Nihonto Club

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

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

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

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

Now that I have the Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords I can add to the possibilities for this particular sword.

On page 266 of this book it mentions that blades by Kunisuke have substantial sugata with thick kasane. That is certainly true for this blade. It was something I mentioned before without at that time knowing the correct words/descriptions to use. The motohaba is 32mm, the sakihaba is 20.5mm and the kisane is 7mm.
My 'Kaneyoshi' blade kisane is 4mm for comparison.

I haven't as yet been able to put a description/name to the hamon from descriptions and drawings in the book. If you look at the jpg labelled 'tempering' you can see that there are many fine lines in the hamon moving up into the hiraji almost like waves when you have wind against tide - like peaks. (my description) But also I have spotted one feature on the hamon which is the same as picture 164 on page 229 of the book. Not sure what that feature is called yet - looks like a flower or leaves - will try and photograph it.

So in conclusion, I can see many features on the blade that could be attributed to one of the Kunisuke generations, as noted above. If the polish had been better it may have shown up more clearly on the blade's surface.

Cheers

Andy

Doesn't really show it up very well but there is a fan shaped flower kind of 'thing' floating in the wave forms.

Cheers

Andy

Can't see much in the picture, but your description sounds like "kikusui" or similar. There are a couple of other designs that are very similar to kikusui, but you need to see it very clearly to tell them apart in the real world. Most examples on swords are not nearly as clear/obvious as what is shown in books.

And if it's not in the category of one of the "decorative shapes" like kikusui, then it could be in the more general category of "choji midare" (a catch-all for a 'random bumpy shape' that goes up and down a lot, but does not fit a more specific name).

Edit: Looking at your previous picture again: look up the words TOGARI (means 'pointed') and YAHAZU.

Pete

Thanks again for the input.

Whereas there are lots of features that would suggest a 'Kunisuke' which would be great from my point of view, I still find the mei comparison somewhat off-putting. I realise that the blade assessment is one aspect but the signature seems very 'sloppy.' If I was to make a guess, assuming it's not a gimei (which it could still very well be), then I would guess that it was done by a student or by an old 'Kunisuke' whose eye and hand co-ordination may have deteriorated with age or eyesight for close work may have deteriorated, which it does after aged 40 or 50. Only my thoughts - clutching at straws for a reasonable explanation as to why the mei is so 'bad.' I say this based on looking at other mei online, which may always be the best in any case, being featured online, but this one is the worst I've seen - not meaning to be disrespectful, only my observation based on general aesthetics.

Cheers

Andy

Just had another look at the mei.
The first two characters are virtually touching. It's such a simple task, in principle, to accurately space your characters, especially if you have spent weeks making the blade. Why would you start the second character so close to the first that they are almost touching?
The third and fourth characters are even worse - rather a 'dog's breakfast' to be blunt.

In conclusion to possibilities:-

1. They were done in a hurry?
2. The person was unwell at the time.
3. The person was old/infirm/poor eyesight.
4. The person was inexperienced/a student.
5. It is a fake signature/a gimei.

Most gimei's I've seen have been reasonably carried out - (only seen images online) - some don't seem to make any sense or have 'odd' characters. But there is obviously some effort to fool the individual. This blade does have some basic features of a Kunisuke so if a gimei then those features have been recognised as such - at that time (1620s/1640's) or later? in order to fake the correct signature, but without care and attention, possibly?

Anyway, no closer to a conclusion about the mei, from my list above, but I do feel that the blade is of that school/period, based on my limited knowledge and research.

Cheers

Andy

As much as I hate to admit it, I am now almost certain that this blade is no Kunisuke of any generation, based on the mei.
I have added another image kanji.jpg which compares the first character KAWA ( I have mistakenly called it KAMA in the image). I have looked at quite a number of genuine/certificated Kunisuke nakago and all have a particular horizontal stroke within the KAWA kanji. The blade I own has a vertical stroke.
Secondly, and which I've mentioned before, the signature on my blade is very poorly chiseled out of the metal - basically a right old mess.

So I will 'put this one to bed' now and accept it as a gimei.
I believe the period is right - sugata/kissane/kissaki/hamon all look appropriate, but as to who made it, that shall probably remain a mystery.

Thanks for your help in sorting this one out.

Cheers

Andy

A theoretical option, FYI:
Years ago, I've heard of folks sending a blade for polish in Japan, and requesting that the signature be removed, then submitting it for shinsa (with the new polish, and no signature).
Without a signature, it is not gimei, so it's possible to get a "good paper" from the shinsa-in. And the paper will give an attribution as to who made it.
There have been cases where this was done, and the attribution went to the name that was just removed - whoops. Was the mei actually good, or is the workmanship of the blade accurate enough that it cannot be distinguished from the real maker???

Pete

Hi Pete,

I thought if the nakago was 'fiddled with' then it seriously affected the value of the sword? The rust and ageing of the tang being an important value in the overall value of the blade? By removing the signature would it not remove the rust/ageing and quite a bit of thickness of the tang as the chiseling is quite deep. Also the yasurime would be affected?
Not sure it's a route I would like to take - a bit of an expensive risk if you don't get the certificate plus the cost of a professional polish.
If I had the spare cash I think I might prefer to invest in another blade. At the moment though I'm tempted to keep purchasing, I am taking the sensible route and reading/researching until my knowledge level has improved.
Interesting possible route and having a professional opinion on age/school/smith would be satisfying.

Cheers

Andy

I think it's variable, but my understanding is that most of the removal process is to simply peen the metal back down into the chisel marks. That is, the original chiseling doesn't remove any metal, it just moves it around, so it's possible to just "put it back" (sort of).
Anyway, the theory is that a professionally-modified tang is better than a fake signature, when it comes to passing shinsa (because a bad signature will NEVER pass shinsa).
Personally, I would never do it on my blade - the bad signature is historically interesting, and getting a "paper" is not very important to me.

If you're looking for a no-risk blade to buy, I can recommend either or both of these :-) :
http://yakiba.com/Daisho_Tango_no_Kami_Kanemichi.htm
Already polished and papered, etc. Good examples of the popular Mishina school. Lots of interesting hamon features to look at.
I'm the owner, but they are for sale on the Yakiba site on consignment.

Pete