My first attempt at buying an older sword.

[Crusader22]

I agree on the open available connection to the best experts here. I have privately had exchanges with a few, and everyone has been helpful.

 

Im not concerned at all, I guess if I'm this happy with it, what could be wrong?

 

Im anxious to get a solid ID of the blade and smith/period for sure. I know I need to provide more photos of higher quality first.

 

No comments or opinions are unwelcome!

 

Jeff

[GeorgeLuucas]

Hi Jeff, I am looking forward to more photos. Even if the signature is gimei, the blade still appears to be genuine. 
 

Your post inspired me to create this little photo guide. I hope @ROKUJURO approves . I’m open to feedback. 

 

Be sure to take photos well lit against a dark background. Ideally centered overhead with the tip north and nakago south. You’ve already covered a couple of these, but here’s my guide that I hope helps.  

Best of luck,

-Sam

[Shugyosha]

Hi Jeff,

I'm glad you're enjoying your new blade. A solid ID might be a bit tricky, but this is where the fun begins:

 

https://nihontoclub....a=All&school_nid=All

 

The above is a link to smiths signing Yasumitsu on an online database. First up, you can eliminate those using different kanji to those on your blade, then you need to have a trawl through to pick out those signing with a two character mei and then identify the work style of the smiths you identify as candidates to see how they compare with your own.

 

It's interesting to note that all of these candidates were working pre 1600 and for me your blade fits into this period - as Dee notes the tang colour and lack of machi point that way but also it was a long blade as the registration certificate has it down at over 70cm and it has been shortened (measuring the distance between the two peg holes and adding that on to the present blade length will give an approximate idea of it's length when unaltered). It's possible that your guy might not be listed on this database or not be in the textbooks at all, but I don't feel that it's likely to be gimei as there are too many candidates - someone faking signatures is going to do it in a way that the smith can be easily identified and it's likely to be clearly one of the bigger names of the bunch.

 

Sure it has some flaws but it's an old soldier that has literally been through the wars and there's nothing to not like, particularly if you like a research project.

[ROKUJURO]

4 hours ago, GeorgeLuucas said:

.....Your post inspired me to create this little photo guide. I hope @ROKUJURO approves . ......

He does indeed.

Anything that helps people to post usable photos is welcome. 

[Crusader22]

Tomorrow I am buying a black cloth sheet, and will follow the excellent photo advice of @GeorgeLuucas , and I will provide good photos of everything.

[Crusader22]

Well, still have not made it to the fabric store (I live in a very rural area).

 

I did find this, though, @Shugyosha, it matches what the seller told me, but Im just getting into reading three hardcover books I purchased so I can better ID the 5 Gokaden on my own, to see if the location is consistent. This is what the seller sent a link to, but I cant for sure make out the top character.

 

I also found what looks like a matching tsuba to the other metalwork, even if not period to the blade, it will be a set.

 

Jeff

 

 

[Jussi Ekholm]

I would think it could be an unknown Yasumitsu (安光) smith from the late 1500's. This particular Yasumitsu signature is quite rare character combination, and I personally don't see any of the known Yasumitsu smiths in smith indexes as a plausible option for this sword.

[Rivkin]

The writing style is consistent with Muromachi.

[reinhard]

For consideration:

The blade is signed on the sashi-omote/haki-ura, meaning: as a katana.

There were a few exceptions to this rule before late Nanboku-Cho period, but this "Yasu(?)mitsu" probably doesn't belong to them.

All in all, the horrible quality of the fittings and the obscure quality and polish of the blade leave me with the conclusion:

The whole package is probably not of Japanese origin.

Chinese maybe.

 

reinhard

 

[Crusader22]

Again....I know the tsuka and all fittings are not from the sword. I know it is by no means "high end". 

 

My only concern is the age (and now, legitimacy) as a real Nihonto, hopefully Koto..

 

If not, Ok. I took a bath. 

 

@GeorgeLuucas

 

Jeff

 

[Crusader22]

More

[Crusader22]

More

[Crusader22]

[KungFooey]

No way is that Chinese! 🤣🤣🤣

 

I think sometimes the people who only study Juyo swords forget where we normal folks start out. You've got a real, old, genuine Japanese sword there. Okay, the fittings have been messed around with - so what? There are more Frankenstein's out there than unmessed-with swords - even in the Japanese market.

As regards it being signed katana side, I would say the lower, punched hole is the original making it an uchigatana and the higher, drilled hole was added when the machi were moved up  to shorten the blade length (maybe it was stuck in gunto mounts in World War II?)

 

Enjoy it!

 

All the best

Dee

[BKB5]

I'm learning more from your post than most! I am certainly not knowledgeable enough to nail down era, school, etc. from your photos. Its an interesting blade though and may very well turn out to be something of note. That may be one where a really knowledgeable resource gets it hands on. If nobody around your area, just look for a Tuba you like that might fit or just leave it and enjoy it!!! Use it as a "learning blade" to study with your books. Thats the best part - I'm really looking forward to a few sword shows next year. Thanks for the post!!!

[Crusader22]

3 minutes ago, KungFooey said:

No way is that Chinese! 🤣🤣🤣

 

I think sometimes the people who only study Juyo swords forget where we normal folks start out. You've got a real, old, genuine Japanese sword there. Okay, the fittings have been messed around with - so what? There are more Frankenstein's out there than unmessed-with swords - even in the Japanese market.

