Kawachi No Kami Fujiwara Kunisuke?

I've attached a few images of another of my wakazashi. I admit I bought this unseen, on a whim, which for a beginner is probably not a good idea. I know the advice is to read and read before making a purchase but the internet makes it so easy to just click and buy.
Anyway, I attach a picture of the tang and its signature - whether that be genuine or fake, I believe it reads - Kawachi No Kami Fujiwara Kunisuke.
It came with a nice iron Tsuba, also images attached.

I have haven't yet documented the details of length or curvature or type of kissaki etc. But what I have noticed, compared to the Kaneyoshi? wakazashi from my earlier post, is that this blade is much heavier. In thickness terms the Kaneyoshi is 4mm thick on the back, measured at the habaki. Whereas this blade is 7mm thickness measured at the same location.

It's amazingly difficult to capture the subtleties of the tempering on the blade - easy to see with the naked eye but not so easy with a camera - this looks like 'Frog-shaped clover-tree flower' (kawazu choji) - purely comparing with images in the Yumoto book.

Shame there is a slight kink or bend in the blade at the tip - you may be able to see this from the last image.
Condition of blade not as clean as the kaneyoshi a couple of the tiniest nicks on the edge - hard to make out without magnification.

Cheers

Andy

AttachmentSize
20170421_105452.jpg937.25 KB
tempering.jpg86.92 KB
tsuba.jpg70.59 KB

bent

Hi, You are correct about the signature. At a glance, it is not an obvious match to the more well-known examples seen on the net, but it still may be a match to one of the generations. Also note that a smith's signature could change somewhat over time, so that could possibly be an explanation of the differences.
The bend may be fixable, but needs to be done by an expert to avoid making it worse. Beware of self-trained Western "sword polishers".

Pete

Kunisuke

Hi Pete,

Thanks.

I have found quite a few examples of Kunisuke tang signatures on the internet, but quite a few variables in detail and style so difficult to make a match.
A few other details from searching, suggest blades of 1st gen Kunisuke have shallow sori, relatively small Chu-Kissaki and Hamon notare-gunome mixed with choji and ashi - all features of this particular blade - though obviously those features on their own are not enough to be anywhere near conclusive.
I do feel the signature is a bit 'rough' and not as defined as other examples. I have attached another image. The 1st character on all genuine examples I've seen have steeper angle on two (not sure what they're called) angled features of the character. From my untrained eye, the overall quality of etching on my blade looks shoddy or rough. Not as clean.

Not having seen or handled any other blades apart from the three in my possession, this one of the three is very heavy - as I mentioned, 7mmm thick at the habaki on the back edge. Is it normal to have such a heavy blade? I thought that the ideal was to have a light blade and that's why some had the groove of varying type/length - to help with bending and weight?
I haven't found any information yet on relative weights to length ratio and if there were trends to lighten blades over the generations etc.

Cheers

Andy

signatures

Hey Andy, You're definitely looking at all the right things, but as you say, it's hard to be definitive. In your latest picture, I'd say that yours is so much different than the other that they were clearly not signed by the same person - there are fundamental "handwriting" differences.

As you may already understand, the signature typically does not verify a "good" blade (handwriting can be copied), but it may confirm a gimei.

One other thought: Don't get too hung up on the signature. If the blade is well-made, a false signature does not change that. Sure, a gimei will hurt the resale value, but that only should matter if it is nothing but an investment to you.

As for the blade thickness: I think there are multiple possible explanations. It can be a trait of a school and/or time period, or it could have been made with a certain purpose in mind (such as a "yoroi-doshi", armor-piercer).

Pete

Thanks

Hi Pete,

Thanks for the input. I'll keep looking and checking. I do reckon the blade is of good quality, from my untrained eye, but main concern, apart from the possible gimei, is the bend at the tip. Obviously spoils the line.
So much to learn.

Cheers

Andy