Help with mei please

[DARREN]

Hello to you all,newbie here so go easy!

 

 

Would appreciate all help possible please in translating the follwing mei on my Katana.The sword was purchased from the Lanes Armoury(Brighton, England) owned by the Hawkings brothers and was described as being late Koto era.

 

Congrats on an excellent site and hope to be a regular visitor here

 

 

 

A few pictures of the Hamon and Kissaki

 

 

 

 

 

[Brian]

Hi Darren,

 

Good to have you here. I edited the first post. The pics uploaded fine, but due to the large size it converted them to links instead of displaying directly.

 

Just wanted to ask who cleaned the tang on this one? It's a pity, because cleaning the nakago is one of the big no-nos of the Nihonto world. Hope it was done before you got it. The patina and rust on the tang (nakago) is very important to judging the age of a sword, and far better to have a rusted and uncleaned tang even if the mei is unreadable, than one that has been ground or filed to make the signature readable.

 

At a bad (and novice) guess, I would say Noshu ju KaneYoshi? Not too sure about the Kane though.

Haven't tried the date yet.

 

Regards,

Brian

[DARREN]

Hello Brian and thanks for the welcome.

 

I'm afriad I have to own up to cleaning the nakago in my impatience to get a better look at the mei etc and yes, I feel guilty as sin.I must state though that at no stage were any abrasive materials used just a bit of Brasso and elbow grease,it was only cleaned around the signitures and heavy rust (almost black) and pitting remain extensively.......I will not touch it again!

 

I hope to post some further pictures of the blade and some more technical(blade length etc) info very soon to help with further appraisal.I recently bought 'the connoisseurs book of Japaese swords' by Kokan Nagayama to do a bit of self research but to be honest being a novice the choices are mind boggling!

 

 

Once again,a big thanks for the welcome!

[Bungo]

Noshu no ju Kaneyoshi...........a Mino sword.

the other side is the date

 

milt O

[DARREN]

A few more pics.....blade length is 70.1 cm.Many thanks for the help so far,date estimate?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pcfarrar]

Interesting sword, but you do realise you've probably cut the value in half by cleaning the nakago?

You'll have to get someone over here to repatinate it for you.

[DARREN]

Cut the value in half?..surely thats a little extreme!

 

All comments welcome.

[Brian]

Darren,

 

Nope..that is pretty much fairly accurate. The original patina on the nakago is THAT important to the value of a sword.

There are people that specialise in repatinating tangs, but they are not common, and it is an expensive job. Looks like you lost a lot of the pitting too, which will never match the rest of the tang.

You aren't the first to do this though...and will not be the last, so consider it an expensive lesson learned. At least some others will be warned hopefully.

I once had a nice katana where the previous owner had sandblasted the nakago in an effort to read the mei. I eventually sold it off as there are no decent guys to repatina here, and it was getting to me more and more.

Anyways...looks like a nice blade otherwise, and let's see if we can get you more info on your sword and anyone who can read the date.

 

Regards,

Brian

[Stephen]

well see if we can dig it out,,, dont beat your self up too much, alot more have done alot worse...ie chop trees and the list goes on, you do have a nice mino blade so dont be too down.

[paulb]

Hi Darren,

As Peter said an interesting sword. While I dont think you have halved its value by cleaning the nakago you certainly havent done it any favours. One of the keys to judging the age of a blade is the colour and condition of the nakago so cleaning it not only makes it look unsightly it also makes dating more difficult.

With regard to the blade itself. personally I cant judge with any certainty from the photos. The hamon is ok for Mino and seki (Noshu) If I had to guess earlist would be Sue-mino (1470-1590) but I am more inclined to put it late shinto. it is always difficult trying to judge from photos, with few exceptions it is very difficult to capture detail of hada and hamon. Where are you based? I know you bought the sword in Brighton do you live in the south?

I would strongly recommend joining the Nortern Token Society, although they meet in Manchester they do have country members who recieve their newsletter. There a lot of keen students who would be happy to help you through the early stages of collecting and study.

[Stephen]

in the first pix the first kanj is the the start of the date ?

[DARREN]

The nakago has not been altered shape wise and like I say only had a very light polish around the signitures.......I do understand the error of my ways now though but hey ho, no use crying over spilt milk!

 

I live in Blackburn Paulb and joing the northern Tokein society would be ideal for me.

 

 

Thanks to all

[paulb]

Darren,

go to http://www.northerntokensociety.co.uk site. it has all the contact details on there. I have no doubt they can help you a lot. Welcome to the world of the Japanese sword!!

[DARREN]

Cheers Paul.

 

Would the first Kanji on the date side be the nengo (period)?.....I've looked high and low but cant find anything similar looking to this one.

[Stephen]

id go with Ei as the first kanji...maybe EISHO

[DARREN]

Mmmmmmmmmm...very interesting Stephen.

 

The date Eiroku (1558) falls nicely into the period of the 7th generation Kaneyoshi swordsmith of Yamato?

[Brian]

The second kanji is the difficult one. Did you take a look at Rich's excellent page at http://www.nihontokanjipages.com/koto.html ?

With the sword in hand, maybe you can see more than we can. I was also looking at Ei... and thought maybe Eiroku, but it is just a guess.

