Over the years and with the growth of knowledge among collectors, the translation of signatures on swords has considerably improved. However, there are some citations of mei going round whose translation is correct but whose grammar of the quoted Japanese inscription is not. Some might call me nitpicking but my intention is to draw up an article which serves as a guideline for others who have to translate sword signatures. First of all it has to be mentioned that the vast majority of all signatures on swords are inscribed in the kanbun syntax (漢文), the Classical Chinese notation. But one has to know that they were read in the Japanese way, that means the reader reproduced the signature in his mind or in words in the proper Japanese grammer. As a basic introduction, the Wikipedia article on kanbun provides a decent overview.

Well, let us begin with the most common cases, namely the mention of „made by“ or „forged by“.  In a signature, this is inscribed as (国広作之), (国広造之) or (国広鍛之) for example. Now in earlier years, such signatures were translated character by character, i.e. as „Kunihiro saku kore“, „Kunihiro tsukuru kore“ and „Kunihiro kitau kore“ respectively. It would be harsh to say the citations are incorrect but at least they are from the point of view of grammar. The correct reading is namely „Kunihiro kore o tsukuru“, „Kunihiro kore o tsukuru“ (yes, the same tsukuru reading) and „Kunihiro kore o kitaeru“ respectively, whereas in the latter case, also „Kunihiro kore o kitau“ is possible.

Also often found are inscriptions which mention where a blade was made, for example (於南紀重国造之). Frequently, such a mei of Shigekuni is translated as „Oite Nanki Shigekuni tsukuru kore“ but correct is „Nanki ni oite Shigekuni kore o tsukuru“. The character oite (於) marks that what follows refers to a place where something took or takes place. In Japanese, the term oite stands at the end and is marked with the particle ni (に), i.e. „… ni oite“, „at …“. So the reader has to be familiar with Japanese grammer to put the characters quoted in kanbun in the correct order. In texts, sometimes hints are given in the form of so-called kaeri-ten (返り点), little marks at the side of characters which lead the reader to the order of characters as they would be written when noted in Japanese. This is not the case at sword signatures and the reader/translator of a mei has to become familiar with the correct syntax. But it is not as difficult as it seems because mostly always the same phrases were used. That means when you see the character oite (於), try to figure out what place name follows (which can consist of one or more characters). Also oite does not necessarily have to be at the beginning of a signature. For example Hinin-Kiyomitsu from Kaga often signed with „Kashû-jû Fujiwara Kiyomitsu Kasamai ni oite kore o tsukuru“ (加州住藤原清光於笠舞作之), „made by Fujiwara Kiyomitsu from Kaga province in Kasamai.“

Another frequently found term in sword signatures is motte (以) which means „with, by, by means of“. It is used with the particle o (を) and comes like ni oite at the end of the word it refers to. For example (以南蛮鉄). This translates as nanban-tetsu o motte, i.e. „[made by] using/processing nanban-tetsu“. Or for example (以南川砂鉄鍛之), „Minamigawa no satetsu o motte kore o kitaeru“, „forged by using satetsu from the Minamigawa [a river in Kumamoto Prefecture, former Higo province]“.

Now it´s getting harder. A bit tricky are namely inscriptions where the swordsmith mentions his customer. For example (応山田太郎需造之). Here the two characters (応) and (需) intereact, where the former means „to respond to“ (kotae[ru]) and the latter „demand, request“ (motome[ru]). Fully translated the inscription reads „Yamada Tarô no motome ni kotae kore o tsukuru“, „made by request of Yamada Tarô“ or „made according to an order of Yamada Tarô“. [Note: The character (応) is often signed in the old variant (應).] The character (需) could also be replaced by (好). The latter reads „konomi“ and means „wish, liking“. Thus a signature (応山田太郎好造之) is translated as „Yamada Tarô no konomi ni kotae kore o tsukuru“. Well, it is left to the translator or reader to decide how literally such an inscription is translated. Strictly it would mean „made according to the liking/wish/preference of Yamada Tarô“ but which is in effect equal to an order as the smith mostly did not forge a blade (for free) just because the customer likes it (although sword presents and donations by smiths are of course also known). [Note: Apart from „kotae(ru), the character (応) can also read „ôjite, that means the signatures quoted above can also be translated as „Yamada Tarô no motome ni ôjite kore o tsukuru“ or „Yamada Tarô no konomi ni ôjite kore o tsukuru“.]

Picture 1: mei “Nanki ni oite Shigekuni kore o tsukuru” (於南紀重国造之)

Picture 2: mei “Miyajima Minamoto Nagatada no motome ni kotae/ōjite Fujiwara Unju Korekazu (応宮島源長忠需藤原運寿是一, „made for Miyajima Minamoto Nagatada“), “gyōnen 45-sai Azabu-tei ni oite kore o seitan” (行年四十五歳於麻生邸精鍛之, „carefully forged at the age of 45 in the Azabu residence“)

I would like to inform all German readers about an upcoming event. The organisers are looking for supporters and participating artists. If you are interested, you can contact the staff at requiem [at] gmail.com.

It is called “Requiem” and more details can be found here:

http://tackk.com/requiem

https://www.facebook.com/events/597347486947341/

Thank you.

