Removed nakago mark?

[Matsunoki]

I’m not even saying the book is wrong. I am in no position to do that and would never dream of doing so. Does the book have absolutely all smiths listed. Could ther be omissions? Is that possible?

I’m just saying making a “declaration” of gimei in these tenuous circumstances is unwarranted guesswork. 

Seems anyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

 

As for the shortened Gunto theory….if they are indeed removed stamps on the nakago wouldn’t that place them originally somewhere on the actual blade rather than the nakago?….

 

[Nihontocollector752]

You also have to look at the quality of how said Takada or other shinto/shinshinto smiths carved their mei. They carved mei with excellent quality and precision. This looks like "chicken scratch" mei. Hastily done, placement is wrong, etc.

 

 

[John C]

Folks:

I was able to resize the pics to show the sugata (I hope). I too believe the signature may be gimei because it seems as if it were not done with any confidence. Like watching someone write a forged check - it's always hesitant. 

Thank you guys so much for the information. It all helps.

John C.

[Jacques D.]

2 hours ago, Matsunoki said:

I’m not even saying the book is wrong. I am in no position to do that and would never dream of doing so. Does the book have absolutely all smiths listed. Could ther be omissions? Is that possible?

I’m just saying making a “declaration” of gimei in these tenuous circumstances is unwarranted guesswork. 

Seems anyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

 

As for the shortened Gunto theory….if they are indeed removed stamps on the nakago wouldn’t that place them originally somewhere on the actual blade rather than the nakago?….

 

Of course there may be unregistered swordsmiths but this is not the case; and anyway, we have to stick to what we have and until proven otherwise this sword is gimei 

 

what you say is not a fact, just a denial of principle without any valid argument 

 

Your behaviour is a troll one.

 

With the measures, I do not think it is a gunto but it is a recent sword (100/130 years maximum) and ubu.

 

 

Sori is tori sori. The sori of Taira Takada swords of this period 1500 and after is a strong saki sori.  it's one more element.  

 

ps off topic

 

You wouldn't be a climate skeptic by any chance? Because you use the same old tactics 

 

 

 

[John C]

Jacques:

According to the Token Society of Great Britain, the Kanbun Shinto swords followed this same pattern; namely:

"Swords were Adapted to a new dueling style. Blades had less sori and marked taper towards the kissaki. This shape was believed to facilitate a faster and more efficient draw and slash with a sword which could be a major factor in such combat."

I'm not saying this sword is anywhere near that old. But could someone have made it in that style thereby "concealing" its actual age?

 

John C.

 

[Matsunoki]

Jacques

In my professional life I learnt that when something is complex, unclear and subject to many different opinions it is best to keep an open mind and not jump to conclusions. Sometimes sitting on the fence is a sensible thing to do….and listen to everyone. I experienced some remarkable insights from the most unlikely of sources.

Your approach is “guilty unless proven innocent”.

 However it is equally impossible for you to prove the sword is gimei. Just an opinion……I would respect an opinion.

This overall subject is about as complex as it can get with even shinsa panels disagreeing at times.

I still fail to see how questioning what you say, asking for clarification and avoiding personal insults makes me a troll as you have labelled me (and others) twice.

If you don’t like being challenged…………

PS No I am not a climate change sceptic. Quite the opposite, I believe it’s already too late for the planet, or rather for humans…one way or another.

I await your next insult with interest.

C🙂lin.

[Alex A]

Not wanting to jump in but feel this point has to be made for the sake of any newbies being sucked in by Jacques “everything in boxes” way of thinkng.

 

Seen some swords with NBTHK, dated to the late Muromachi where the mei looked nothing like other examples, you would just look and assume gi-mei.

 

NBTHK have more resources and Knowledge than Jacques, and are obviously a lot more open minded.

 

The mei is the last thing you look at!

 

This has gone way of mark, would advise owner to study hamon and hada closer, look for a school.

 

Anyways, leave you to it

 

 

[NewB]

Most swordsmiths were actually illiterate (from the older years, per my sensei) - you see sengoku sukesada with different chiseling of the characters signed by who knows whom.. Just as an example that is. So, I don't know where this is going but probably better to just to leave it to shinsa. 

 

My 2 coins..

 

❤️

 

Johnny

[Jacques D.]

11 hours ago, John C said:

Jacques:

According to the Token Society of Great Britain, the Kanbun Shinto swords followed this same pattern; namely:

"Swords were Adapted to a new dueling style. Blades had less sori and marked taper towards the kissaki. This shape was believed to facilitate a faster and more efficient draw and slash with a sword which could be a major factor in such combat."

