Lilleskit

I think it hasn't been purchased yet. Looks like you at some type of shop(?). Depending on the price, it could be a great find.

I never intended for what I thought was a simple question to turn into a heated debate. I has, however, been very educational.

Sorry, I completely missed the responses. You are very correct, it is Wisteria. Were iron tsuba very common during tge edo period?

Yepp, you're definitely correct. 😎

Hello, Sorry for such a slow response. I missed the notification. Yes, it is quite interesting a first for me. I've never dived deeply into the world of tosogu but some of the items are very fascinating. I've never been the type of collector yo chase value so for me this tsuba is gold. 🙂 Kind regards Ken

As for the tsuba... I haven't got a clue. I think copper/copper alloys were more common from the Edo period forward but this one pictured doesn't feel correct for an edo period tsuba. Could it have been commissioned early Meiji so the family katana could be with him in battle? Did soldiers do that? Just fantasy and speculation on my part. I hope someone who knows what they're talking abaut chimes in soon. Best regards, Ken

Hey Kyle, It's difficult to see in the pictures you've provided, but i'm inclined to say yes, it could very well be traditionally made suriage katana. Zooming in on a couple of your pics, there appears to be a visible signs of a hamon and of a type not done on the mass produced blades from that era. The patina of the nakago and the presence of multiple nakago-ana hint at the blade having a much earlier origin. That said, with the pictures you took, it's hard for me to say with absolute certainty. Any possibility of clearer pics of the blade without so many reflections? It's hard to see what are scratches or just mirrored things in the room.

Not active rust. Along with the micro pitting you can see my reflection that appears somewhat redish at the top and bottom of the picture.

I think you're referring to the micro pitting/oxidation scaring on the shinogi-ji, ji, and mune. The redish color on the bottom right portion is me, my reflection. I'm a horrible photographer. 😅

Hi, No, it is in poor shape but there's no active rust on the blade. Maybe you're seeing reflections of the surroundings.

Yes, it recognize this blade and the mei. I found many examples signed this way. The reason I wavered from thinking it was a close enough match were the "dots". They are lined up, one behind the other, chasing each other down and to the left on some of the examples I've found. I truly want to be incorrect and find it to be authentic. Seems that the devils in the details. Some might remember gimei signed Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada that looked pretty good exect for the final stroke not starting a little early and crossing over the previous one.

And here are its measurements: Sword Overview: Blade type: Suriage katana Nagasa: 69 cm Nakago: 19.5 cm Nakago-ana ×2 (5.5cm apart) Sori: 0.67 cm Kissaki Length: 3 cm Width: Base - 2.93 cm, Middle - 2.64 cm, Tip - 1.94 cm Thickness: Base - 0.74 cm, Middle - 0.65 cm, Tip - 0.54 cm Thanks for any insight 🙏🏽 Ken

Here is the blade in sections. Omote pics are 1-9, the remainder are of the ura side. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Ow1USADZIQcjVaD9AbxAbKYG9x-I9qvz

Yes, it is unpaperd. Purchased in horrible shape from a antique dealer that deals mostly in European blades and collector coins.

Hello all, I have a blade signed Tango no Kami Kanemichi. Opinions so far have been mixed and I personally am leaning on the gimei side. It would be nice for it to be real but I'm skeptical. My blade is far right next to a couple of the many confirmed mei. I added notes with a few of what I think are problems. Regards, Ken

Hey Jim and thanks. I've obsessed and researched this mei for months and have the following concers/doubts about the signature on the blade in my possession. Like many excellently done gimei, the devils in the details. Here is a picture of the points the mei I'm researching differs from those on confirmed blades. Mine is on the far right.

Hello and thank you. Your correct that there were numerous smiths using the name Kanemichi and right about the similarities in some of their mei as well. Your right in saying that "gimei" shouldn't be used without verification, it was careless to say so without knowing. I'm uncertain which is why I'm asking. That said, I've found seven Kanemichi that were active from Murimachi and into the edo period and it would be a pleasant surprise if it turned out to be authentic. So far, all of the mei I've studied have, like the example given, been off in spacing, and/or stroke direction, as well as depth. Some signatures match one character perfectly but are way off on another. I've tried to upload better pictures och the blade but the file exceeds the allowed max. I'll try editing the and upload them tomorrow. For now, here are smaller images of the ura side.

