Trying to identify maker Shin Gunto

[deadoscillate]

Hello! Would love some opinions on this piece. No arsenal stamp, two kanji Mei which I think is Shigemitsu, correct me if I'm wrong. Trying to determine if it is traditionally made and rough age if possible. 

 

Thank you

 

Chris H.

[PNSSHOGUN]

It could be Yoshimitsu, it does certainly look traditionally made and a potentially quality piece.

[Shugyosha]

Hi Chris, I think you're correct with Shigemitsu - 繁光

It's an unusual form of the kanji for "Shige" so he ought to be relatively easy to track down. There's a Suetsugu Shigemitsu signing in this way that looks a decent candidate but the military sword guys will be able to tell you more:

https://www.aoijapan.net/katana-fukuoka-jyu-suetsugu-shigemitsu/

 

[Bruce Pennington]

Chris,

Can you show the full nakago?  It helps guessing the age.  Plus, this one seems to be using 2 mekugi. 

[deadoscillate]

4 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

Chris,

Can you show the full nakago?  It helps guessing the age.  Plus, this one seems to be using 2 mekugi. 

Working on getting additional pictures, its being held for me by the seller. 

 

What is the significance of having 2 mekugi? There are 3 ana in the nakago, my guess is two of them were made for the gunto fittings?

[Shugyosha]

In an old sword it might suggest the blade was shortened. In this case it probably means that the owner preferred a “belt and braces” approach as two mekugi are less likely to break at the same time at a crucial moment. 
 

If the sword also has a third hole near the end of the tang it would be so it could be mounted as a katana or a tachi (edge up or edge down). 
 

Edit: sorry read your post properly after posting this, so see immediately above but your pictures will help. 

[deadoscillate]

2 minutes ago, Shugyosha said:

In an old sword it might suggest the blade was shortened. In this case it probably means that the owner preferred a “belt and braces” approach as two mekugi are less likely to break at the same time at a crucial moment. 
 

If the sword also has a third hole near the end of the tang it would be so it could be mounted as a katana or a tachi (edge up or edge down). 

 

Oh okay I see that makes sense. I looked into Suetsugu Shigemitsu, the extant mei examples don't really match up to this one in terms of style. I would bet its still most likely one of his, but kinda holding out hope on an earlier Shigemitsu.

 

I'll upload the full nakago pictures as soon as I get them.

[Kiipu]

11 hours ago, deadoscillate said:

No arsenal stamp, two kanji Mei which I think is Shigemitsu, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Chris, only two Shigemitsu 繁光 are mentioned in Swordsmiths of Japan by Markus Sesko.  One active in Genji 1864-1865 and the other in Shōwa 1926-1989.  Hope this helps in narrowing it down.

[Bruce Pennington]

I'll probably be corrected on this - @PNSSHOGUN - Type 98 tsuka ... should I say 'never'??? - don't have 2 mekugi.  So, I'd be tempted to say this is an older blade that already had the double ana at near the end of the nakago (not counting the third ana, near the lower one, as this was probably due to a re-fit earlier in it's life), and the second, higher, mekugi was installed simply because the second ana was already there, so ... what the heck, might as well use it!

[deadoscillate]

5 hours ago, Kiipu said:

 

Chris, only two Shigemitsu 繁光 are mentioned in Swordsmiths of Japan by Markus Sesko.  One active in Genji 1864-1865 and the other in Shōwa 1926-1989.  Hope this helps in narrowing it down.

 

That does help a lot thank you for the info! 

 

35 minutes ago, Bruce Pennington said:

I'll probably be corrected on this - @PNSSHOGUN - Type 98 tsuka ... should I say 'never'??? - don't have 2 mekugi.  So, I'd be tempted to say this is an older blade that already had the double ana at near the end of the nakago (not counting the third ana, near the lower one, as this was probably due to a re-fit earlier in it's life), and the second, higher, mekugi was installed simply because the second ana was already there, so ... what the heck, might as well use it!

 

Oh I see, that would make sense. Knowing that, do y'all think this was possibly an older unsigned blade and the Showa smith simply signed it for the gunto conversion? Can't imagine the odds that the Genji era Shigemitsu blade ended up in the hands of the Showa Shigemitsu, or that if it is the earlier Shigemitsu that the Showa smith who performed the conversion didn't sign it at all.

[Bruce Pennington]

6 hours ago, Kiipu said:

One active in Genji 1864-1865

 

13 minutes ago, deadoscillate said:

was possibly an older unsigned blade and the Showa smith simply signed it for the gunto conversion

No, I would, for now, assume it came from the earlier Shigemitsu, made for civil fittings, then re-drilled for the military fittings.  But still looking for more photos.

[deadoscillate]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Pennington said:

 

No, I would, for now, assume it came from the earlier Shigemitsu, made for civil fittings, then re-drilled for the military fittings.  But still looking for more photos.

 

Okay cool. Seller will get me the additional nakago pictures on Monday, I'll update as soon as I get them. Is there anything else you'd like to see while I'm getting more photos?