I'm not saying this sword is anywhere near that old. But could someone have made it in that style thereby "concealing" its actual age?

 

John C.

 

I dont' think that wakizashi is a Kanbun shinto one,  it's too short, has a too important sori and the tapering is not that pronounced.

 

Colin,  

 

 

Quote

No I am not a climate change sceptic. Quite the opposite, I believe it’s already too late for the planet, or rather for humans…one way or another.

I await your next insult with interest.

 

Good point for that; but i wonder where you see insults as all that i said is factual until proven otherwise. You greatly overestimate your knowledge and you are not the only one. As for those who claim that I don't know anything, I wait for them and I ask to see their arguments. Sorry, but when I see that someone declaring a nakago machi-okuri on a simple photo (without having had the sword in hand) it is the proof that he doesn't know much.

[Matsunoki]

 

4 hours ago, Jacques D. said:

Sorry, but when I see that someone declaring a nakago machi-okuri on a simple photo (without having had the sword in hand) it is the proof that he doesn't know much.

Jacques

re “insults”…..please don’t make me post screenshots of what you said to me in PMs. Also I take being called a troll as an insult. If it were justified I’d accept it…..but I’m not the sort to just roll over and shut up just because you don’t like what I say. I’ve been round the block a few times.

re my knowledge…..if you read what I say on many posts including my own you will see I freely admit that I have no ability to Kantei anything as far as school/smith goes BUT I have eyes and a brain and have handled and owned/enjoyed/help preserve hundreds (literally) of swords. Where I believe I have a valid opinion I express it with NO arrogance, merely saying what I think I see. It’s nice when I’m right but more useful if I’m wrong.
 

Please read the following exact quotes of your words used on the same sword working from just rather dodgy images -

“Looking at the machi one would say that it was suriage yesterday...”

 

“Have à look at the location of nakago shinogi on both sides, they show the sword is ubu.”

 

Tell me Jacques, if I had uttered these words, what would you say? It is by no means the only time you contradict yourself both in what you say and the manner you say it.

 

I have no doubt that you possess knowledge in some areas far in excess of mine. I have been away from swords for over 30 years. But if you could only get off your high horse and contribute without arrogance but with tolerance then all our experiences on here would benefit. Mine, yours, new members….everyone.

 Colin

[Alex A]

Sometimes, a horse can be so high it puts the riders head in the clouds.

 

Another line..

 

"Sorry, but when I see that someone declaring a nakago machi-okuri on a simple photo (without having had the sword in hand) it is the proof that he doesn't know much."

 

 

 

Yet Jacques does not have the sword in hand either and come to the conclusion it is less than 150 years old and gimei.

 

Nothing of certainty can be said about this sword yet, as not enough good photos and we do not have it in hand.

 

Jeez, first time i saw the picture of the hada i thought Sue Mino

 

Looked at the hamon and thought Bizen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Brian]

Warning...if I find people are being abusive or insulting, even in private messages, I won't hesitate to just remove them from this site permanently.
Jacques, the ice you are skating on is so thin it is basically non-existent. Since you hate it here, should we just assist with relieving you of the burden?

[John C]

Everyone:

I really do appreciate all of the input. I guess it is somewhat comforting to know that my confusion over this sword is, at least in part, warranted. I think for now, I will just file this sword away as a "study" piece and look for examples of various eras that may fit the profile, etc.

Thank you all very much for the interest in helping me solve this puzzle. And for the education and knowledge you all have provided.

John C.

p.s . I'll ditch the old Ipad and buy a better camera! 

[Alex A]

John, as Johnny pointed out, maybe one for Shinsa to sort this. 

 

Just having a look through Takada swords, surprising variation.

 

See some smiths at a certain time producing running itame with masame in the shinogi-ji whilst others a Ko-mokume etc etc etc.. As said earlier, known for copying other schools.  

 

The hada did not shout Shinshinto to me, but who knows.

 

Its a tough one, without seeing it in hand and using the available images.

 

Cheers.

[Jacques D.]

Collin 

 

 

Quote

 

“Looking at the machi one would say that it was suriage yesterday...”

 

“Have à look at the location of nakago shinogi on both sides, they show the sword is ubu.”

 

so what ? There are visible thing.  

 

I will not comment on the rest of your words which are unspeakable. 
I have just one thing to ask you: describe me in detail the process of machi-okuri.

 

Brian, 

 

I don't hate this place or I would have left it a long time ago but I don't like to see nonsense being spouted when people come to ask for information all because some people want to make themselves look good. I have always said what I think honestly and I will not change. I have knowledge to share, but it is necessary that the other side knows how to admit it. 

