Reddit mentions of The Connoisseurs Book of Japanese Swords

EDIT: Ooh, shiny! :-D Thanks much.

---

TL;DR: Authentic antique Japanese sword. Assuming it is not gimei Possibly gimei (false signature; the mei is not as well-carved as I would like it to be), but if the mei is genuine it was made at the Imperial Court by one of the Iga no Kami Kinmichi smiths sometime between 1624 and 1840; subsequently stuffed into gunto mounts and given an amateur "polish," but still restorable and worth preservation. Please read the care guide here and here, and if you would like to have it polished I've listed resources near the bottom of the thread. I recommend cross-posting to the Nihonto Message Board to further narrow down which Kinmichi smith made this sword, and/or if it is gimei.

---

I will attempt mei translation tomorrow (going to bed now). First glance I can tell you it is genuine in the sense that it came from Japan. Nakago patina looks significantly older than WWII, but Imperial chrysanthemum is often used during Gendai / WWII period. Long signature with ura date is usually a later-period trait too. Interesting; looking forward to mei reading in the morning.

Too sleepy for more right now, will return tomorrow.

---

EDIT: OK, here we go. I can't try to read them until they are oriented correctly so I'm downloading them as a zip packet now. TheWildTurkey is also right that the surviving mounts (such as they are) are gunto mounts. On the other hand I am not 100% convinced the blade proper is gunto (as opposed to antique prewar) yet, that nakago just looks so much older. On a side note, I can see the suggestion of a hamon underneath the unfortunate amateurish attempt at restoration (which doesn't mean much, could be oil-quenched if WWII, but it is heat treated at least).

Images downloaded. Translation in progress...

---

First interesting point, the mei is done in tachi style, that is, the name is on the side of the nakago that would face outward if the sword was worn edge-down.

The omote (outside, i.e. the side an observer would see with the edge down and nakago to the left) reads:

日 NI (first character of Nippon/Nihon - Japan/Japanese)

本 HON (second character of Nihon)

鍛 (first character of KAJI, smith)

冶 (second character of KAJI)

宗 SO (first character of Sosho, master/teacher)

匠 SHO (second character of Sosho)

藤 FUJI (first character of Fujiwara, old honorary clan title)

原 WARA

金 KIN (first character of Kinmichi, smith name)

道 MICHI

So as a sentence: NIHON KAJI SOSHO FUJIWARA KINMICHI (Fujiwara-clan Japanese master swordsmith Kinmichi)

---

The ura (reverse) reads:

三 (first character of Mishina)

品 (second character of Mishina)

伊 (first character of Iga province)

賀 (second character of Iga province)

守 KAMI (lord; highest official title for swordsmiths)

As a sentence: MISHINA IGA NO KAMI (Mishina line, Lord of Iga Province)

---

I'll be back in a minute. This is not gunto, it is a fine older sword (stuffed into gunto mounts). I will help narrow down the possibilities once I have finished translating and cross-checking, but there are a number of smiths in this line between 1596 and 1860.

---

OK, I'm back. The Kinmichi smiths signing with "Nihon kaji…" seem to date between 1772 and 1848. The only one with the Fujiwara title I see at the moment is KIN55, Kinnmichi working in Yamashiro around Anei period (1772-1781). This is the Shinshinto era ("new-new sword" period) when many copies of older, classical swords were in vogue. Since this is done in tachi-mei with an Imperial kiku (chrysanthemum), it certainly matches that artistic trend. Update: I have discovered that many of the "later" generations of Kinmichi did inscribe the kiku emblem, which matches this sword. Second update: further info suggests this is an earlier sword, and turns out "Nihon Kaji Sosho" (master swordsmith of Japan) started with second-gen Kinmichi.

---

In the Shinshinto volume of the Nihonto Koza, there is the following on Kanemichi/Kinmich of Iga:

> …As for Iga no Kami Kanemichi (Kinmichi), there is nothing that could really be called his works, as he worked exclusively in the Imperial Court, and his duties were to determine who should work there. At any rate, he is interesting from the point that he was the last of a famous Mon which had continued for a long time.

Take that how you will. Still researching.

---

Success on the ura mei! The first two characters together read "Mishina," which is a sword line. This will help narrow down the smith. In fact it suggests it is an earlier smith. More digging to do...

