fromaes Posted May 22, 2018 Report Posted May 22, 2018 Nagasa: 64.5cm (cutting section on the blade) Sori: 1.62cm (curvature) Nakago: 19.4 cm Hada :Ayasugi or itame ? Hamon: ? Boshi: ? KISSAKI O 3 cm Mune: Mitsu Kassane: 7.2 cm MIhaba:2.96cm Tsuba: w 8,7cm / Thickness 5.2 mm Can this sword be identified on the basis of these high definition pictures? I already presented this sword several years ago but with low resolution photos and I realized by browsing the site that it was very unsuitable for comment. I hope that with these new photos and description and measurements of the blade it will now be possible to obtain more information on this sword. I would also like to know if the tusba/Tsuba/Fuchi date from the same period as the blade. Finally, on the I seem to see the rest of writing but I'm definitely not sure ... I thank you in advance for the interest you will bring to my sword and hope that its identification will be possible Jean-Luc CERJAK Quote
CSM101 Posted May 22, 2018 Report Posted May 22, 2018 "Can this sword be identified on the basis of these high definition pictures?" Simple question, simple answer: No. And I think that even with the sword in hand you will only get time and province. My best guess would be something Mino-related. Sengoku. Uwe G. Quote
fromaes Posted May 22, 2018 Author Report Posted May 22, 2018 Hello Thank you for your clear answer. I would also like to know if the tusba/Tsuba/Fuchi date from the same period as the blade and of course your opinion and comment on this sword would be welcome. Best Cerjak Quote
ROKUJURO Posted May 22, 2018 Report Posted May 22, 2018 Jean-Luc,it is not always the case to have the KOSHIRAE or parts of it from the same period of time as the blade, but it could occur. The later the blade, the more likely it is..The TSUBA looks like an attempt to reproduce some kind of a TEMBO style. Difficult to say when it was made, but my impression is late EDO. I do not see a MEI or remains of it on the NAKAGO of your blade.You may have seen that the KISSAKI (blade tip) seems to suffer from a KARASUGUCHI which is considered a fatal flaw. There is a considerable WARE in the HAMON as well. Quote
Brian Posted May 22, 2018 Report Posted May 22, 2018 Could be an opening. Need to see the other side. Quote
fromaes Posted May 22, 2018 Author Report Posted May 22, 2018 Could be an opening. Need to see the other side. other side Quote
vajo Posted May 23, 2018 Report Posted May 23, 2018 Ken you be right. Sunagashi and Hakikake. Nice boshi. Quote
fromaes Posted May 23, 2018 Author Report Posted May 23, 2018 Thank you all for your contributions to enlighten the neophyte I am.So if I understand well the blade could from the 16th century and the mount early 19 th century?Can you tell me what are the characteristics of the blade that can date this period? Is it as a whole a good piece? The defect revealed in the photos on one side of the KISSAKI is it serious ? and does it affect the value of the blade significantly?Finally I was unable to identify the type of Hada: Ayasugi or itame? as well as the type of Hamon.Sorry to ask all these questions, the answers are certainly obvious for the majority of the members but nevertheless the subject requires a lot of knowledge for a beginner... best regards Cerjak JL Quote
CSM101 Posted May 23, 2018 Report Posted May 23, 2018 Dear Cerjak, in the end it is the question "What is it and what is it not?" It is a katana, osuriage, mumei (shortened and unsigned). Judging by the shape and the tang it is not ShinShinto or Shinto. So it is Koto. And end of the Koto period = Sengoku. Hada is ko itame (pic 4). It is not Ayasugihada. For comparison 2x Gassan. You cannot find some special traits in the sword because it is a kazuuchimono (mass production). And most swords came either from Bizen or Mino. I think Mino is more likely. The defects in pic 3 and 6 are fatal. So the value is less than zero. From a collectors point of view. Sorry, if I got you depressed by now. But don´t worry. My first sword was even worse. Uwe G. Quote
SAS Posted May 23, 2018 Report Posted May 23, 2018 I looked at pics 3 and 6 that Uwe referenced; i don't see those as fatal flaws, though they certainly are not desirable. it is an honest sword, showing its age; good for learning from and about. Enjoy it for what it is, and continue the lengthy learning process. 1 Quote
vajo Posted May 23, 2018 Report Posted May 23, 2018 From my point of view i see ware, no fatal flaws. The sword is a weapon of its time. Not an art sword. It has value and the koshirae looks not bad. As Uwe said it is from an important time in the Japanese history, the warring states. Quote
PNSSHOGUN Posted May 23, 2018 Report Posted May 23, 2018 My impression is the same as Uwe, late Koto Mino school. Quote
Gakusee Posted May 23, 2018 Report Posted May 23, 2018 Delamination / crack in the hamon is a fatal flaw. The hamon is very vulnerable in photo 6 Quote
fromaes Posted May 24, 2018 Author Report Posted May 24, 2018 Once again I thank you all for your answers and have share your knowledge. I am well aware that this katana is far from perfect and is not a master piece too .however I ‘m still satisfied with its acquisition because my goal when buying was to find an ancient sword from a time when battles and conflicts were rife. With a blade not restored and somehow "untouched" I accept the defects this blade that bears the mark of centuries and with its later mount but of correct quality. It's more the historical side that guides me, may be not a good investment but I do not look for a perfect piece with a real market value . If the blade was with mei that would have been perfect piece for me. Best Cerjak JL Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.