As for the people I can't hate someone I don't know (the opposite is not valid). 

[Matsunoki]

17 minutes ago, Jacques D. said:

so what ? There are visible thing.  

Please read them again. You said these two things on the same sword -

1. It is suriage

2. it is ubu

 

it cannot be both can it?

 

 

[Jacques D.]

You need to learn what is written not what you want to see.  i never said that sword was suriage

 

Im' still waiting your descrition of the process of machi-okuri. 

 

Quote

 

The nakago patina does not look faked or Showa to me.

The nakago patina looks to get stronger as it heads towards the jiri with deeper corrosion ie older

The upper nakago patina looks weaker (newer) especially above the upper ana…..probable machi okuri

The nakago looks oddly skinny…..I still believe it has been reduced in depth to create new machi

The hada does not look showato to me

The hamon does not look showato to me 

Possible long yakidashi?…hamon appears to narrow and to become more suguha

Not a bad sashikomi polish

 

 

 

 

All that without having the sword in hand, you are a genius 

[Matsunoki]

I am not talking about this sword. You said this, and several other rather crazy things on another sword. Can you recall it?

[Matsunoki]

8 minutes ago, Jacques D. said:

All that without having the sword in hand, you are a genius 

True.

[Jussi Ekholm]

I think there has been some good discussion yet somewhat heated.

 

I know in the original translation thread I suspected it would be 平定守 Taira Sadamori instead of Minamoto that was on registration card. As I said then I couldn't find a single reference mei for comparison. Steve has found one and it is very different from the one on this sword. I would suspect the same thing as Jacques did that your sword in this thread would be gimei. Here is bit of an amateur explanation for what I feel on the signature. Basically the focus would be on the two characters, Sada 定 and Mori 守, and how they seem to me to be on reference signatures by Taira Takada smiths, in Bungo smith book. Of course not being native English speaker it is not easy to explain what I think I am seeing with words. Sada (定) character in general is wider on the reference Bungo smiths (while the reference Sadamori that Steve found seems to be extremely wide), and more sharp. Of course the sword in question is extremely narrow but still. In reference mei that Steve found, the Mori (守) character seems to be very long. Based on the few examples I saw in the book, the smith Hisamori (久守) seems to use bit similar long style in Mori. When you look at the long downward stroke in Mori on your sword, it seems to be on the very right side and there is a long upwards stroke at the bottom. In general I did not see these features in any Taira Takada mei, the long downwards stroke was mostly at the center of character and there was a small tick at the bottom.

 

I am of course more than willing to change my view if other reference mei pop up somewhere, but this seems to be very unknown Bungo smith.

 

The reason why I asked for a picture with habaki earlier is, that I think the extreme narrow form might be throwing us off. Would it be possible to see the tsuba in place and tsuka on top to see how the holes line up when tsuka is in place? As the tang is so narrow I think it might optically make us think the holes are further from machi than they are in reality? Of course I am bit puzzled as on some pictures the nakago looks very narrow and long and on some I feel it seems more regularish proportions.

[mas4t0]

I've heard mention a few times of these special Jacques PMs, I had a disagreement with Jacques a while ago, but never earned the PM unlock. 🙄

 

Would anyone like to share theirs with me so I can see what I'm missing?

[John C]

Jussi:

The mei from my blade and the reference sample side-by-side look very different. Even the phrasing  "Sadamori saku" vs. "Taira Sadamori." So, a gimei then?

As for the koshirae, I can take a pic if you think it would help, however as you have heard, my pictures are not very good using my current equipment. Additionally, the tsuka and tsuba are not original to the blade. Or at least the tsuba is not. It must be at least 5 or 6 mm too large and rattles on the blade. The saya seems to fit okay and the habaki is an exact fit.

 

John C.

[SteveM]

Hello John,

Regarding the inscription;

 

The first kanji is 平 (Taira). Taira is a well-known clan name. Swordsmiths often sign their swords using their clan name. It isn't the smith's real surname. It is an assertion of ancient nobility. It is the swordsmith's way of saying, "somewhere back in my family's history we were affiliated with a powerful and aristocratic family". There are four common clan names that one finds on swords and tsuba. In order of frequency (most common to least common), they are

1. Fujiwara (藤原)

2. Minamoto (源)

3. Taira (平)

4. Tachibana (橘)

 

We know from looking in the swordsmith name indexes, that a smith named Sadamori did indeed use the clan name of Taira. There may not be many (or any) extant examples of this smith's work, but from the information given in the histories, it doesn't surprise us to see the name "Taira Sadamori" on a sword. So the inscription format itself is not suspicious or unusual. 

