Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Dear Jon.

 

Please add your name to your posts, you can set this up in your profile.

 

Oh, and while your'e about it some pictures would be a help on this one.

:)

 

All the best.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Thank you for the information!! Anyway to guess on the style of the sword for dating purposes. Signed on the side facing out when the blade is facing down, Tachi style

Posted

Jon, an important thing you need to learn is how to look at a blade's sugata to make an estimation of its jidai. In fact, that's the very first thing you should look at, not the mei.

Posted

I agree 100% I wish I knew how. From opinions, only from photos all suggest Suguha. The line appears faintly and somewhat parallel. It is on it's way to a trained sharpener who is going to polish a small window area and examine the tip to make sure it is still tempered.

 

I have had estimated dates from 1400 to 1675. I am excited to learn more because I love history. I do not want to pour cash into it until I learn more about it's condition.

 

I have had several people comment not first or second generation Kaneuji which I believe but I would like understand how they see that? Is it the style of blade or the tang. Or is it the Hamon or curvature.

Thanks

Posted

I know you are new to all this terminology, but I hope it is going to better than a "trained sharpener" as that is not how swords are polished. The mei, or signature, as well as the actual features of the blade are how the various generations of smiths using a name are determined. There are also a lot of gimei, or fake signatures on swords, even old ones like yours.

  • Like 1
Posted

I have had several people comment not first or second generation Kaneuji which I believe but I would like understand how they see that? Is it the style of blade or the tang. Or is it the Hamon or curvature.

Thanks

 

 

Kaneuji (shodai) is a very big name and his signed works are not that common (red flag). Mei seems odd, the level of wear is not the same for each character, so i wonder if nakago was not artificially aged. 

 

Also, there is a dot on your mei i can't find on any oshigata i own (Mino to taikan, Fuhishiro, Iida koto taikan and so on)  see pictures below 

 

 

I found one with this kind of dot on a shinshinto tanto sold by Ginza Choshuya 

 

http://ginza.choshuya.co.jp/fs/sale/touken/901_1000/922_kaneuji/922.htm

post-373-0-08924400-1570783081_thumb.jpg

post-373-0-28591100-1570783142_thumb.jpg

Posted

You are not the first person to mention the difference in wear. I sent photos to professor at Princeton he was very sceptical that it genuine signature, believing that it would have been added perhaps several hundred years later when the wars were over and adding big names to help sell swords was done.

 

I have reached out to several well known dealers and the consensus is that it is an old Tachi style katana. Dates given have been broad from 1400 up until 1675. This is obviously conjecture as they have not seen it in person. Woody Hall is going to polish a window area to see if it is worth polishing the whole sword. He will check the spots that are showing to see if it can be polished out or if the underlying steal is showing. It has been polished so many times not much of the cutting edge remain, he will also check the tip to make sure it still has not been damaged beyond repair.

 

All in all as a novice I am most interested in it's age and history and preserving it in the proper way.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...