ROKUJURO

HAMACHI and MUNEMACHI do not align, but in the opposite way than seen in Chinese copies. Not familiar to me.

As far as I know, bronze (a copper-tin alloy) was not used for TSUBA-making. Bronze is always a cast metal, and copper has to be cast as well in a raw shape. Infos by Ford Hallam

Hi John, in the EDO period, the Japanese had iron casting technology, and it was mastered in very good quality. They had furnaces to heat up iron to its melting point (1.538°C), and of course they would have been able to cast small objects like TSUBA! They used the "lost mold" (not 'lost wax') technology learned from the Chinese, and it was not the same as our modern 'sand-casting', but for the molds they used a mixture of clay and sand to produce a fine surface. The problem in the discussion here about this subject is the lack of knowledge about iron casting and annealing, but also about Japanese history. Making a mold for casting is a lot of work. You have to make a 'master object' first, considering the shrinkage of the desired final object. Using this, a two-piece mold was made that had to be heated up for casting so the molten iron could run freely into the finer structures. After cooling, the mold had to be destroyed to 'free' the cast object. Cleaning and cutting-off sprues and air-ducts had to follow, together with careful filing-off casting seams. Annealing to make the objects less fragile was an additional process, necessitating fuel (charcoal) and furnaces, adding to the production costs. This single-item process was labour-intensive, not resulting in cheap mass-production! Only when industrial steel production came up in the late 19th century, chill-casting was invented which allowed mass-production and low item prices. In EDO JIDAI, there was no demand for cast iron TSUBA that could be substantiated. "Normal" people (so-called 'commons) had no use for TSUBA, and wealthy people could afford traditionally made ones. Generally in the Japanese culture, hand-made objects were (and are) highly appreciated. Mass-produced small 'art' items are still considered trinkets or giveaways today. The other side should also be looked at: Forging was a well established craft in Japan, as we all know. Forging a TSUBA blank is really easy and not time consuming, and they used simple iron for it which had good toughness as opposed to cast iron. We know that not all TSUBA were made by a single workshop, but some traditions/schools used ready-made blanks and decorated them in a more artistic way. Coming to your post, we have to differentiate between "smelting" and "melting". You can feed an OROSHIGANE kiln with old iron objects that were originally made from TAMAHAGANE. The result would then be a kind of bloom looking very close to a TAMAHAGANE bloon (= KERA), differing possibly only in the carbon content. There is no melting intended in this process! Of course you can also use scrap iron of any alloy type in an OROSHIGANE kiln, but the resulting bloom would not have the properties of TAMAHAGANE and could not be treated the same way. The main purpose of this special process besides the recycling is to control the carbon content. With this short abstract, I have only scratched the surface of these technologies, but I wanted to show that throwing assumptions and guesses around is never a basis for true research. Often, the reality is not what we want it to be.

That's the problem.

To me, the leaves look like those of chrysanthemum: which would correspond with the shape of the HITSU-ANA

Hi Alex, it is a sword, and probably an authentic one, and older than WWII; that much can be stated. But the photos are not good enough to comment much. The TSUBA seems to be by BUSHU no JU MASAKATA, and the blade was probably shortened at one time. Have a look into your PM for more information.

Ken, the first MEI character is perhaps MUNE, but the rest is difficult to read. Maybe it would be easier to identify if we had good photos of the whole TSUBA.

Infos on HANKEI: https://www.samuraimuseum.jp/shop/hankei-繁慶/?srsltid=AfmBOoqRnUAVVM7X1aUT4IErO36bCUF2ZxVhUu2ZXHaBZJlsmCET8pcG

A SUN NOBI TANTO is usually a tiny bit longer than 1 SHAKU, and in past warfare, it was used as a TANTO, not as a WAKIZASHI. This is why collectors like to stay with the TANTO designation. But the NBTHK had to draw a "technical" line, so in the papers, 303 mm is the limit for TANTO.

Stefano, you certainly meant MENUKI?

Stephen, to me, this one looks like a wheel motif, one of later type, not Buddhist or HEIAN JIDAI cart-wheel. A FUKURIN is always a nice addition!

Well, we have an IZAKAYA.

Jacques, all the best for the soonest healing possible! May your New Year start better than the old ended!

...to a blind person.

Ah, I see. You are running a museum....

Brian, any piece of scrap cast iron would do the job for this test, you wouldn't even need a TSUBA! But this would then mean real research and learning.....painful for some.

Deanne, Looking at the last photo, I am seeing the AMIDA rays stopping at the fine UCHIKAESHI MIMI. There is no final 'cleaning' of the burrs, if I am correct. The rectangular HITSU is not at all unusual in older TSUBA, but in this case it is too big, I think. Just a feeling! My guess is that a later artist (MEIJI or later?) used old iron and traditional techniques to produce this TSUBA as a kind of UTSUSHI. Pounding some copper into the surface might have seemed to him to enhance an "old" look. I am missing some wear on this TSUBA if it were EDO JIDAI, but in the end, I am only commenting photos and may be very wrong. Please let us know your impression when you have it!

In my opinion NOBUIE style, but not traditionally forged.

Typical ÔMORI style! It could be restored easily if you have a belt grinder! It is only brazed-on copper, I think!

SHOAMI style.

No, KANZAN and JITTOKU. But pretty ugly indeed!

The phenomenon is called galvanic corrosion.

Is that really a granite plate the blade is resting on?

KO-TOSHO TSUBA with lacquer HITSU filling:

A side note From a metallurgical standpoint, the MIKASA steel was probably not well suited for blade making as cannon barrels have to be made of especially tough steel with low carbon content to prevent cracking. I doubt that the MIKASA cannon steel was used as single material, but was certainly combined with a hardenable carbon steel. The use of the name MIKASA was mostly a good marketing trick in my opinion.