 

As was mentioned, it is common for a smith to start out using one form of signature early in his career (perhaps "Sadamori-saku"), and then change to another style once he achieves a certain level of success or renown. So this too, is no cause for suspicion. 

 

As to the authenticity of this particular sword's signature, we are already deep in the weeds, and in a way it isn't very relevant at this point.

 

However, its important to focus on the sword itself: the shape, the hada, the hamon, etc. Unfortunately all of these things can be hard to judge over the internet, so often we jump to the shortcut, which is: trying to judge the signature (the angle of the strokes, the depth of the strokes, etc.). But here is the thing - even if the signature were a perfect, stroke-for-stroke copy of the same signature that is in the authenticated sword, it would still be essential to look at the sword itself to verify whether the work matches the work of the smith, because even if the signature is an exact copy, the signature will be judged gimei if the sword looks nothing like a Sadamori sword. Conversely, if the sword itself looks every bit like a Sadamori sword should look, but the signature is slightly unusual, the signature may still be judged as valid, because its harder to fake a sword than it is to fake a signature. To put this another way, with a bit of practice, I can make a very good copy of  Monet's signature, but no matter how hard I try I will not be able to make a good copy of a Monet painting. Its just too hard to fake the style, the materials, the patina profile, etc.

 

Unfortunately, we don't have a very clear idea of what a classic "Sadamori sword" should look like. All we have is that one sword to compare it against, and its just not super helpful given how obscure this smith seems to be. (But I agree that the NBTHK usually knows what they are talking about, and they have more resources at their disposal than we have). 

 

Consider it gimei and study as much as you can of the hada and hamon. 

 

Regarding the registration; It isn't unusual for clerks in the city halls and boards of education to make mistakes on the registration papers. In your case, because the hole is obscuring part of that kanji (平), and because it isn't written very cleanly to begin with, it is easy to mistake it for something else. Let's assume that the person registering the sword just made a simple error. 

 

 

 

[dkirkpatrick]

The hada and the nioiguchi especially by the ha machi, make me think this sword is saiba. Hate to say that without seeing in hand but just my impression.

[Alex A]

Lots and lots of swords out there made by obscure/low level smiths where there is very little references.

(for us)

 

Not just Koto, Edo too.

 

References that only the likes of a shinsa panel may have a hold of.

 

No doubt they come across swords now and again where even they scratch their heads.

[Matsunoki]

2 hours ago, dkirkpatrick said:

the nioiguchi especially by the ha machi, make me think this sword is saiba

Hi Doug, welcome to the debate!

I also noticed this. In one image the hamon/nioiguchi clearly looks to finish bang on the hamachi which I think would suggest saiba IF we are looking at machiokuri? Any apparent continuation into the nakago could be a polishing creation or perhaps a shadow of the previous hamon.

Anyone else see it?

All the best

Colin

[Jacques D.]

This is the proof that you can't judge the patina of a nakago without having it in hand.

Collin, I'm still waiting.

[Jacques D.]

11 hours ago, Matsunoki said:

I am not talking about this sword. You said this, and several other rather crazy things on another sword. Can you recall it?

Why do you lie (it's not the first time) ? See your comment on page 3 posted saturday at 7.08 PM

[NewB]

I think it's time to lock this thread. While I don't have to read it, I find some of it abusive and unacceptable for the standards of the forum. 

 

J.

[Matsunoki]

11 hours ago, Jacques D. said:

You need to learn what is written not what you want to see.  i never said that sword was suriage

Jacques, please take the time to read what I actually say.

The quotations of yours that I referred to were not in this sword thread but I can see how I misled you. I was not clear. I apologise but instead they were on the sword in the link below. Based purely on my poor images you first insisted that the nakago was suriage. Then that it was 20thC. Then that it was ubu. Never once commenting on the actual blade despite me asking you several times. You then decided to continue to argue against very experienced people who had actually had the sword in hand and argue against the overwhelming opinion of highly respected members on here. You then decided to send me 2 insulting PMs. I will not quote you from them. You can see why some of us struggle to accept what you say as consistent?

As for my words, I cannot see any that are unspeakable…..please feel free to point them out to me.

As for how machi okuri is actually done, there are many ways to achieve it. Some doubtless legitimate and traditional, some hasty in the days of war and some that are butchery. Anything from a trained smith in his forge to a chap in his shed with a sanding disk on his drill. I’m sure you are expert in the traditional “correct way”…..I am not….but again I say it isn’t rocket science to remove small quantities of metal from a blade with suitable files.