Question about a naginata-naoshi I recently acquired. Any help or info is appreciated.

Basho · February 13

Hi everyone. I've been collecting Nihonto for almost 25 years, and have (of course) been reading this site with great interest. I set up my account in 2010, but have posted very little since then.

I purchased this blade about six months ago, and I was curious if any of you could give me an idea of the rough age it was made in. It was described as a nagamaki-naoshi, but my (limited) understanding is that shortened blades that were either naginata or nagamaki are often simply referred to as naginata-naoshi, regardless of how they started out.

The blade is mumei, and while it has NBTHK paperwork describing it at "Takada" school, it has no further attribution to a specific smith or a particular period/age. My understanding is that Edo-period Takada blades are sometimes listed as "Fujiwara Takada" and that older (Muromachi?) swords may sometimes be listed as "Taira Takada" and even older blades might sometimes be described as "Ko Takada." This is purely based on searching around the internet and looking at other Takada blades with paperwork, but I really have no idea. My (again limited) understanding of nagamaki blades is that they were not very popular after the 14th century, suggesting that if this blade is a shortened nagamaki (as the seller believed) it COULD be quite old. But, I have also read that more recent blades were sometimes made in a nagamaki/naginata-naoshi style, so I gather that this could also be a considerably newer blade.

I would love any thoughts or insights that any of you have. Thank you in advance.

Robert S · February 13

My first instinct is that this blade has not been shortened, looking at the hamon. The nakago could have been shortened, but again, I'm not seeing it at first glance.

Basho · February 13

Interesting! Thank you for your reply.

I have never owned anything naoshi, so I am completely new to this. I can definitely see your point about the very large hamon. Ultimately I bought the blade somewhat impulsively, simply because I think it is beautiful - and I will consider it beautiful regardless of how old it is.

I will note that one reason I thought that it might be shortened from something like a longer nagamaki/naginata is that the overall curve does not appear to be as smooth as it perhaps "should" be. The area immediately behind the kissaki seemed to be slightly at odds with the curve of the rest of the blade, making me wonder if that was related to some re-shaping that took place at some point in the past.

oli · February 13

For me it looks like a Shinshinto Katana with O-Kissaki, looks nice!

Basho · February 13

Thank you Oliver. I am glad I am not the only person that thinks it's a nice-looking blade. Usually when I buy a sword it's for reasons beyond "it's so pretty" but this one I just absolutely loved as soon as I saw it!

The nagasa is about 52cm, so it's technically a long wakizashi.

Shugyosha · February 13

Hi Claus,

My first impression matches that of Oli - a shin shinto piece, but it might also have been made around Keicho when the same sugata was popular. Could you post some detailed shots of the hamon, hada and boshi please? That might help with putting a date on it.

A nice looking package though. 👍

oli · February 13

Oh 52cm Nagasa.... so i would guess late Muromachi, or very early Edo time.

Basho · February 13

28 minutes ago, Shugyosha said:

Hi Claus,

My first impression matches that of Oli - a shin shinto piece, but it might also have been made around Keicho when the same sugata was popular. Could you post some detailed shots of the hamon, hada and boshi please? That might help with putting a date on it.

A nice looking package though. 👍

Thank you John.

Here are the best close-ups I have on my computer right now. I can take some better close-ups when I get home later today, if that would be helpful.

Franco D · February 13

3 hours ago, Basho said:

curious if any of you could give me an idea of the rough age it was made in

Does the NBTHK designate this as a naginata-naoshi in the paper?

Basho · February 13

11 minutes ago, Franco D said:

Does the NBTHK designate this as a naginata-naoshi in the paper?

Unfortunately, I am not smart (or well-educated) enough to know the answer to that. I cannot read the paper. Based on having looked at a few other Takada attributed papers (to try to understand the Fujiwara, Taira, Ko distinction), my guess is that it is NOT listed as naginata-naoshi.

Hopefully someone who can read the paper will chime in.

Shugyosha · February 13

The paper says it’s a wakizashi.

Basho · February 13

Thank you John! I appreciate the assistance and skill.

