ROKUJURO

B. Ashton, in case you want to send me the SAYA, I promise to remove the paper in less than 5 minutes! It's not rocket science!

John, a permanent solution should be solid enough that you could handle the YARI without fear to break it. A double-threaded screw will not hold well! It would be no witchwork to have a slightly tapered thin-walled tube made from brass or steel. That could be either patinated or hidden under some cord wrapping to look "natural", and it could also be made in a way that the pole could be disassembled if needed.

Brian, as long as a weapon has a single cutting-edge, it makes sense to use an oval handle or pole, I think. It is different with KENDO SHINAI which are (almost) round, but are used as if they had a "cutting-edge".

I would have used an exactly fitting piece of a thin-walled metal tube, but that is probably just me as a "metal guy"....

Grev, I would understand this as NAOKATSU being the maker, copying a famous NOBUIE TSUBA.

Well, then use a longer wire!

It's almost invisible....

Of course a vacuum cleaner will not work unless you cut the end of the SAYA off. Please don't do that! Did you try my recommendation of a wire? It should be very easy!

Barrett, I am curious to learn what information you now got when you compare the weights of two very different blades. The longer, beefier is a bit heavier. Not a great surprise to me!

Viktor, as the methods have improved considerably, the really good quality copies/fakes are made recently. Making a master copy of an item with silicone is easy and results in very precise models. The so-called sand-casting has been refined, and surfaces are now almost perfect, so there is not much work on these TSUBA left to do except patinating. There are a lot of MEIJI era (and later) copies of lesser quality on the market which are easier to spot in case you have developed an eye for it.

It looks like a genuine cast TSUBA copy to me.

MACHI OKURI.

Brian, by animal protection laws, they are not allowed any more. You have to get a drone!

Adam, you are not correct in your assumptions. Stefan Mäder has done some interesting research on early medieval blades (Merovingian) and found that they were made very closely to the Japanese way. They had a tough blade body with a steel cutting edge, and they were heat-treated with differentially hardening technique. Quality differences in early steel making were caused by the process temperatures. Higher temperatures above 1.350°C in the early blast-furnaces up to melting temperature (1.538°C) resulted in a much more effective output of cast iron while the TATARA (as well as the European bloomery kilns) had only a max. degree of efficiency in the range of 30% or a tiny bit more. On the other hand, TAMAHAGANE (as well as bloomery iron and steel) is very pure in alloying metals and - besides carbon - does not contain many impurities after being processed in the forge. Cast iron, on the other side, cannot be forged because of its very high carbon content. It has to undergo different methods to reduce carbon to be malleable. When the Europeans improved their methods using industrial dimensions, they were able to increase their production so they could export their steel. All this has to do with the desired steel quality. While Japan could produce the best (finest/purest) steel of their era, Europe had a much bigger output of iron and steel of different qualities, ranging from very good blade-steel to minor iron for horseshoes or wagon-wheel tires.

Rafal, SAMONJI (signature SA) was one of the ten pupils ( = JUTETSU) of Japan's most famous sword-smith MASAMUNE. I would be interested to know what you mean by "he blade was cleaned with strict adherence to all principles....". Japanese blades should absolutely be treated with strict adherence to Japanese restoration principles. These are learned in a long apprenticeship which may take as much as 10 years or more. Any other treatment is not suitable with Japanese swords, and only traditionally trained polishers can judge their respective condition.