As regards it being signed katana side, I would say the lower, punched hole is the original making it an uchigatana and the higher, drilled hole was added when the machi were moved up  to shorten the blade length (maybe it was stuck in gunto mounts in World War II?)

 

Enjoy it!

 

All the best

Dee

Thanks, and like I said, I love it, though no museum piece. All that concerned me was authenticity, not necessarily "quality" of a better smith. Just hope to nail down an era and location. Thanks!

 

Jeff

[Crusader22]

5 minutes ago, BKB5 said:

I'm learning more from your post than most! I am certainly not knowledgeable enough to nail down era, school, etc. from your photos. Its an interesting blade though and may very well turn out to be something of note. That may be one where a really knowledgeable resource gets it hands on. If nobody around your area, just look for a Tuba you like that might fit or just leave it and enjoy it!!! Use it as a "learning blade" to study with your books. Thats the best part - I'm really looking forward to a few sword shows next year. Thanks for the post!!!

Thanks! I am learning too, its a steep curve. With a lot of info to sift through.

 

Jeff

[Crusader22]

I also like the shape and form of it. It is thin, and the arc of the blade is shallow, less pronounced, and the width is such that it looks more delicate and slender. 

 

All in all, it looks unique to me, and I love the deep blue ito and Mantis/Cricket theme, as an expression of duality in those two insects - the hunter, and the sound of the "aum" in the cricket song 

 

So, yes, Im ok.

[Rivkin]

Without full clear image of the nakago its difficult. It can still be from around 1570 in poor polish, but we need to see the full nakago without angles etc.

[Franco D]

3 hours ago, Crusader22 said:

All that concerned me was authenticity

 

If that's the case then submit this sword to shinsa. 

 

I see "nothing" in the images posted that suggests that this sword is in fact a nihonto.

 

 

 

[2devnul]

@Crusader22

 

Can you post as advised by @Rivkin all sides of Nakago. Close-up, good quality. Both sides and back/front. 

Something I did for my sword here:

https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/48904-nbthk-mumei-echizen-seki-wakizashi-for-sale/#findComment-508959

 

 

 

[Lewis B]

Everything about this area gives me pause for concern. The way the hamon drops off, the general sugata around the machi, especially towards the nakago. I get the feel of an abura quenched blade although not seeing the telltale secondary peaks. Higher rez images would be helpful. Load them onto a google drive folder where you don't have file size limits unlike on NMB.

 

[2devnul]

Just a though, could it be that shortening was done recently by 'none-professional smith'? Polish might also be messed due to being done (fake Hamon) 'none-professional Togishi' ...

 

Still, I think it is Nihonto, but definitely not Yatsumitsu 1362-1368. Probably not Koto either. 

 

Where did you buy this? Komonjo (Ebay) maybe? 

[Crusader22]

Well, Im thoroughly confused (and somewhat concerned and disappointed).

 

I will provide pictures as requested.

 

Jeff

[Crusader22]

[Crusader22]

Im really struggling with the photography, especially light sources.

 

I apologize if the crappy photos make my crappy blade seem....crappier.

 

Jeff

[Franco D]

16 minutes ago, Crusader22 said:

m really struggling with the photography, especially light sources.

 

I apologize if the crappy photos make my crappy blade seem....crappier.

 

Jeff

 

"The sword confirms the mei and not the other way around."

 

It doesn't matter how many images under any lighting or at any angle are taken of the nakago, it won't change the fact that the business end of this sword offers nothing in the way of kantei that suggests this is a traditionally made sword. 

Which leaves the bigger problem of the fact that this sword is trying to pass itself off as an old sword. 

 

Again, if you really want to find out what you have here, submit it to a shinsa. 

 

But don't be surprised if the judge reaches for the pink paper almost immediately. 

 

Kantei is the key to collecting nihonto!

[2devnul]

32 minutes ago, Crusader22 said:

Im really struggling with the photography, especially light sources.

 

I apologize if the crappy photos make my crappy blade seem....crappier.

 

Jeff

 

Well, this looks bad. Like I said, looks as home-made shortening. I have no idea why someone would do this. To fit Tsuka? Hide lack of Hamachi? 

 

[Crusader22]

6 minutes ago, 2devnul said:

 

Well, this looks bad. Like I said, looks as home-made shortening. I have no idea why someone would do this. To fit Tsuka? Hide lack of Hamachi? 

 

The other side does not look like this. The lighting greatly exaggerated these markings in this photo.

[Crusader22]

Ok, I guess it's time to shift this conversation from what I hoped for - "Don't worry, Jeff, it's probably original nihonto",  to the apparently more likely -  "Jeff, you got hosed".

 

Having said that, and considering the confident assertions of the latter, can anyone answer the following (just for education on fakes)?

 

When might this have been faked? (For instance, in the 1900's as a display item?) If so, why sign it?

 

Is the mei a good, or a poor forgery? Was a specific period or style of engraved mei attempted? If so, why?

 

Was this blade a "good" or a "poor" forgery, and has it been altered? What level of skill was involved?

 

AGAIN, discount the koshirae in this evaluation, obviously they are not original to the sword, but are any of those parts, or all of them  (or none), authentic?

 

I think Im done posting on this sword, I admit defeat.

 

Sorry to be a pest, or the archetypical "dumb new guy" that does exactly as I have here...back to reading/lurking.

 

Jeff.