ROKUJURO

Hector, you could well be right, but the pitting could also be the result of corrosion. Maybe a full size, high resolution photo could tell more. There are a number of indicators for cast TSUBA, not just the surface texture. Please remember that there were different casting techniques over the last 150 years in Japan, and modern iron TSUBA imitations have a perfect surfave and are no longer cast but often press molded.

And another HIRADO with Zodiac subject but not mass produced

They made round ones also:

Piers, this one seems to have more Chinese stylistic influence than Hamish's TSUBA, in my opinion.

Hamish, what about the other side? Just plain or similarly decorated?

Hi Elle, welcome to the NMB forum! Your knife looks like amateur work to me, using a cut-off tip of a sword. The HAMON reminds me of those of oil-hardened swords of WWII production. The blade's shape is not typical for authentic TANTO (SAMURAI fighting-knife). Probably a nice souvenir!

Hi Bert, welcome to the NMB forum! The first photo is upside-down. On the second photo, the engraved design might be an interpretation of an OMODAKA leaf. The bad condition of the surface does not allow a guess about age or provenance. The lower SEKI-GANE is questionable if you imagine the blade the TSUBA was possibly mounted on. The collecting value of TSUBA like this is very low.

Russ, these look like Copenhagen porcelain manufacture.

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.