[mecox]

Chris,  It is most likely WW2 Shigemitsu.  Here are some other examples from page 45 (I note I have a few typos in here).

 

 

Your sword has a slightly different cut of Shigemitsu (繁)  but appears to be the same.  Yours also has kiri (horizontal) yasurime filing,  as opposed to oblique.  

[deadoscillate]

2 hours ago, mecox said:

Chris,  It is most likely WW2 Shigemitsu.  Here are some other examples from page 45 (I note I have a few typos in here).

 

 

Your sword has a slightly different cut of Shigemitsu (繁)  but appears to be the same.  Yours also has kiri (horizontal) yasurime filing,  as opposed to oblique.  

 

 

Thank you for sharing this, this is solid information. I guess I just don't understand if this is Suetsugu why his mitsu kanji is so different than all of the other mei attributed to him. Screenshots below for comparison.

 

This piece:

 

Extant examples of Suetsugu Shigemitsu:

 

 

For character 

[Shugyosha]

Hi Chris,

There might be any number of reasons, among them:

• He didn't physically sign the sword himself but had someone in the workshop carve the mei (not as weird as it sounds) if he was pushed for time;
• It's a short mei as opposed to the longer mei he used (might indicate a sword made for general sale as rather than made to order) so he might have used a more cursive style;
• He'd got a snoot full the night before he signed it;
• It's a false signature (gimei).

I take it that there's no date on the other side of the tang?

[deadoscillate]

10 minutes ago, Shugyosha said:

Hi Chris,

There might be any number of reasons, among them:

• He didn't physically sign the sword himself but had someone in the workshop carve the mei (not as weird as it sounds) if he was pushed for time;
• It's a short mei as opposed to the longer mei he used (might indicate a sword made for general sale as rather than made to order) so he might have used a more cursive style;
• He'd got a snoot full the night before he signed it;
• It's a false signature (gimei).

I take it that there's no date on the other side of the tang?

 

 

Right I don't recall seeing anything on the other side. 

[deadoscillate]

On 7/8/2022 at 6:18 AM, Bruce Pennington said:

Chris,

Can you show the full nakago?  It helps guessing the age.  Plus, this one seems to be using 2 mekugi. 

 

On 7/8/2022 at 11:20 AM, Shugyosha said:

 

Edit: sorry read your post properly after posting this, so see immediately above but your pictures will help. 

 

On 7/8/2022 at 7:42 PM, mecox said:

Chris,  It is most likely WW2 Shigemitsu.

Your sword has a slightly different cut of Shigemitsu (繁)  but appears to be the same.  Yours also has kiri (horizontal) yasurime filing,  as opposed to oblique.  

 

 

Okay everyone just got the full nakago pictures, both sides. Attaching below

 

@Bruce Pennington

@Shugyosha

@PNSSHOGUN

@mecox

[deadoscillate]

Nakago pictures are above, do they give yall any insight as to age?

[mecox]

The holes are a bit strange.  Maybe @Bruce Pennington is right that it could be the earlier Shigemitsu?  I just noticed the tsuka has 2 mekugi.   Cant tell from angled pic but possibly a short nakago so put a second hole when remounted as gunto.

[deadoscillate]

Right? The lower two holes to my eyes seem to be more inline with each other leading me to believe it originally just had the top one above the mei.

[Shugyosha]

Hi Chris,

I've had a bit of a dig around my books, the second Shigemitsu is listed in Hawley's Japanese Swordsmiths but with a slightly different signature to the one in Markus Sesko's index, but they are both long form:

 

Hawley: 越州新発田在道賀住河内丸繁光 - Esshū Nihata-zai Dōga jū Kawachimaru Shigemitsu

Sesko: 越州新発田左道賀住河内丸繁光 - Esshū Shibata  Hidari Dōga jū Kawachimaru Shigemitsu

 

Unfortunately that's the best I can do - I can't find a sample signature to compare with the one on your blade. Finger in the air, I'd say that the patina on the tang suggests a 19th century blade rather than a Shōwa blade. Also, it looks like the patina is a little lighter in colour near the habaki so it may have had the machi (the notches at the back and cutting edge of the blade that the habaki rests against) moved up to shorten the cutting edge for military use. Here's a picture of the tang of a blade that I had that was made in the 1860s for reference - there's some similarity to the colour of the tang as pictured in your first post:

[deadoscillate]

10 hours ago, Shugyosha said:

Hi Chris,

I've had a bit of a dig around my books, the second Shigemitsu is listed in Hawley's Japanese Swordsmiths but with a slightly different signature to the one in Markus Sesko's index, but they are both long form:

 

Hawley: 越州新発田在道賀住河内丸繁光 - Esshū Nihata-zai Dōga jū Kawachimaru Shigemitsu

Sesko: 越州新発田左道賀住河内丸繁光 - Esshū Shibata  Hidari Dōga jū Kawachimaru Shigemitsu

 

Unfortunately that's the best I can do - I can't find a sample signature to compare with the one on your blade. Finger in the air, I'd say that the patina on the tang suggests a 19th century blade rather than a Shōwa blade. Also, it looks like the patina is a little lighter in colour near the habaki so it may have had the machi (the notches at the back and cutting edge of the blade that the habaki rests against) moved up to shorten the cutting edge for military use. Here's a picture of the tang of a blade that I had that was made in the 1860s for reference - there's some similarity to the colour of the tang as pictured in your first post:

 

 

Hey thank you so much for spending some time researching this one. Is the difference in signatures just the province he worked in? Would make sense if he moved around, but same I haven't been able to find any other examples of his or other information. @Shugyosha @Bruce Penningtondo you think this piece might be a good candidate for Shinsa if polished?