Hi all, I'm working on a ebay blade bought from a U.S. antique seller. The blade, imo, is definately gimei but worth rescuing. I couldn't uppload all the pictures so I attached a PDF I through together. It's the same as the info shown below but with pics if anyone is interested in helping. Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks Sword Overview: Blade Type: Handachi (I believe it’s originally a tachi, now shortened and fitted as a handachi) Nagasa: 69 cm Nakago: 19.5 cm Sori: 0.67 cm Kissaki Length: 3 cm Width: Base - 2.93 cm, Middle - 2.64 cm, Tip - 1.94 cm Thickness: Base - 0.74 cm, Middle - 0.65 cm, Tip - 0.54 cm Original blade likely had a deeper sori before shortening Polishing Work and Observations: Polishing performed entirely on hazuya stone and finger stones (hazuya and jizuya) Surface cleaned of minor pitting and small chips Nugui applied in stages to enhance contrast Hada observed: Combination of masame and itame Kissaki and Boshi: Evidence of historical reshaping (likely due to prior damage) Boshi appears to be kaen-style (flame-like?), subtly different on omote and ura sides Kissaki being refined slowly to avoid over-thinning Mei and Nakago: Mei, signed Tango No Kami Kanemichi is likely gimei or optimistically, ato-mei, based on both carving quality and inappropriate placement (katana side of a shortened tachi). Also, if not gimei, it would mean my era guess is off by about a century. File marks include oosugikai on original nakago, katte-sagari on new nakago area Hamon features include: Notare and ko-gunome base. Sudareba sections (bamboo-blind pattern). Choji-midare elements. Sunagashi and dense nie School possibilities: Soshu? strong candidate based on nie and sunagashi Bizen? possible influence (choji, sudareba) Mihara or Yamashiro? structurally plausible but less likely Era Estimation: Based on sugata, nakago condition, and hamon activity, can the blade date back to the mid-to-late Muromachi period? Assumption based on the thin kasane, tapering mihaba, o-suriage nakago, and variety of mixed hamon elements Structural Notes: Blade remains straight and healthy but tired Two kirikomi-kizu (I think) found and left untouched due to possible historical relevance Koshirae and Mounting: All non-metal fittings and stand made/fitted from scratch, wood, samegawa, and silk ito imported from Japan Saya and stand built from honoki. Unknown wood species for the tsuka but likely old pine I had lying around. Full samegawa wrap on both tsuka and upper portion of the saya Tsuka-maki is tight and secure using high-quality ito Menuki are centered per tachi tradition Edo era tsuba is very secure when the menuki is in place Brass fuchi and kashira and saya fittings are reproductions, aged using vinegar and egg method Vertical tachi-style display, edge facing inward, tsuka downward Saya is snug and secure, with careful shaping to match the blade and habaki geometry Silk sageo dyed to compliment tsuka-ito with typical display knot. Goals: To restore and preserve the blade without altering the geometry of it’s pre-polish condition to a point that school, age, and hopefully smith identification is possible. Same Information with pictures in the attached PDF Handachi Summary apr 14.pdf

I uncertain if it is meant to be wisteria. I was thinking possibly kikyo (桔梗, bellflower) or possibly tachibana (wild citrus blossom)🤔

Great info all😎👍🏼 It's very appreciated 👏

Very much appreciate your response 🙏🏽 I'm guessing mid edo but unsure. Yhe inlay seems edo but the robust iron construction even for yhis little tsuba has me wondering if it could have an earlier origin.

How does one tell if a naginata-naoshi (naginata remounted or reshaped into a tanto or wakizashi) is a true naginata-naoshi or just a wakizashi or tanto forged in the shape of a cut down naginata?

Hello all, Could anyone with more knowledge than me on tsuba types and history (which is just about everyone) help me with this tanto tsuba. I've been unable to find other examples like it. It's well constructed sitting perfectly without any rattle when seated. It measures 5cm x 3.3cm. I liked the design of it and needed it for a project I'm working on but I want to learn more about it. Any information would be helpful. Thanks, Ken

Hello all, Could anyone with more knowledge than me on tsuba types and history (which is just about everyone) help me with this tanto tsuba. I'm assuming it's from the mid to late edo period based on the inlay work but the no nonsense construction says early edo or slightly earlier. It's well constructed sitting perfectly without and rattle when seated. It measures 5cm x 3.3cm. Some of you have probably seem it on ebay. I liked the design of it and needed it for a project I'm working on but I want to learn more about it. Thanks for forgiving my ignorance 🫠 Ken

Hello! I'm looking for advice/tips on shipping my swords from Europe to the states. It sounds and seems like it should be as simple as boxing them up and sending them home but I don't want to miss anything. Has anyone come across any issues with customs? Are there possible problems sending by air etc etc? Thanks in advance!