Basho12

For guns that caliber you wouldn't shoot the squirrel directly. Most likely you'd "bark" it by striking the branch underneath. Either the wood shrapnel or the shock alone would get the squirrel.

Vaidas and John are both right, of course, and as I mentioned earlier, I've seen fakes for sale right here in the US, so realistically the country of origin can't be any more than a general guideline. I apologize for painting with too wide a brush.

I recently had the pleasure of watching a Jumei Tosho blade with multiple bids go through a big spike at the end. I knew people with deeper pockets were going to fight over it so I wasn't bidding, but it was instructive to watch.

As another newbie it's a subject of interest to me, too. I'm going to go over the things I think are obviously wrong, and it might help someone else in the same boat, especially if the more experienced members can point out where I'm wrong and what I should be looking at: 1) As others have mentioned, the Seller. Anything sold out of China or the former Soviet Union is almost certainly a fake. There may be exceptions, but I've never seen one. I've also seen these fakes sold out of the US, too, so nowhere is 100% safe. 2) The serial number on the habaki. Several things wrong. First, it's way too high. Also, for an officer's sword there wouldn't have been one. Low number assembly numbers, perhaps, but not a serial number. You only see those on NCO swords. And if this had been an NCO sword, the hilt would have been metal, or painted wood, not real maki, and the serial number would have been stamped on the blade near the mune. There's nothing on this one. Plus I only see that sort of what I call "random kanji" on a fake. 3) The blade itself. This is trickier, especially for a beginner like me, but that boshi is mishapen and just ugly. Any competently made Showato blade would look better than that. The rust doesn't tell you anything, except that it all looks new. You'd expect some old rust on a blade 65+ years old. In earlier generation copies the casting on the tsuba and fuchi, etc would have been more rough and ugly, but you have to admit they're getting better. :?

Beautiful.

I'm reading it "Kiyohisa," though I'd wait for more experienced people to weigh in.

Looks like Kanenori. He's listed as a Seki smith. Is there any sort of stamp or other marking on the tang other than the name and date? 1943 looks right, but I'm less sure of the month. Appears to be March.

It is a shame. I'd have loved to have seen it before they took the sandpaper to it. Not to get too far off the subject, but could someone take a moment to explain why this blade would be considered "tired"? I mean, I know it's when the blade has been polished so many times that core steel and any hidden ware start to become visible, but this one looks "meaty" enough to take a polish, or at least does to me, so I must be missing something.

It almost looks like it was made from a cut-down epee blade. I've seen that triangle cross-section on modern fencing weapons.

I wondered if that was a tanuki. I was pretty sure the one described earlier was, disguised as a tea kettle(based on the old story). Thanks, Morita-san.

More practice for me! Showa 19, 10th month. Suke yes, less certain about the kuni. Also looks like an arsenal stamp (Sho?) but can't quite make it out.

Over on the auction site That Shall Not be Named. It's academic for me at this point, alas. :|

Almost everything I've learned so far has come from the kanji links from this board, especially Bladeshark and JSSUS.

And there's my next lesson. Thanks! :D

I've been trying to learn how to read mei and attempted to read this one strictly as an exercise (I'm not buying or selling). I'll understand if no one wants to waste time on this, but any help/correction would be appreciated. I'm reading this: Hoshu (no) Takada Ju Tomoyuki Saku. How far off am I?

I've never dealt with the seller, so I can't say one way or another, and as another beginner my impressions of the blade as a blade are probably worse than useless. Definitely not as described, but at my level it's hard to tell the difference between a seller who simply doesn't know what they have and how to present it and those deliberately trying to conceal. There are a few sellers with a decent reputation and I try to stick with them whenever possible. Any major buys I'm putting off, period, until I have a much better idea of what I'm doing.

This one might be a decent restoration project for someone, but I'm pretty sure it's not, as described, a 16-18th century blade. I'm reading "Showa 17" (1942). http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... K:MEWAX:IT

Thanks for the confirmation. Lesson learned, though I'm glad it wasn't a more expensive one.

I had thought this blade was a Naval tachi of the rust-resistant (stainless?) type, but when I got a closer look I'm seeing a pattern that suggests it's been acid-etched, and thus a fake. One thing I don't understand, and wouldn't expect to see, is that it appears to be suriage, with the blade shortened by about an inch (you can see the position of the original munemachi in the third photo). Has anyone seen one done like that before? There's a mei, for what that's worth. I'm reading it as Yoshikawa Tsune.

It's my understanding that, yes, the ko-dachi was worn as a companion blade to the tachi, much as the later wakizashi was to the daito(Kanzan Satos' THE Japanese SWORD says as much).

My restoration project has a long way to go, and no doubt I'll make mistakes along the way no matter how careful I am or how informed I try to be. When that happens I won't blame anyone but myself. I appreciate all the opinions and experiences the folk here care to share.

Thanks for the tip. I'm probably going to end up making at least one new seppa, just to get the fit right on the habaki side.

As someone else neck-deep in a restoration project, I'm also curious if there is a consensus among more experienced collectors on this. Do most people hold onto them for future use, as Mark does? A few do turn up on eBay now and again, true, but how important is it? I know it's desirable to use period fittings whenever possible, but it's a given that certain portions of the koshirae are going to be replacements (horn parts go missing, and honoki, ito, and rayskin get a bit dicey after a few hundred years), and seppa are just about the most strictly utilitarian component of the entire mounting.

Thanks for the explanation on the first tsuba! That's the sort of thing I'd never have spotted, at this stage.

Another beginner here, and no points for going third, but I also think the second one is cast. From the picture it looks like the filework didn't clean up quite all the flashing from the mold (said one who bought a cast tsuba on his very first attempt). I'd love to hear a definitive explanation of what's wrong with the first one.