Does that mean the NBTHK is essentially saying it started out as a wakizashi and is definitely NOT a naoshi of some kind, or does it just mean they are just saying it is currently a wakizashi, without commenting on whether or not it used to be something else at some point?

Brian · February 14

I don't really see anything here that suggests it was shortened. To me, it looks like it was made as a wakizashi originally and hasn't been altered. Nice wakizashi.

Franco D · February 14

9 hours ago, Basho said:

I cannot read the paper.

Would someone please be kind enough as to give a translation?

Thank you.

Shugyosha · February 14

一脇指無名(高田) - One wakizashi, mumei (Takada).

Shugyosha · February 14

14 hours ago, Basho said:

Thank you John! I appreciate the assistance and skill.

Does that mean the NBTHK is essentially saying it started out as a wakizashi and is definitely NOT a naoshi of some kind, or does it just mean they are just saying it is currently a wakizashi, without commenting on whether or not it used to be something else at some point?

Hi Claus,

See this thread which discusses how this is treated by the NBTHK in their paperwork (or recently at least) - I think that if they had thought your blade was a re-purposed pole arm then they would have said that on the paperwork, though perhaps as Naginata naoshi as the suggestion in the linked thread is that they no longer use the Nagamaki designation for blade types.

Basho · February 14

Thank you John. I've previously read that thread and it was fascinating (and just went back and read it again).

moriarty · February 14

Greetings Claus

It's hard not to hear Zapp Brannigan while reading your posts :laughing:

Lovely wakizashi you posted, the hamon is quite enchanting.

Franco D · February 14

20 hours ago, Basho said:

Does that mean the NBTHK is essentially saying it started out as a wakizashi and is definitely NOT a naoshi of some kind

Yes. It does appear that there has been some machi-okuri.

Jacques · Friday at 11:02 PM

Quote

一脇指

A little correct, In this case, the kanji ichi means item, not one.

Rivkin · Saturday at 01:27 AM

The original form like this would be the end of Nanbokucho, early Muromachi and it would be a naginata. However, the nakago would be different. What is more a concern is that the Bizen-like hamon is very non-repetative, it has one or two places with distinctive Muromachi-style crab claws, but then it goes to do something else. There is a lot of tobiyaki, almost hinting towards hitatsura, but everything in nioi and tobiyaki have very elongated, at times comma like shape.

Altogether it looks like Momoyama period's provincial work (Kaga, Bungo, sometimes you find it in Mino like Senjuin, Fuyuhiro etc.) in a period mixed style, already with a drilled hole and tight jigane, getting ready to shinto transition but not yet there (and no sugu boshi). Shinshinto imitations did not favor a mixture of styles mixed together in nioi.

Bungo "bucket" was probably chosen because jigane is light, and overall such wide hamon with such tobiyaki was practiced more often in Bungo than in other places around the end of Muromachi to early Edo, but nevertheless the attribution might not be 100% certain especially since no specific name is added. Overall it feels like an attractive sword.

Basho · Saturday at 03:10 PM

20 hours ago, moriarty said:

Greetings Claus

It's hard not to hear Zapp Brannigan while reading your posts

Lovely wakizashi you posted, the hamon is quite enchanting.

Thank you!

Basho · Saturday at 03:15 PM

Thanks to everyone for your insights and knowledge. I really appreciate it.

So it sounds like there's a bit of a consensus emerging that this blade:

(a) is not a naoshi that was shortened from an earlier polearm, but rather was made in this size/shape and style

(b) is probably from around the end of the Muromachi/beginning of Edo period

This has been a very informative and useful thread!

Schneeds · Saturday at 06:52 PM

That is a nice looking blade especially the kissaki.

I would also like to add that vulgarity absolutely made Wolverine's character better.

Basho · Saturday at 07:09 PM

15 minutes ago, Schneeds said:

That is a nice looking blade especially the kissaki.

I would also like to add that vulgarity absolutely made Wolverine's character better.

Thank you!

Not to contribute to derailing the discussion, but having spent years in the infantry in my youth, I definitely agree that the judicious application of vulgarity can sometimes be very appropriate.