---

Kokan Nagayama's "Connoisseur's" book has a more detail on the early Mishina school. Instead of typing it all out, I will simply upload the relevant pages here, here, and here. However, here are a few key quotes:

> The founder of the Mishina School was Kanemichi, who lived in Seki, Mino province, at the close of the Muromachi period. He had four sons. Iga no Kami Kinmichi was the eldest, and the second eldest was Rai Kinmichi. His third son was Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi ad his fourth, Etchu no Kami Masatoshi. The four brothers later moved to Kyoto, where they played an important part in the manufacture of blades in the Keicho Shinto period.

> The second-generation Iga no Kami Kanemichi (ed.– alt. Kinmichi) titled himself "Nihon Kaji Sosho" (Master swordsmith of Japan). His important position allowed him to use his influence at the Imperial Court to help determine which smiths would be given honorific titles. Later generations, as a distinguished family, succeeded to this exclusive business through the end of the Edo period.

Very interesting! More to come, but this info seems to be narrowing down to KIN46 (1661-1673) or one of his line.

---

The Shinto volume of the Nihonto Koza has some additional information on the Mishina school smiths. Again, here are the pages (one and two), and here are some key quotes:

> Kanemichi was the eldest son of Seki Kanemichi and it is said that he received the title of Iga no Kami (ed.— Lord of Iga) during Bunroku (1592-1596). …

> MEI: Those inscribed IGA NO KAMI FUJIWARA KANEMICHI are the most common, there are also some without the FUJIWARA, and some that are just the nijimei of KANEMICHI. There are some that are fairly large size, and also some that are not all that large, but the tagane (ed.– chiseling) is proportionally fine, and have a tone which looks like the previous era, in other words, Late Muromachi.

> SPECIAL TRAITS … As for the nidai (ed.– second gen.)… the quality is inferior to that of the shodai (ed.– first gen), and are poor in elegance. …As for the mei, he inscribed IGA NO KAMI FUJIWARA KANEMICHI the same as the shodai, but he used a flat tagane and it is thicker than that of the shodai. Also, he inscribed the KIKU MON (ed.– Imperial chrysanthemum) and NIHON KAJI SOSHO on the ura.

> From the sandai (ed.– third gen.) on, it is the same mei style as the nidai, but SOSHO (惣匠) was inscribed as SOSHO (宗匠).

The last line there is pretty interesting, since if strictly true it implies this sword is at least a third-generation (KIN51, 1675-1716) sword.

---

At this point there are various conflicting pointers to different generations in this line, from the second gen to the later gens. Narrowing it down further would require rubbings / illustrations of the nakago & mei from previous swords, and a more thorough inspection of the workmanship and style of the metallurgical activity / shape / nakago cross-referenced against records of the smiths' known works. I do not have any more resources than I have already shared (apart from googling – we might find a matching sword online), so I highly recommend that you post this sword on the Nihonto Message Board to help narrow down which smith made this or to check if it is gimei (false signature).

Someone has attempted an amateur "polish" which has done some damage to the blade (note the softer geometry) and masked the details, but the good news is it looks very healthy and restorable by a professional polisher. I am going to quote myself from another thread to save time:

> If... you wanted to have [the blade] assessed further, then the next steps would be to post it on the Nihonto Message Board, bring it to a sword show, sword club, shinsa, and/or to send it to a qualified professional polisher. There are very, very few qualified pros outside of Japan; some are Moses Becerra, Jon Bowhay, Bob Benson, and Jimmy Hayashi. Or, get in touch with Paul Martin (who serves as a middleman for Japanese sword services).

> Please read the care tips here and here.

> As far as what you can do: repeated cleaning with fine-grade uchiko and oiling will help neutralize any red rust and even strip off some of the thinner rust. That's it, please do not attempt anything else. If you want to look into having the blade professionally restored, it is very expensive ($75~$100 per inch) so is usually only recommendable if you have a valuable-enough blade, expect to turn a profit, or just are well-off and sentimental. ;-)

---

That's the end of this monster post. Thank you for an enjoyable research project to spend my morning on.

Cheers,
—G.

I don't have it with me anymore, else i'd look it up for you, but this book: The Connoisseurs Book of Japanese Swords should get you pointed in the right direction.

Also this: http://www.nihonto.com/

Other than that, if you don't know anything more about the blade, all I can say is do not alter it in any way. Don't try to sharpen or clean it. Have it professionally evaluated by a reputable collector's group or individual. Japanese blade collecting is a very particular discipline and very tiny slight things can be the difference of thousands of dollars value.