Koto katana with orikaeshi-mei!

[Viper6924]

Hi!

 

I continue my quest for knowledge about my small collection nihonto.

 

This is a long cut down katana. My favorit blade. Comes with an old koshirae. I had it for 3-4 years now.

 

Cutting edge:72 cm

 

Complete length: 91 cm

 

Mei: Bizen and perhaps Mitsu

 

I think the pictures tells a good story for an expert.

 

I have two questions.

 

1. Can someone make out the kanji and perhaps give me a maker of this sword?

 

2. Age?

 

I value every opinion very highly!!!

 

 

/Jan

[Jean]

Bishu Osafune somebody

[cabowen]

Interesting sword but as jean notes, only Bishu Osafune is legible in the photos....I don't think more photos will help- it probably needs to be examined in hand....You would learn a great deal about this one and the other one by submitting them to a shinsa....

[Viper6924]

Thanks a lot Jean and Chris. It´s a xxxx shame that the rest of the kanjis have been lost to time.

 

A shinsa would def be a good idee´ for this one. I guess this would be the place to find out when the next shinsa in a country near Scandinavia would be held.Like England or perhaps Germany.

Is there any possibility from the photos to place this sword in a timeframe?

 

Thanks again!

 

Jan

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

If i'm not wrong, this sword is a katana, and i wonder if it is a true orikaeshi-mei.

[Viper6924]

Hi Jacques!

 

The only thing I´m sure about is the orikaeshi-mei. Well as sure as you be on a an old japanense sword.

 

It´s acctually easy to see the fold on the pictures. I just wish there would be some more kanjis readable.

 

Any further info would be great. Especially a timeframe. But this is probably hard, based on pictures only.

 

/Jan

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

The only thing I´m sure about is the orikaeshi-mei.

 

It is possible Jacques refer to the quality (and hence the purpose) of this orikaeshi.

[Viper6924]

An Orikaeshi-mei with a bad signature can always be a valid point. As I said, You can almost never be a 100% reagarding antiques.

 

I got this sword from an auction I attended. And all the swords has been to an expert app. But the sword was listed as "An early-mid koto katana with orikaeshi-mei"

 

That leaves a lot of room for deeper analys.

 

Because of the fact that the last kanjis are missing, it gets even more important to read the blade and try to find

 

a, maker/school and b, period of produktion.

 

But that is, sorry to say, way over my head. And like Chris said, it is probably only possible via a shinsa. But I feel this forum is the second best place.

 

I can only guess the period by looking at other swords in books and on internet. But I think it´s best this time to let the guessing be done by the experts.

 

 

/Jan

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

An early-mid koto katana with orikaeshi-mei

 

 

With a katana mei ? Personally, i find this nakago somewhat strange, it has to my eyes an artificial flavour.

[Viper6924]

The question is, based on the sword as a whole, if it could have been made let´s say early 15th century give and take a couple of years. Making it a mid-koto produktion?

 

Or is the shape, hamon etc pointing it to a koto-blade from the 16th century?

 

The fact that it has an orikaeshi-mei on a katana, historic wise, still can put it in early Muromachi-period when the transition from tachi to katana began.

 

The tang with or without the orikaeshi-mei, still looks old like the Flintstones.

 

With my very limited knowledge, I can find some features on this blade that supports an early Muromachi timeframe.

 

But hey, I´ve been wrong before

 

/Jan

[Nobody]

Based on the location of the orikaeshi-mei on the shortened nakago, I assume that the original blade was 12 cm longer at the least. Its current blade length is 72 cm. Then the original blade length must be about 84 cm or more. Even so, its mei was originally chiseled as a katana-mei.

Isn't it strange if the long katana was really made before Muromachi period? Or was it a tachi bearing a katana-mei?

[Viper6924]

Now it´s getting a bit intresting. Moriyama-sans questions is a valid one. I also agree that this sword must fall under the category tachi from the beginning on the account of the original length.

 

Why than slap a katana mei on it? This is truely strange if the blade was made during the 14th century. But if it´s made let´s say 1400-1430 it could acctually

 

been made as long katana in a time when tachi and katanas was being mixed out of preference on the battlefield.

 

Could there be an reason for this. And again, is the features (based on the pictures) on the blade such that it could support an early Muromachi-blade?

 

I can´t get my head around it. What I know is: I have a very nice looking sword with a good hamon and a very old looking tang. The blade show def signs of aging and repeated polishes. And amongst this a orikaeshi-mei.

 

/Jan

[Viper6924]

I´ve been doing some more research on this sword. And if I don´include the orikaeshi-mei (I will leave this hot topic for a future shinsa) and just look at the sword, I see some indication that this could even be a late nanbokucho period sword. Here goes:

 

The rather shallow torii-sori, chu kissaki, hamon and of course the long tang. Ad to this it´s overall length and obvious sign of age.

 

What do You true experts think? Am I completely out of the reservation on this one?

 

Jan