   When I was working at my Index of Japanese Swordsmiths, I frequently came across different kinds of mentioning certain forging techniques in a signature. First the easy ones. For example a wakizashi with the mei „Teruyoshi saku – shitagitae Hidekane“ (英義作・下鍛英兼), which means „Made by (Fujieda Tarô) Teruyoshi, foundation forging by Hidekane (who was Teruyoshi´s student but is mostly quoted with the reading „Hidekane“).“ Another example. There is a katana extant by Miyoshi Nagamichi (三善長道) whose mei on the ura side starts with „agegitae“ (上鍛), which means „final or finish forging.“ This practice was by no means uncommon, i.e. a master having his students forging the shitagitae, rare is only the explicite mentioning on the tang. So we can assume that such inscriptions honestly marked less expensive blades coming out of the forge where the buyer was now sure that the master at least gave the finishing touches. (Note: More details about shitagitae and agegitae can be found in Kapp and Yoshihara´s standard work The Craft of the Japanese Sword.)

   Another rather frequently found term on sword tangs is „shin no kitae“ (真の鍛) or „shin jûgo-mai kôbuse tsukuru“ (真十五枚甲伏造). The former is seen for example occasionally on blades of Kotetsu (虎徹) and the latter on works of Ômura Kaboku (大村加卜), his student Bokuden (卜伝), Suishinshi Masahide (水心子正秀), the 2^nd generation Shitahara Toshinaga (下原利長), Hamabe Toshinori (浜部寿格), or Musashi Tarô Yasukuni (武蔵太郎安国). Usually shin no kitae is translated as „carefully forged“. As this process takes a great deal of time and effort, the translation is not off but there is more than just „carefully forged“. The famous sword tester Yamano Ka´emon (山野加右衛門) wrote namely in his rare script „Tetsutan-shû“ (鉄鍛集) that for shin no kitae, high-quality steel from Izuha (出羽) of Iwami province is used and mixed with a small amount (5 monme ~ 19 g) of old iron from anchors and the like. This mix of iron pieces is piled up in the usual way of a loose block (mizubeshi, 水減し) and then forged and folded crosswise. Note: Like Shiso (宍粟) in Harima province, Izuha was known since oldest times as production site of high-quality iron or steel respectively.

   Well, the term shin jûgo-mai kôbuse tsukuru has nothing to do with shin no kitae. The one who started to apply this technique was the aforementioned Kaboku. In his publication „Kentô-hihô“ (剣刀秘宝) he explains that he used three different kinds of steel for this forging technique, namely two kinds of core steel, shin-jitetsu (心地鉄, lit. „basic core steel“) and shin-hatetsu (心刃鉄, lit. „cutting-edge core steel“), and one kind of skin steel which he called tsurabuse-uwatetsu (面伏上鉄, lit. „bent over surface steel“). First he prepared the soft shin-jitetsu like the well-known shingane (core steel). Then he made the shin-hatetsu of high-quality steel from Izuha and/or Shisô which is still soft but a bit harder than the shin-jitetsu. The shin-jitetsu is put atop of the shin-hatetsu and both steels are forged together. As a final step, the hard tsurabuse-uwatetsu is completely wrapped around this package (see picture 1). Thus we have here still a kind of kôbuse, the famous U-shape, but where the shingane consists of two kinds of steel of different hardness and the kawagane covers also the later back of the blade. The jûgô-mai is explained by the fact that the shin-jitetsu is folded fifteen times to make it considerably soft. That means „shin jûgo-mai“ is here an abbreviation of „15-times folded shingane“. It is now assumed that this forging technique was developed by Kaboku either to achive the most durable sword or to rediscover old and forgotten kotô forging techniques. I would tend to the former approach because unlike forging methods like hon-sanmai-awase or shihô-zume, a kôbuse or Kaboku´s version of a kôbuse does not necessarily have that big effect on the later appearance of the finished sword (i.e. the way the jigane interacts with the habuchi and yakiba for example). In turn, the later shinshintô master Suishinshi Masahide who had a strong theoretical approach to swords, was inspired by Bokuden´s publications and so it is no wonder that he too experimented with the shin jûgo-mai technique.

Picture 1: Cross-section of a shin jûgo-mai kôbuse blade of Kaboku. 1. tsurabuse-uwatetsu, 2. shin-jitetsu, 3. shin-hatetsu

     A slightly different shin jûgo-mai technique was applied by the shinshintô smith Sasaki Ichiryûsai Sadatoshi (佐々木一流斎貞俊). He signed namely with the supplement „shin jûgo-mai futo-hirafuse“ (真十五枚太平伏). Hira-fuse referred in contrast to kôbuse to the forging technique of makuri-gitae (捲り鍛え), where the shingane is layed atop of the kawagane and then folded together so that the kawagane encloses the shingane in the known U-shape. In short, Sadatoshi used 15-times folded shingane for his hira-fuse/makuri-gitae technique. Somehow unclear is the term „futo“ (太) which means „thick“. So either a thick layer of shingane was used or „futo-hira-fuse“ was back then one single term to express a makuri-gitae.

   Most of the other forging techniques like maru-gitae, muku-gitae, makuri-gitae, hon-sanmai-awase-gitae or shihô-zume-gitae are described and depicted elsewhere. I did not want to hash and rehash all the stuff published but focus on the few lesser known forging techniques in this very first article.