Joel Brady

Hi John, Thanks for your post. If I were to say anything about the 'kana' on the nakago it looks to me like a katakana フ (fu) and hiragana 㮠(no). I think my friend was reading it as ワ or ウ (wa or u). Joel

I have uploaded some more pictures of the mei (both sides) from various angles and with different lighting. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kareneandjoel Cheers! Joel

...and if it's a Chinese fake I can live with that as well Joel

Hi all, Thank you very much for your replies. I'll try and take some clearer pictures of the mei (the ones up are the best I have been able to manage as they are quite faint - even in person they are hard to read). When I received it my comment was, "it has had a hard life", but I paid little for it so consider it a bit of a learning opportunity (AU$120). Being more of a practitioner of JSA than a collector, I am interested in the blades history, regardless of its present condition or value. regards, Joel Brady

Hi, I recently purchased this wakizashi (I have uploaded some pictures here http://www.flickr.com/photos/kareneandjoel). I lent it to a friend of mine with experience with Japanese Swords and his comments were: 'There is Hamon and I think a very fine Ji-hada. Sword blade is signed (hard to read) and it said, 6th year of Eiwa (1379) and other side said, Tokyo (in Kanji) and wa or u in hiragana, but there was no Hiragana used in 1379 (nan Bokuchou Jidai)? Any way patina on the tang is not that old.' His comments seem raise more questions than they answer and was wondering if anyone on the forum had any more information or advice. The kitsaki has been damaged at some stage and badly reshaped and the nakago possibly shortened. Regards, Joel Brady