Nice example of a Mino sword though, and I like that tsuba and fuchi that you posted in the other thread!

 

Brian

[DARREN]

Agree Brian, the second Kanji is causing a problem,resembles nothing on that list.Its surprising how difficult it is to the novice and untrained eye,everything looks different in the books etc! :?

 

Thanks to everyone for their time and input to date.

[Nobody]

I have been hesitating to reply, because I did not find any reasonable conclusions. And I am still unsure.

 

At first, I read as follows.

??三年十月日 (October in the 3rd year of ??)

 

The first Kanji looks like Ko (康). So I naturally imagined Koo (康応). It is the same period of 1st generation Kaneyoshi. But there is a BIG problem. The 3rd year of Koo never existed. Koo era was ended at March of the 2nd year.

 

I have not got any answers yet. But I am almost sure that the first Kanji is not Ei (永), though I am not so sure that it is Ko (康).

[DARREN]

So just to reiterate the swordsmith reads NOSHU NO JU KANEYOSHI(I can only find reference to a NOSHU JU KANEYOSHI)

 

How would you classify the Hamon...Sambon Sugi?

 

 

 

Great work people,much appreciated...please keep the info coming!

[paulb]

Hi Darren,

yes I would go along with a sort of sanbon-sugi. certainly typical mino and kanemoto style. dont worry about the missing "no" in the mei

[DARREN]

Is there anyone who could recommend a good source for re-patination with the UK?...... its really got to me now

 

Anymore ideas regarding the date gentlemen?

 

 

Many thanks.

[mike yeon]

I'd go with "Ei" too. Maybe Ei-kyo. Mid 1400s. Which would point to the nidai Kaneyoshi. Or if Ei-sho, there was a mino Kaneyoshi that worked around 1500.

 

Hamon is sanbonsugi. It certainly looks mino-den muromachi (wide shinogi ji. less pronounced sugata. coarse hada.)

 

Also, Darren, this guy is definitely mino-den, no need to look at yamato or bizen kaneyoshi.

 

There are few togi outside Japan than can handle a repatination (cleaning effectively altered the mei. they might also suggest removing the mei entirely.) You have enough of the blade left to make a close call on the smith. The mei is not the most important thing in kantei.

 

Then figure out:

 

How much do you like the blade? Restoration is very expensive. You might even end up spending more than the blade is worth.

 

In the U.S. I know Moses (nihontoantiques.com) handles repatination. One of the best guys you can deal with. Good luck.

 

mike

[DARREN]

Thanks for you comments mike!

[David Flynn]

I would call the hamon: Togari Gunome Midare.

[mike yeon]

I would call the hamon: Togari Gunome Midare.

 

agreed. which is a variation of sanbonsugi. classic mino-den.

 

mike

[Yoshii]

Hi Darren,

I have just today see your message.

As far as my knowledge reach is say it reads Noshu ju Kaneyoshi an dated Keian san nen, 1650, the second kanji of the date is not clear so it could also be Keio san nen, 1867, but looking into the sword and at the hamon it lloks to me to be Keian, the hamon suggest it is made by a smith of the Mino Seki Kanemoto school. It is a typical example of the sanbonsugi hamon of this school. Being very regular it must be of a later period of this school which started about 1530.

Hoping this will help you.

greetings Yoshii

[Jean]

Hi everybody,

 

Interesting sword as I have come along few months ago across a nijimei tachi Kaneyoshi (Mino kanji for Kane) which a strong Yamato flavour.

 

Zenjo Kaneyoshi went to Mino end of Nambokucho, beginning of Muromachi. As a lot of Mino smiths, he was coming from Yamato and said to be a son of Tegai Kanenaga. he is part, as Honami Koson has stated, together with Akasaka Senjuin, of Yamato Mino Mono.

 

I am quoting Honami Koson :

 

"Zenjo Kaneyoshi an the Akasaka Senjuin Group worked in the strict Yamato tradition. Therefore works of the smiths belonging to these two groups can be considered the same as Yamato works, such as those of the Yamato Tegai smiths."

 

If you check with Kokan Nagayama book, this blade does not belong to the Kaneyoshi smiths group. The boshi of this sword is Jizo, typical Mino, far from Kaneyoshi boshi (which is untypical Mino).

 

IMHO, it is not a smith from the 15th century, rather 16th/17th century;

the hamon is typical Mino, Gunome midare and perhaps based on but not sansbonsugi, definetly too irregular. Furhermore, looking from the munemachi the blade does not seem to have been polished a lot of time.

[DARREN]

Yoshii,would I be correct in stating that the patina and pitting of the nakago appears far too 'weathered' and old for a blade circa 19th century?

 

Jean,the blade was described as being Koto era on purchase( I fully understand this can NEVER be taken for granted,especially when date Kanji are unreadable) so your estimate of 16/17th century may be close.

 

The hamon is good and strong,peaking to nearly touch the shinogi in places.One or two areas of small ware(is this down to over-polishing or fault at forging stage?) in the hamon otherwise its aesthetic appearance I think is very good!

 

Fascinating and diverse range of comments and much appreciated......please keep 'em coming.

 

 

 

 

A belated happy new year to all board members!