Martin

Hi Carlo, I saw some kind of turtle shell design recently on AOI Art. At least it reminds me of a turtle shell Katana 06228 cheers, Martin

Hi Stephan, I was actually asking myself if it wasn´t usual to put the signature on the omote side. At least that is what I always thought was the standard. On your sword it just seems to be the other way around. Does anybody know if smiths sometimes signed their blades on the ura side? cheers, Martin

Hi Stephen, as I read your post I tried again and checked my firewall... My Media Player was blocked and there wasn´t any alert message.... Well thanks for your "HELP" :D regards, Martin

and thanks for sharing them Rich! I tried to load your link Carlo, but I wasn´t successful. Seems that the resource is not available anymore... Cheers, Martin

Hello, as for a picture of the habaki in question: All pictures I´ve got from that particular one are of really low resolution quality It is a simple 1 piece habaki with a filemark decoration (cat scratching or maybe rain?). Here is a picture of a piece with similar design. kind regards, Martin

hi grey, sounds very interesting. Could this article somehow be shared (if it exists in digital form)? regards, Martin

Hello, many thanks so far. The blade I refer to is a koto blade made by a respectable smith. So the furnished habaki obviously doesn´t indicate the age of the sword in this case... By the way from what kind of material were the habaki made in koto times and could it possibly be the original habaki that was made for the blade? best regards, Martin

Hello, I was wondering if the material of an habaki generally tells anything about the value of a sword. Almost all blades of respectable smiths I have seen yet had gold foiled, solid gold or silver habakis made. If a sword is just furnished with a simple copper habaki - does this tell something about its value or quality of workmanship? Hope this question isn´t too naive kind regards, Martin

Hi, many thanks for your informative replies. Although your conclusion doesn´t sound that good I heard of the possibility to submit some pictures to the NTHK to confirm the authenticity of the mei. Would you suggest to do so? And do you have any information of how much it costs and how much information you gain from this kind of "shinsa"? Martin

Hi Henry, yes, I meant the torokusho paper which I added as an attachment. I was told it dates from August 25th 1957. Too bad I don´t understand Japanese... It´s pretty much worn and I have to admit I don´t really know what is written there. Is it a kind of affirmation that the sword in question is authentic? Or is it just a kind of registration card for weapons? I would really like to know if the sword is from the koto period or much younger (as assumed in Darcy´s post). Any help on this would be highly appreciated. best regards, Martin

Hi Henry, this sword doesn´t have any authentication papers (NBTHK or NTHK) yet. Or do you mean the Tokoru paper? best regards, Martin

Hi, thanks so far for your great effort and informative replies. I´m a bit astonished (and definately disappointed if this would be confirmed) to hear that this piece may not be a koto tanto. Here are some pieces of information that the seller gave to me before the purchase: A KOTO Japanese TANTO BIZEN SCHOOL SIGNED TOKORU paper dated Showa 32 / August 25th 1957 Late MUROMACHI period 15th / 16th Century NAGASA : 240 mm, NAKAGO : 102 mm Actually the patina on the tang as it was discussed seems not to have that distinct border between the unrusted ji and patinated part of the nakago in natural. Maybe the foto was a bit misleading. Furthermore I couldn´t really see the crisp edged impression of the mekugiana. I add another one with this post and try to make a good picture of the whole blade later on that gives a better impression of the sugata. Thanks very much so far and kind regards from germany, Martin

Hi, I bought a koto tanto some time ago that has the following mei (at least that´s what I found out...): Bichu Osafune Munemitsu Could anyone help me in judging this mei? What I want to know is from what exact time it is from and if the mei is authentic. In this context I would also like to know how you can recognize if a mei is authentic or not. Is it the way the chiseling was done or what other hints are there? I have to admit that I am still much a novice regarding nihonto and do not know which books I could consult that would help me to answer my questions. I have got a few books on Japanese Swords (amongst them the "Conaisseurs book of Japanese Swords") but I don´t know if that is the right book to consult in this case. Does anybody have a recommendation of what english language books to buy as a beginning collector of nihonto that really give you profund information on Japanese Swords and their identification. Any help would be highly appreciated. Kind regards, Martin