Muramasa...classic gimei?

[Stephen]

Wouldn't it be under the ana?

[Gakusee]

Yes, I agree Stephen. The ana normally is sort of between Mura and Masa. Also, the vertical lines of Mura are nice and parallel in Shoshin. The jiri is also a bit off. 

[Stephen]

Someone's liking it.

https://buyee.jp/item/yahoo/auction/g1025528838?

[SteveM]

It's a nice-looking sword from the pictures. Ubu, good length, excellent hada, excellent hamon... Very early registration: 1951.

Either someone thinks it has a chance at being a Muramasa blade, OR they are taking a gamble that it will paper to a decent smith if the fake Muramasa name comes off. Of course it raises the question: if its so promising why didn't the owner already put it through shinsa, or remove the mei and put it through shinsa?? 

Hidden flaw? 

[Gakusee]

Steve M

I think someone bought it for “bragging” rights. The buyer knows he is not buying a genuine zaimei Muramasa (these are well over $70k for a papered daito and over $30-40k for the short swords) and the seller knows he is not selling a genuine Muramasa. 
 

If we go into the actual sword, it looks like a nice Shinto sword. I note that:

- it does not seem to have the nagare and “not-so-pretty” hada of a genuine Muramasa

- the yakiba lacks the kinsuji and sunagashi and some other niesuji one often encounters in Muramasa 

- also the hamon neither seems symmetrical nor has the “ha-kissing” low tani that characterise this family

 

I suppose someone bought a nice looking (mumei after mei removal) Shinto sword for  around $4.5k.