Translation Request for a Friend

[ChrisW]

Hello everyone,

 

This piece is a wakizashi with what appears to be a WWII surrender tag, a Namban tsuba, and all the fittings intact. The blade has minor chips but doesn't appear to have any major issues. The nagasa is 17 3/4".

I would love a translation of the nakago, surrender tag, and if the mei seems correct or is gimei.

 

Thanks gentlemen!

~Chris

[Ray Singer]

Musashi ju Tadahiro 

[ChrisW]

Would this guy be TAD40 in the swordsmith index?

[Ray Singer]

I don't think this is an authentic mei for any of the Hizen smiths who signed Tadahiro. 

[ChrisW]

That was my feeling too. Definitely a Hizen blade, but the signature seems off. My thought was: if this is shoshin, then it is a low ranking smith at best.

Would anyone have time for the surrender tag?

[SteveM]

I think the tag is pointing to a location/person in Ōkumage (大熊毛) in Oita prefecture, but I'm not sure of the name. Morikuni (盛國) might be the given name, but I'm unsure. 

 

Also, the mei might read 武藤住忠廣 Mutō-jū Tadahiro. Mutō is a lcation in Hizen (present day Saga prefecture).

[Ian B3HR2UH]

Wow , so this might be a Gendaito and worth even more than a genuine old piece !!

Ian Brooks

[ChrisW]

Huh.. a gendaito wakizashi. Definitely an odd possibility considering the mounts it is in. But I suppose gendaito were made from 1868 as well, if we're being strict on time period. But wasn't the gendai Muto smith "Hidehiro" and not Tadahiro?

[Nobody]

As for the tag,

熊毛村大熊毛 – Kumage-mura Okumage (an old place name in Oita prefecture)

小庄盛國 – Kosho Morikuni

[ChrisW]

So given the relatively young fittings, the state of the nakago...  is it more likely to be a gimei (which is what I am leaning towards), or signed by a gendai smith?

[PNSSHOGUN]

The Muto school had lineage from 8th Generation Hizen Tadayoshi & Shinano no kami Hisahiro, many of their works represent the Hizen style. However there isn't any mention of a Muto Tadahiro among the Muto Gendai school so you can probably remove that from the equation.

[ChrisW]

So we're looking at a gimei Tadahiro made by a Hizen smith. I had thought as much.

Thanks for clearing that up John!

[Brian]

Why do you think it was made by a Hizen smith?
Gimei means fake signature. That takes away most likelihood it is a Hizento.

[mecox]

Good point made by Brian.  To me the mei looks rough and certainly not a neat Hizen.  Cant see much of the blade, but the ito binding is a quickie western job, so dont know about menuki, and  could be some composite parts.  Of course this could also go to the owners name tag.  No guarantee its original.  I have see added ones, both canvas strips and wooden label.   Not a dump, just a comment!

[PNSSHOGUN]

Yes, with the condition and surrender tag this would be unfortunately relegated to more of a historic relic.

[ChrisW]

Good point Brian! Fair enough. Gimei most often do make an attempt at appearing to be correct, but there's no way to confirm that this one was made by a Hizen smith even if the sugata were to be correct.

[reinhard]

My dear forumites,

 

You are going nerdy on this one (once more).

You hear "Tadahiro" (Oh, that must be a Hizen smith!)

You hear "Musashi" (There was something with Hizen and Musashi as well!)

The first Hizen master Tadayoshi acquired the title "Musashi Daijo".

The mei in question only states that this Tadahiro was a resident of Musashi.

 

Apart from the fact that the state of the blade is beyond serious judgement, you actually see a rather random assembly of objects.

Especially the tsuka looks like a very clumsy attempt of repairing something that is not worth the pain and shows no signs of Japanese craftsmanship.

 

What probably caught your particular attention is the surrender tag.

What makes you think, this surrender tag has any connection to this blade?

I'd expect a surrender tag together with a GunTo-mounted sword.

During WWII Japanese officers weren't allowed to bring just any wild assembly of koshirae to service.

 

reinhard

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ChrisW]

While this is true that soldiers were not permitted to bring any random sword to service, there were the Gunzoku whose swords only had to loosely resemble regulation fittings. Though I doubt this sword is gunzoku. The other possibility is that this sword, along with other civilian swords, were surrendered to the US military at the end of the war per the order of the Foreign Liquidation Commission.

[Bruce Pennington]

1 hour ago, reinhard said:

weren't allowed to bring just any wild assembly of koshirae to service.

 

45 minutes ago, ChrisW said:

The other possibility is that this sword, along with other civilian swords, were surrendered to the US military at the end of the war per the order of the Foreign Liquidation Commission.

Chris, you don't show the saya, is there one?

 

I have seen numerous swords that were fully civil from kabutogane to blade tip, but simply put into a wooden saya with leather cover to 'militarize' it.  Well, in fact, I have even seen fully civil swords, saya and all, but simply with a leather cover.  There were at least 2 big pushes by the military to get civil swords donated, and/or bought by the military, to meet the big sword shortage during the war.  The effort to militarize them was vastly varied.

[ChrisW]

It was a plain black textured lacquer saya; not sure if it ever had a leather combat cover on it or not. A lot of the lacquer has flaked off and the wood is cracked in places.

 

[Brian]

Reinhard is right. Except maybe for the fact that there are a few ways this could have gone to war. But that is irrelevant isn't it? The tag doesn't do anything to link this to a smith and could indeed come from anywhere or be added later. The sword is the main issue here though.
And as mentioned, it is likely gimei and no easy way to attribute it any further currently. It's been 75 years since the war. Many if not most swords have been fiddled around with since then.

[Stephen]

Surrender tag is often a misnomer.

90% of the time it's  the transportation tag with owner's name address and sometimes the rail line it was on.

Like this one in question the owners name who probably had hopes of getting it back. 

Often romanticized.