sa naginata ???

[bubbles]

hello everyone,my name is bubbles and would be grateful for any input you may have.i bought a sword 3 years ago knowing slightly less than i do now about katana.becoming curious as you do i had several people look at it all with different opinions.one said it looked like a 19th c copy another said he was not sure but it had age and another said he thought it was an old cut down naginata.having worked in engineering all my life all i can say is it is a fine piece of smithing.if anyone could help me research this further i would be most grateful.

 

 

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

For what i see, i can't say when this blade was made, but i can say the signature is not genuine.

[bubbles]

thanks for the reply but what does a genuine one look like and where could i see one.i believe that people copy famous smiths is there any referencies i could read.its an art in its self trying to follow these things

[Stephen]

Brian please sign off with your name per sign up rules, just cant bring myself to call you bubbles.

here is a scan out of the yoran

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Two other examples.

 

[bubbles]

thanks Jacques,that just confuses me more, is the one on its own also correct.

merci beaucoup,Brian

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hi, long swords, tachi, by Sa are extremely rare to begin with, most known works are tanto, and only one known signed example of a long piece extant according to Yamanaka, to say the odds are not in favor is an understatement. Also, "The only signed long blade is inscribed Chikushu Ju Sa."

 

Comparing this mei to those on pg. 451 in Fujishiro, tanto examples, does not look favorable (opinion). One problem with this mei (perspective) is that it is attempting to look like an original mei rather than simply being an attribution of sort. One way to find out for certain about the mei is submit this piece for shinsa.

 

That being said, the question remains 'what is this sword?' Its quite possible this is a Koto sword from what can be seen. Is it possible to see additional images with close ups and better lighting?

[bubbles]

Here's the best i can do - it's hard to take pictures in unnatural light (it's evening here).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards, Brian.

[bubbles]

 

[Markus]

I agree with Jacques that the signature in this case is gimei.

Brian, when you take a look at the examples provided by Stephen and Jacques, you will see

that the authentic signatures are always made up of a uniform width of the chisel, whereas the

vertical stroke to the left (the second strong when counting in stroke numbers) on your

"Sa" starts thick, becomes thinner around the center, and grows once more thicker at the

ending.

[bubbles]

CHEERS MARKUS,ANY IDEA WHAT IVE GOT THEN.JUDGING BY THE RUST FOR WANT OF A BETTER WORD AND COMPARING IT TO ANOTHER SWORD I OWN DATED AROUND 1870 IT WOULD APPEAR TO BE MUCH OLDER.

BRIAN

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hi, thanks for additional images. At this point, and, I could be wrong, I think we're looking at a Shinshinto sword, but wouldn't eliminate the possibility of Shinto.

 

(edit) looking at "real 'old' swords" helps establish a frame of reference >

http://japantrip.tripod.com/Japan/osafune2.html

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

 

On shoshin mei, the right vertical stroke never crosses the lower horizontal one.

 

 

 

About age, it seems to be kesho yasurime, so this blade is shinto or shinshinto but not koto.

[Mark Green]

My guess would be shinshinto.

Surely not 1400's /Sa

There were MANY smiths that signed Sa thought, in that period. They were gone by Shinshinto times.

Good looking sword Though. Looks very powerful.

Mark G

[leo]

Hi, Brian!

Interesting blade to be found in a military koshirae! A good buy!

It looks indeed like a Shinshinto copy of a late Nambokuchyo Yamato Shizu blade. The pictures do not show enough details to tell the date of manufacture precisely.

Judging from the style it could have been a much longer blade which was cut off considerably 200 years ago and then had the Sa-character scratched in. It was then shortend again during the Showa period to fit the military scabbard.

Regards, Martin

[bubbles]

thanks Martin,Japanese swords, its complex.as an amateur its taking me alot of time to understand Japanese terminology but happy time.getting back to the scabbard,on the handle is a mon of three oak leaves in a circle(yamaouchi-yamanouchi)does anyone know if this was normal on ww2 swords.

Brian

[Mark Green]

Check this out Brian.

 

http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~t-ohmura/gunto_002.htm

 

 

Mark G

[reinhard]

O-SA can be safely excluded on the basis of mei and sugata. That's about all we have for judgement, sitting in front of computer screens. There are two possibilities left: It is a gimei sword, as was suggested because of the yasurime, or it is a blade from O-Ishi Sa-school in Chikugo. They purported the famous name and used it without deliberatly cheating. This attitude can be compared with Mino smiths in Seki, using the "trademark" KANEUJI in a similar way during Muromachi-period. Without seeing the blade itself, any further conclusion is ridiculous.

 

reinhard

[bubbles]

thanks for the link Mark,very interesting and thankyou Reinhard,i know what you mean about seeing the blade itself.polihed blades are so hard to photograph and dont do them justice.think i need to find somebody to sit down with and have a good chat about swords.