BjornLundin Posted February 22, 2021 Report Posted February 22, 2021 Sun was out, and I thought to try to capture my 3 blades in the best light. Interesting to place them together. Sori for the "Morimitsu" wakizashi and wartime blade is very similar Will work on my photo skills. Also adding after carefully cleaning with a cotton tip the menuki and the kashira piece for the later wakizashi. Less dirty now. Wakizashi - possible bizen - possible Kyoto-Osaka - possible 1400-1600 period Katana - war blade from middle of 1500 Wakizashi - Bizen middle of 1600 1 Quote
b.hennick Posted February 22, 2021 Report Posted February 22, 2021 I suggest that you use kids foaming soap and a well used very clean toothbrush on the menuki and fuchi kashira. The soap comes in a bottle with a plunger top that puts out a ribbon of soamy soap. 1 Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 22, 2021 Author Report Posted February 22, 2021 Katana kissaki and comparission 2 Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 22, 2021 Author Report Posted February 22, 2021 The last two are the same picture but different orientations... 3 Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 22, 2021 Author Report Posted February 22, 2021 On the side was probably better? Comparing these "only" three blades, I think it is a clear difference of the hamon on either side of the blades. One side more refined and the other a little more hmmm... less? 2 Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 22, 2021 Author Report Posted February 22, 2021 Trying to catch the hada of the katana. The hamon-boshi is fainly seen on the kissaki, I am a bit afraid that it is going out. Hard to tell. Sorry for all the pictures, I hope you did not get bored. For me, this photo session actually made me enjoy the 1600 blade more. Found it much more alive now -Björn 1 Quote
JH Lee Posted February 22, 2021 Report Posted February 22, 2021 Thank you so much for sharing these! It makes me want to also get better at taking pics of my own blades.... 1 Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 23, 2021 Author Report Posted February 23, 2021 Tried a bit to analyze the "Morimitsu" Shinogi-zukuri Koshi-zori Tori-Mune? Gyo-no-Mune? Chu-kissaki Nagasa – 47.5 cm (original ~50cm) Nagago – 14.8 cm (oringial ~12.3 cm) Yasurimeu: File pattern, not clear. Possible Katte-sagari Sori Asai – 1.6 cm (Sori is ~1/3 from the nagato-gata Kasane – 0.61cm Mihaba – 2.8cm Motokasane – 0.67 cm Nagago-Kasane- 0.71 cm Sakikasane – 0.51 cm Kissaki – 3.1 cm Nagako gata: Kurijiri Boshi – Ko-Maru, kaen (one side) Ji-hada: Finely forged, soft-feeling ji-gane, no utsuri, Osaka-tetsu? Marudome-hi, Konuka or Ko-Mokume, Hamon: Nioi, O-choji Midare? Gunome? Different sides Soe-bi – possible added later I rather think originaly the Nagako started a few cm of the mekugi-ana due to difference of color of rust and filings. Then orginally the blade might have had a Nagasa of 55 cm. Im adding a bit of photos, super hard to take good photos. Need more practice and to get a camera stand. 1 Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 23, 2021 Author Report Posted February 23, 2021 My guess, is around murumachi to sengoku period (Kyoto-Bizen) but I am more leaning to Bizen. I also thinking abit that it has been shortened, if so maybe earlier namboku... ^^ I dont think based on the Boshi that it is more to shinto but the straight shape is a bit complexing. Please have a guess Quote
Jussi Ekholm Posted February 23, 2021 Report Posted February 23, 2021 That is good to take a moment and analyse what you have. I feel you are on the right track. I believe 55 cm would be overshooting but I think you are quite correct with c.50 cm. I think this picture in particular might help a bit. I would think both hi were done at the same time and they are executed quite well in my opinion. I made a very rough paintjob of this pic but as you are analysing well, I thought I'd ask how you think this part of the sword looked when you think it was original? 1 Quote
Mister Gunto Posted February 23, 2021 Report Posted February 23, 2021 Nice pics! I like that Bo-hi. Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 23, 2021 Author Report Posted February 23, 2021 Hi Jussi, I played around a bit with the nagako, see if I can take better pictures to analyze. I wonder if UV light help to get in more depth. It is not super clear, but it could be that the nagako was altered three times. The red and orange point to the original place, due to that it looks to have different underlaying patination and filing. Need to take better and clearer pictures Macro objective on my buy list as different filters The blue arrow point to the second differentiation place and I guess it is here the bohi was carved (ko-katana was made into a wakazashi and Morimitsu name was added? Just my guess. Possible how the date was added, this could be in the late 1400 to mid 1500 era. The third green arrow pointing to an area with bad, crude filing marks was probably made during the great war and fitted as a gunto. Another favo. idea that this made in kyoto in early edo period to a rich person. There were some information somewhere that a smith from Yamashiro school was "forced" to make forgery by the top boss. Need to verify this though Quote
Jussi Ekholm Posted February 23, 2021 Report Posted February 23, 2021 I was thinking about bit more simpler solution. Of course you have access to the sword and can see things differently than is possible through pictures. This would be the one possibility I see when I look at the pictures. (yellowish gold thing is supposed to mark for habaki). Red parts would be blade in the original length. Few things that made me think of this are the following, I do think the sword is in original shape, aside from moving the machi up. I see good shape to the sword when I look at it, and picture it as in my above picture. I can see this being a Muromachi Bizen wakizashi from 1400's to 1500's. Might be my eyes playing tricks but I might see some wear on the area behind my proposed habaki, which might indicate tsuba wear as also koshirae needs to be considered too. As the tang has only 1 hole, how has this been mounted? When you add tsuba & tsuka, where would the hole approximately be, would it be logical fitting wise too? 2 1 Quote
Infinite_Wisdumb Posted February 23, 2021 Report Posted February 23, 2021 beautiful blades @BjornLundin Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 24, 2021 Author Report Posted February 24, 2021 On 2/23/2021 at 10:08 PM, Infinite_Wisdumb said: beautiful blades @BjornLundin Expand Thank you, upping my photo skills with a better lamp + a fue computer filters. Kissaki love Quote
BjornLundin Posted February 24, 2021 Author Report Posted February 24, 2021 On 2/23/2021 at 8:37 PM, Jussi Ekholm said: I was thinking about bit more simpler solution. Of course you have access to the sword and can see things differently than is possible through pictures. This would be the one possibility I see when I look at the pictures. (yellowish gold thing is supposed to mark for habaki). Red parts would be blade in the original length. Few things that made me think of this are the following, I do think the sword is in original shape, aside from moving the machi up. I see good shape to the sword when I look at it, and picture it as in my above picture. I can see this being a Muromachi Bizen wakizashi from 1400's to 1500's. Might be my eyes playing tricks but I might see some wear on the area behind my proposed habaki, which might indicate tsuba wear as also koshirae needs to be considered too. As the tang has only 1 hole, how has this been mounted? When you add tsuba & tsuka, where would the hole approximately be, would it be logical fitting wise too? Expand I added a few more photos of nagako, looking from the top, I would agree with you . I guess the "notches" on the top would be from tsuba? Filings looks to go to that mark. 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.