ROKUJURO

Hi Richard, welcome to the NMB forum! We are always interested to see your treasures!

Even with a double set of (bad) photos, with a lacquered SHIRA-SAYA and a KIZU like that it will generally be difficult to sell, I think. Starting here on NMB with an auction and no introduction is another thing.

Jon, as you know now, it is certainly not a WWII WAKIZASHI.

Just from the pictures, I get an impression of a neglected IAITO TSUBA. For a safer assessment, I would have to see it in-hand.

Please have a look into your PMs.

HANYOUNG, as a blade-smith myself, I would be interested, but you have to name a price in this "FOR SALE" section. It is a rule here. On YAHOO, you might find comparable offers.

Derek, no one here knows about problems you might have with spelling. My remark was just an interpretation of what you posted to better understand it, not criticizing.

Hanyoung, welcome to the NMB forum! To answer your questions: 1) Generally, yes, but probably not in this case. These blades all appear to be not very old to me 2) Not really. The 3rd blade (from top) is not necessarily a Japanese one. The NAKAGO surface is unusually uneven so there is a doubt 3) the NAKAGO have been ground "clean" so if there was a MEI before, it might have been visible or ground away 4) There is a sales value in these. As explained above by Rohan, they are bought for research purposes or by knife-makers in the West to use the material. The regulations in Japan say that no unregistered blades above 150 mm length are allowed to own, so when police confiscate blades, they are being checked by experts to see if they are historically important or valuable. Then they are cut with less than 150 mm cutting-edge length and given back to the owners.

Damage is not necessarily a sign of wear, and slightly irregular NANAKO is not a typical sign of hand-work.

NAGOYA-MONO TSUBA were mainly made in MEIJI and TAISHO eras, but I get the impression that this TSUBA might be younger than that.

Was that meant to be read as MICARTA? Indeed, that would be quite off of Japanese swords!

This is not urgent!

Hi Boris, I am surprized as this is not really a plain dark background, so details are not visible. Usually, NAKAGO have two main sides, so 9 photos (!) of that quality don't really help much. However, I think I see that a SHINOGI in the middle of the NAKAGO has been ground down which might be an indication that this was indeed a YARI before. But one day in the future, we will perhaps see good (straight vertical, tip-upwards) photos of the NAKAGO on a plain dark background so the experts (I am not one of them) can see details.

Boris, thank you, but that is not really a plain dark background, so details are not visible. To transfer some information, please present the NAKAGO photos as cut-outs so we also have a magnification. Are there any KANJI characters of a signature? On these images, the NAKAGO shape looks narrower than on some other KEN TANTO I have seen.

Could we discuss at all if this is a fake when it is MUMEI?

Hi Boris, age alone makes no damage. Japanese are known to care very well for their appreciated items. Negligence and bad treatment is rather rare, and if you look at many well-preserved weapons with more than 500 years of age, you'll see what I mean. A HABAKI does not get lost in carefull handling. and drilling a hole in a hardwood TSUKA can be done without a drill-press and without damage to the wood.. I absolutely do not intend to downgrade your KEN TANTO, but we should look realistically at it and compare to what is existing in this field elsewhere. You posted a double set of photos but none of the NAKAGO (= tang). That would be helpful to possibly determine the age. Please make a good photo (straight vertically tip-upwards) on a plain dark background of it.

If it ever belonged together..... To me, it looks like a crude attempt to put a KEN TANTO together from pieces available. Missing HABAKI, wrong KISSAKI. damaged TSUKA.

I would look into possible SHOAMI signatures as artist names usually have only 2 KANJI.

Looks like YOSHIHARU to me.

Tony, it is not about the photographer, it's about the photos. In case you want an applicable feedback, only good photos are helpful. A HABAKO is a special form of typo. It is me to apologize!

Tony, a plain dark background instead of a white one would have increased the contrast, so details are much better seen. HABAKI don't get lost, so there was certainly some sad history to the blade which is signed TACHI MEI, by the way.

Looks a bit like ISHI. To be sure, better post this in the TRANSLATION section where the experts are.

The main question is why would I want to have a Chinese copy of an authentic sword if I would never "play" with it? And the second question would be if this would be a look-alike or a traditionally made one?

A plain dark background instead of a white one would have increased the contrast and made reading easier. Ray is a magician in this field!

Derek, never touch a blade with your bare fingers! It is a general rule of care to prevent corrosion and show respect.