Proper description of Nakago question.

[edzo]

Hi to all,

 

I have a question if someone knowledgeable has any idea. I am cataloguing some swords and learning about them. I have a blade that have two mekugi-ana in the nakago. I have concluded that the tang was not shortened for a number of reasons. The primary one being the location of them and the mounting it rests in. This is a shint blade. Would it be proper to refer to this nakago as UBU or because it was altered (just by the additional mekugi-ana, & not shortening) O-SURIAGE?

 

Thank you in advance if someone can assist.

Respectfully,

Ed F

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

I have concluded that the tang was not shortened for a number of reasons....omissis... O-SURIAGE?

 

Ô-: (大) A prefix meaning large, great, greatly

Suriage (磨上 or 摺上) shortened

 

If you've already concluded it is not shortened, then how can it be "greatly shortened" ?

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Ed,

This nakago would be classed as ubu (original) in spite of the extra mekugi-ana. If the nakago jiri is original but the machi have been moved up, the nakago is called machi-okuri. Only if the nakago jiri is not the original (the blade has been shortened) would you call it suriage.

Grey

Grey

[edzo]

I have concluded that the tang was not shortened for a number of reasons....omissis... O-SURIAGE?

 

Ô-: (大) A prefix meaning large, great, greatly

Suriage (磨上 or 摺上) shortened

 

If you've already concluded it is not shortened, then how can it be "greatly shortened" ?

 

Thank You, Giuseppe, I am learning and forgot "O" represented large or great, thanks again, appreciated your input. Will process better next time.

Respectfully, Ed F

[edzo]

Hi Ed,

This nakago would be classed as ubu (original) in spite of the extra mekugi-ana. If the nakago jiri is original but the machi have been moved up, the nakago is called machi-okuri. Only if the nakago jiri is not the original (the blade has been shortened) would you call it suriage.

Grey

Grey

 

Hi Grey, and thank you for your input which I consider very sound. I concluded that the nakago was original as a result of the following thorough obsevations:

1. The Aoi crest, is relatively close to the machi and does not show any signs of being previously finished or exposed beyond the habaki including the area around it and there was no indication of a weld effect.

2. The mekugi-ana (upper one) is exactly where the smith locates it, based upon several oshigata I reviewed.

2. The end is correct for the smith.

3. The file marks (yasuri-me) on the sides and edge are consistant and un-interrupted.

 

Thank You again Grey,

Ed F