ROKUJURO

John, that is absolutely true. And if we talk about gold content and today's price of it, we should also look at the making of TSUBA. Assuming you could find TSUBASHI capable of producing TSUBA in the work-quality range of your above pictured nice TSUBA, what would they charge you? In this context, gold remains a small factor, I think.

Merci Bruno!

Lou, welcome to the club!

Piers, AOI described the design as "hooks", but tools and very simple elements are often found in TEIMEI TSUBA, so I took the definition from another source as it seemed much more plausible to me. Do you have a different suggestion?

Brian, you have a large carpenter's square at home ?

Yesterday, my Christmas gift to myself finally came. It took almost five weeks from AOI Arts to me, though the shipping time was less than two weeks. It was accompanied by a better quality KIRIBAKO which did not fit the rather smallish MEKUGI-ANA (!). I am quite happy with it. It is a typical TEIMEI/SADANAGA TSUBA (unfortunately MUMEI) in acceptable condition, featuring two carpenter's squares as motif. These TEIMEI TSUBA are often very simple in design, showing sometimes unusual motifs, but are very well made and were reliable accessories for SAMURAI.

Hector, unfortunately, the photos are really bad, specifically because of the white background which does not allow a good contrast. In additition to all the corrosion, the surface and patiine cannot be seen properly, so it would have been a risk to put much money in it.

Yes, probably Autocorrect. But we are no victims to a foreign power, we can read and re-read what we have written before we shoot it out. But in this case, it is more funny than a problem, I think.

TSUNAMI on a sword? That sounds really dangerous! Did you mean to write TSUBA? That one looks a bit like JAKUSHI style. I cannot see the MEI properly which might be TOMOKANE (not sure), but the writing is not the typical JAKUSHI grass-script style.

Chris, the tip of the blade is the point (= KISSAKI). The end is the NAKAGO with the NAKAGO-JIRI, so all those photos are good, but upside-down. In these photos I can see that the damage on the KISSAKI is not severe and the basic shape is o.k. It looks like a mistreated, partly hand-made/machine made military blade, so not a NIHONTO.

Some well focused magnified photos of the NAKAGO (oriented tip-upwards) might clear up if this belongs in the MILITARY section, not NIHONTO. With these photos I get the impression that the KISSAKI is damaged/ out of shape.

Max, traditionally, a raw blank was cast and hammered to the desired size. Then the design was cut/sawed (= later technique) and chiseled and filed and polished - quite some work! But you cannot detect if a soft-metal TSUBA was pre-cast in a mold and then worked on and finished. This was done in an extent with later TSUBA when Western technology was known in Japan.

Richard, your longer blade is signed TACHI MEI. I am not sure if it can make a DAISHO with a WAKIZASHI in the precise sense of the term even if they were from the same smith. But that depends on what you want them to be when both swords are mounted with similar KOSHIRAE. In any case, a very nice pair!

Oh, you mean the big stamp Thomas? In mass production, that is done with a punching machine when the steel is red-hot.

Viktor, I have not compared 1.000 SOTEN TSUBA, but I have seen images of really good ones and less good ones. I think there is no doubt that many TSUBA were made in the SOTEN (or HIKONE BORI) style when they were in fashion, that had nothing to do with SOTEN or their school directly. I posted my comment mainly because the auction house Zacke compared this TSUBA to one that was sold 10 years ago at Bonham's for an equivalent of € 5.800.--, and I don't think the above TSUBA is in that range.

I am not of great help in the field of militaria, sorry!

It does not seem to have ORIGAMI which is a red flag in my eyes, specifically with SOTEN TSUBA. There is the saying that "from 100 SOTEN signed TSUBA on a table, very likely all are copies". Depending on the price, I would look carefully and compare. If it was cheap, then it is probably safe to assume it is a copy. If it was expensive (> € 600.--) I would ask for a certification paper. Just my 2 YEN.

It is a KANZAN HAKOGAKI, I think, and perhaps for an OWARI TSUBA. 尾張 Mauro is an expert on these and will certainly be able to help.

Yes Piers, I did not think of that. Tthe police would have the technical means for that.

My impression is that the YOKOTE is not in the correct place.

Ron, in some cases, when corrosion has eaten away too much material, signatures remain guesswork. In this case, I also thought the first KANJI might be TAIRA, but I have no books on blades or signatures to check that. What you could try would be making photos on a plain dark background, in a dark room and spotlights (not too strong to avoid glare) shining from the side. I found that extreme magnification often does not help much.

Looks very Chinese from a distance.

Nicolo, then it is not a WAKIZASHI but a TANTO. A desirable form of a Japanese sword, but in this neglected condition, there is not much that we could say. I can only strongly recommend to let a professional polisher (= TOGISHI) have a close look at it. If the basic condition was still good (= the blade has not been in a fire or so), it might be saved. There are some of these guys in the U.S. so sending it to Japan is perhaps not necessary. But a complete restoration will not be cheap!

Might be KANESADA. It seems as if the NAKAGO had been "cleened" (= sandpapered) which is really very sad as the patina is gone. Big value loss! Is the blade longer than 303 mm (measured from the notch on the back just above the HABAKI to thr tip) ?

Ian, is it magnetic?