Mei Translation Type 3 Gunto

[MacTheWhopper]

I was interested in purchasing type 3 gunto with the following signature. The price seems to be reasonable though it appears the sword has had work done on it. Any help is appreciated.

[SteveM]

Looks like 祐国 (Sukekuni). 

Date is 昭和二十年一月 (January 1945)

[Bruce Pennington]

Kenny,

I once owned a Feb '45 Sukekuni.  I wonder why the box is missing around the kanji for the "kuni" on yours?  Just another example showing that the Japanese weren't flawless perfectionists in their work!  is yours in the standard tan fittings?

 

Here's the mei from mine:

[SteveM]

國 (or 国 in its abbreviated form) has a calligraphic form that is very highly stylized. The stylized form has no box around it. It is one of those calligraphic forms that look absolutely nothing like its normal form, and makes people scratch their heads. 

 

https://word.4ndex.com/name/2-1/215-kuni.html

 

Plus, if I'm not mistake there were at least two gunto smiths who used the name Sukekuni. I don't know which one this is. His calligraphic style should give him away. 

 

 

[Peter Bleed]

I can't get a "Kuni" out of this nakago. And IMHO the suke part is pretty dodgy.

In a real sense, tho, that doesn't matter. What this sword tells me about is 1) the tragedy of Japan's involvement in the War, with them trying to produce swords when aircraft carriers and tanks were deciding the conflict, and 2) the clear evidence that swordsmithing in Japan is a complex - well- "art" that involves thorough mastery of blacksmithing and tangential crafts like signing an art name with a chisel.

I find this sword tragic.

Peter

[SteveM]

You don't see the resemblance?

 

 

[Peter Bleed]

Steve,

Thank you, "YES" I see the resemblance. And I assume that this sword was made by a fellow named Sukekuni. Your help and guidance is always important to us. In this case the swordsmith may have been aiming at a distinctive style, but to my eye it does not look to have been skillfully rendered. And this kind of stylistic refinement hardly seems worthy the moment, especially when it turns out that the smith went back to the BOX Kuni a month later.

Peter

[tbonesullivan]

For the large scale production during WWII, would the smiths always be the ones signing the blades? Or would they have an apprentice or someone else add the Mei and nengo?  

[Kiipu]

Thanks SteveM, learn something new everyday around here.

[Shugyosha]

8 hours ago, tbonesullivan said:

For the large scale production during WWII, would the smiths always be the ones signing the blades? Or would they have an apprentice or someone else add the Mei and nengo?  

 

No they had a guy called a Nakirishi who would do the signatures. Probably the same in Bizen and Mino during the 16th century during the days of mass production.

[Nobody]

31 minutes ago, Shugyosha said:

 

No they had a guy called a Nakirishi who would do the signatures. Probably the same in Bizen and Mino during the 16th century during the days of mass production.

 

When I first saw the term "Nakirishi" at THE Japanese SWORD GUIDE (japaneseswordindex.com) more than ten years ago, I could not understand what the term meant. Many years later I realized that it meant Meigirishi/Meikirishi (銘切師).

[Brian]

Thank you Moriyama san. I have corrected that page of the JSI

[george trotter]

Thanks for that Moriyama san,

I always just assumed it was Nakirishi as that what was said...so Meikirishi it is.

For members not familiar with Nihongo, this means, literally:

Mei-kiri-shi which means Name-cutting-person, as in the guy in the factory who sits there signing dozens of smith names all day.

Regards,

 

[MacTheWhopper]

On 1/16/2022 at 5:49 AM, Bruce Pennington said:

Kenny,

I once owned a Feb '45 Sukekuni.  I wonder why the box is missing around the kanji for the "kuni" on yours?  Just another example showing that the Japanese weren't flawless perfectionists in their work!  is yours in the standard tan fittings?

 

Here's the mei from mine:

 

 

That is correctr, Bruce, It was plain tan fittings