Hello folks. I just took down an officer's sword this morning that I've had for a few years to check out the tang, and lo and behold, signed w/ 3 separate mounting holes. Can anyone translate the Kanji and give me an approximate age of this blade? The temper line is quite crisp and the overall condition of the sword and scabbard is excellent. The rest of the sword is all WWII vintage mounts, and this one purportedly was picked up on Iwo. Many thanks in advance.
-
-
近江守藤原継廣
Ominokami Fujiwara Tsuguhiro
This site says "Edo Jidai"
http://www.yushindou.com/Oshina/Tabl...1208/15151332/
Different person engraved the tang:
THIS one looks like the same hand engraved:
【時代】江戸中期(元禄頃1688～)
NOTE: your tang butt is a different shape than the two I've illustrated.
--Guy -
Thanks Guy. So safe to assume late 17th century blade? Is this smith considered one of high quality? Many thanks for taking the time to comment.Comment
-
Dunno .....
Milton,
I'm not knowledgeable in those areas -- I can do a bit of translation here and there, then research what I find; but no way can I evaluate a blade.
I'm certain someone with real knowledge will opine in time.
--GuyComment
-
Thank you Guy. I appreciate your efforts!Comment
-
Hello
I have a papered Tsuguhiro and ,only from memory as I don't have the sword or my books with me ,the signature looks gimei
That's not to say its not a nice blade just that the signature is fake
NickComment
-
Hi Nick. Thank you for your comments. All I can say with any certainty is that it is a legit WWII bring back that I got directly from the vets son. Whether it was a long ago attempt to copy a "master" sword smith, I can not say. It IS however, a damn beautiful WWII officer's Katana. Thanks again for commenting.Comment
-
Most signatures are gimei
That is to say fake
But there were lots of good smiths who faked signatures
Collectors get hung up on signatures judge the blade before looking at the nakagoComment
-
There wer four generations of Tsuguhiro who worked in the Edo kaji. The signature could be that of one of the latter generations. The entire blade including signature requires study to validate authenticity. The more famous the smith, the greater chance of gimei. The blades of many medium and upper medium quality smiths are seldom faked so I would disagtree that most signatures are fake.Originally posted by nickn View PostComment
-
Thanks for the additional information gents. At some point, I'll snap some additional pix of the entire blade for your further assessment. Thanks again.Comment
-
on the whole most signatures are fake percentage wise but as the quality of the smith goes down so does the fakeryComment
-
Comment
-
i have read 80-90% of mei are fake
as bob said middle or low ranking smiths are not faked so much
i have a sword with a 4th generation yasutsugu mei, not a highly rated smith which did not pass shinsa, so what the percentage accrsss the whole range is i dont knowComment
-
I would strongly disagree with whoever wrote the 80-90% number. I have owned and/or handled thousands of Japanese swords in my life and the percentage of fakes would come no where near that number. The highest percentage of fakes I have encountered are actually Shinto and Shinshinto such as Shodai Tadayoshi, Kotetsu, Inoye Shinkai, Masahide & Kiyomaro. I would say encountering swords with these mei are highly faked.
As to the yondai Yasutsugu blade that was rejected, was the shinsa outside of Japan or inside Japan? The reason I ask is the fact that shinsa held outside of Japan can be not always offer the most accurate information as the team is rushed and also weary from travel and jet lag. The competancy of the individuals on the team is also always an issue. I know of a blade signed Kiyomaro that was rejected as gimei at one shinsa in Japan and eventually was designated Juyo Token by the NBTHK one year later.Comment
Comment