[deadoscillate]

I did find this listing, this could be similar.

 

https://nihontoart.com/shop/kogarasu-maru-katana-by-shigemitsu/

 

Let me know what y'all think?

[Bruce Pennington]

Chris,

I'm the worst guy to ask about shinsa, as it's not something I'm knowledgeable about.  To me, it seems to be one of those things, like polishing, that it's value lies in the personal tastes of the collector.

[Kiipu]

8 hours ago, deadoscillate said:

I did find this listing, this could be similar.

 

Chris, wrong Shigemitsu 重光.  We pay you waaaay to much money for these kind of mistakes!

 

I would suggest doing a search on NMB for Shigemitsu, paying close attention for the mei 繁光.  There are two spellings that you will run into as indicated below.

Shigemitsu -- 繁光

Shigemitsu -- 重光

[deadoscillate]

2 hours ago, Kiipu said:

 

Chris, wrong Shigemitsu 重光.  We pay you waaaay to much money for these kind of mistakes!

 

I would suggest doing a search on NMB for Shigemitsu, paying close attention for the mei 繁光.  There are two spellings that you will run into as indicated below.

Shigemitsu -- 繁光

Shigemitsu -- 重光

Ha! Doh! I completely missed it. 

 

I'm still very new to nihonto, this would be the first in my collection, so I'm grasping for information a bit 😅 thanks for catching that. I think this is enough to go on for me to pull the trigger on the purchase. I just wanted to make sure it was actually nihonto or at the very least gendaito.

[Bazza]

Oh, to have it in the hand!!!  I would opine this is a WW2 era sword no question.  The shape of the nakago and the patina easily suggest this (to me).  The large shinobiana (the bottom hole in the nakago) is noteworthy and not seen (?) on Shintou or Shinshintou swords.  The koshirae has 'blackened' fittings and others can comment on this.  It has its tassel.  Oh, and the kanji for SHIGEMITSU is well-struck and looks very elegant, not the scrappy signatures so often seen.  The quality of the hamon is not easily seen, but selectively enlarging a portion of the blade pic shows what seems to me to be a komidare hamon - picture below that needs to be enlarged in a viewer.  All-in-all I see this as a worthy and collectible sword, depending always on what one likes to collect and of course the price.  I might suggest it is a good item to get, study and pass on much later if your collecting direction doesn't sit in the area of this sword.

 

BaZZa.

Edited July 14, 2022 by Bazza
amendment

[PNSSHOGUN]

My opinion is this sword was made in the 1930's and subsequently remounted in the current Gunto mounts during the war. The second Mekugi is of note, and may indicate the owner was a diligent practitioner. The tassel appears to be the all brown type, signifying a civilian employee of the Army.

[deadoscillate]

9 minutes ago, Bazza said:

Oh, to have it in the hand!!!  I would opine this is a WW2 era sword no question.  The shape of the nakago and the patina easily suggest this (to me).  The large shinobiana (the bottom hole in the nakago) is noteworthy and not seen (?) on Shintou or Shinshintou swords.  The koshirae has 'blackened' fittings and others can comment on this.  It has its tassel.  Oh, and the kanji for SHIGEMITSU is well-struck and looks very elegant, not the scrappy signatures so often seen.  The quality of the hamon is not easily seen, but selectively enlarging a portion of the blade pic shows what seems to me to be a komidare hamon - picture below that needs to be enlarged in a viewer.  All-in-all I see this as a worthy and collectible sword, depending always on what one likes to collect and of course the price.  I might suggest it is a good item to get, study and pass on much later if your collecting direction doesn't sit in the area of this sword.

 

BaZZa.

 

 

 

Hey BaZZa thanks for your input!

 

Yeah I'm pretty happy with it in either case. Like I said earlier this would be the first in my collection so I think I'm going to snag it. Maybe it's a little high at $1400 but seeing comparable Gunto at that price I feel like this is a good deal for the quality. 

 

Thanks everyone for your help in narrowing this down. It's either one of two smith's signing Shige in this way. They wouldn't be more than one generation apart in either case and at the very least it's Gendaito. 

 

Hopefully now I can snag some more books and learn more about Nihonto in general because I would really love to own something pre Tokugawa.

[mecox]

Chris, I'm still confused with the two mekugi in the tsuka.  Do they both correspond to holes in the nakago?  And the question is whether the upper hole (above the mei) is from an earlier (civilian?).  By the way, how long is the nakago.