and study.  Imagine you're trying to collect old master oil paintings with minimal study.  Not very likely you'll walk away from a flea market with a real Vermeer but that's exactly what you're attempting with Nihonto.  Try to get to a sword show and handle as many good pieces as you can.  Keep asking questions but see if you can find the answers yourself before asking others (google would have explained machi okuri).  Get good books and read them twice.  The more you know before you buy, the happier you'll be with what you buy.

Grey

[Fleck]

Paul and Grey,

 

Thanks for your honest opinions and explanations.

I wanted to know the 'truth' about this particular sword, that's why I entered the forum in the first place.

 

Good to know a lot more about it now, since I'm not someone who wants to believe something just based on feelings or speculations. 

 

I'll definitely be looking after the books mentioned on this forum and will follow your advise.

 

Of course it's a bit disappointing, but at least it's a 'real' old Japanese sword, although of poor quality and from a later period, and not some modern fake.

 

Cheers,

 

Fleck

[Brian]

Can you post a pic of the whole blade next to something for scale? I don't think it's out of the question that it is a Boy's Day sword with a dedication mei. Unlikely, but let's rule it out.

 

Brian

[Fleck]

I'll try to make another photo of it as soon as  possible.

The blade isn't really thinner than the nakago, so it probably wasn't resharpened too often then.

 

Although a lower quality sword and not attractive to the serious collector, can't it be considered as an original short Japanese wakizashi? Its length namely does fit into the mimimal lenght a wakizashi should have and all the parts seem to be at least 'original' Japanese from before 1900.

 

Do you guys at least agree with Pauls conclusion: ''What you have is an authentic Japanese blade which is at least 150 years old and may be a lot more. It isnt a national treasure, but equally it is not a Chinese fake which often appear here as peoples first buys.'' ?

 

Cheers,

 

Fleck

[Jean]

Agreed with Paul at 100%

[DirkO]

Agreed with Paul at 100%

+1 - Paul's very knowledgeable, as is Jean - so it's safe to trust their advice

[Surfson]

HI Fleck.  I saw that sword on eBay - did you buy it or is it still active in an auction?   If it's still active, it's probably best to say so, since some members prefer not to talk about swords that are in auction, while others don't mind.  I didn't pursue the sword when I saw it for several reasons.  First, it appears to have been buffed, dulling the shinogi line and making it difficult to see any of the activity, either hamon or hada.   Second, it has a large pit in the vicinity of the kissaki that doesn't look like it will be easily removed by togi.   Third, I'm not sure that it is in the mishina school, which would include Tamba no Kami Yoshimichi based on what I think I can see of the hamon which appears to be a simple suguha hamon.  Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.  

[Fleck]

Thanks Dirk and Jean!

 

HI Fleck.  I saw that sword on eBay - did you buy it or is it still active in an auction?   If it's still active, it's probably best to say so, since some members prefer not to talk about swords that are in auction, while others don't mind.  I didn't pursue the sword when I saw it for several reasons.  First, it appears to have been buffed, dulling the shinogi line and making it difficult to see any of the activity, either hamon or hada.   Second, it has a large pit in the vicinity of the kissaki that doesn't look like it will be easily removed by togi.   Third, I'm not sure that it is in the mishina school, which would include Tamba no Kami Yoshimichi based on what I think I can see of the hamon which appears to be a simple suguha hamon.  Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.  

 

I don't know if this particular sword is or was listed on eBay. As far as I know it's not for sale on the internet at the moment.

[Surfson]

No worries Fleck.  I think that the may is closer to Yamato Yoshimichi than the Tamba group.   Here is a link.  b

http://www.nihontocraft.com/Yamato_Yoshimichi.html

[Fleck]

Looks a lot like it indeed!

Probably a dumb question, but why is the mei on 'my' blade only showing 'Yoshimichi' and not the 'Yamato-part'? 

 

Fleck

[paulb]

Fleck

I am sorry I seem to keep coming in like the negative old **** and attempt to dampen your enthusiasm but in reality the mei on the Yamato blade does not look a lot like yours. They are the same kanji, yes but there the similarity ends. Yours is much more crudely inscribed and the end result lacks quality.

The reason that old two characters appear could be because whoever did it was trying (or appearing to try) to record who the blade was signed by before it was shortened (unlikely) or they just wanted to put a good name on an unsigned work.

Unfortunately I doubt we will ever know.

I have a basic rule when trying to assess swords, the more complicated the story I have to construct to explain what I am looking at the less likely it is to be true.

Regards

Paul

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Fleck,

What I said earlier put another way: no decent swordsmith ever made a 31 cm shinogi-zukuri sword (unless it was a boy's day sword and I don't think this is one of those).  I think gimei on a greatly shortened blade (probably a broken katana fragment) is the most logical answer, and if I'm correct there is nothing to be gained from reaseaching the mei.  Your time would be better spent in reading Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords.

Grey

[Jean]

What Paul says is true and the precisions given by Grey are also true. You've got a piece of a genuine Japanese sword.

[Surfson]

I agree with Paul, Grey and Jean, Fleck.  I think that your mei is "trying" to be the Yamato mei.  Buy lots of books!   PS, Grey has a book selling website that is very good.  

[Fleck]

All,

 

Thanks, everything is clear to me now! Although not the best news, it's always better to know the truth!

Why would they have made a new small blade out of a part of another blade? Was it always ment to 'fool' collectors/buyers, or was it intended to be used as a blade/wakizashi by a merchant or someone like that? The whole set up, so the blade with tsuka and saya etc. looks to be a complete sword, which was made to fit together the way it now is. On top of that, it looks quite old and somewhat used.

 

It's still a difference (at least to me) wheather this sword was made like this as a fake wakizashi, or that it was made, say 150 years ago, like this for someone who couldn't afford an expensive wakizashi. The mei could ofcourse be added quite recently... Or do you think the whole set up, as it now is, is recently assembled?

 

Fleck

[Jean]

Fleck,

 

Generally (at 99%) no one will create a special Koshirae for such a blade. This one has been assembled, when? I don't know. You can find in Japan hundreds of koshirae bit and odds, everything is possible. The blade was not created Shinogi zukuri tanto/sunobi tanto as stated by Grey. It was shortened. It would have been easier to make it hira zukuri.

[Brian]

Fleck,

It is a real sword and an antique one. Call it recycling. If a sword broke, they were too expensive to throw away, so you would make a shorter one from what is left.

No matter what this turns out to be, there is little doubt it is real, old and a genuine sword.

I am not 100% convinced it is from a broken katana (not sure it isn't either) ...still would like to see something next to it for scale. But it isn't a fake sword.

 

Brian

[paulb]

Reusing blades is classic recycling. in some cases it enabled someone to preserve at least part of a blade that was important to them. Remember that making swords has always been an expensive process so to be able to re-use part of an otherwise destroyed blade makes good economic sense and enables someone to sell to a lower level of clientelle.

Once again regarding this blade

1. It is an authentic blade at least 150 and possibly more years old

2. The nakago looks to be newer work suggesting it has been reformed. I dont think this has been done recently i.e. within the last 50 or 60 years.

3. The mei is poor quality and I think gimei. May have been added when the blade was shortened or some time after to attempt to add value.

4. The koshirae are also lowish quality. Overall the package has been put together for someone of limited means or possibly for export. All things Japanese were hugely popular in Europe and the USA in the last quarter of the 19th century and all and every art form was exported and purchased with enthusiasm. This may well have been assembled as a tourist piece at that time.

I dont thinkthere is anything else I can add and furthr speculation would be just that and not add anyhting definitve to what has already been said by Grey,Jean et al.