John C

Are you talking about the squarish piece (habaki) or the oblong spacer (seppa)? If it is the habaki, set the tang (nakago) on the carpet or other soft surface and have someone carefully hold the blade end vertically (use a thick cloth - it just needs to be held in place). Then take a piece of wood with square edges (for example a cut chopstick with flat ends) and place it just on the edge of the top of the habaki where it butts up next to the blade. GENTLY tap on the wood, alternating each side until the habaki starts to slide off toward the nakago end. You should be able to then pull it off with your hands. I use a 3/4 inch square dowel and another piece of thin wood to do light taps. John C.

Could the second kanji be tama? John C.

Is the one picture dated October 10th, Showa 29 (1954)? John C.

I'm still collecting data on that. Not sure what it means exactly, however "assembly number" doesn't seem to tell the whole story. Most folks aren't interested in the mystery, however, so when I get enough data to figure it out I'll give it a shot. In the meantime, I have identified some patterns in the use of colors with certain smiths/shops and the use of western vs Japanese numbers. John C.

I would agree with Bruce. But I would also add that if people are willing to buy them, assuming they know what they are buying, they do have some intrinsic value. I suppose that is true of anything; value is set by the invisible hand of the market (Adam Smith, "Wealth of Nations"). John C.

The YA 677 serial number matches the year (1942). I think you did well. John C.

Yes. As noted by others, it would be called a showa-to; meaning a sword made in the showa era. But the community uses the term to describe a mass-produced blade made during the war period. The mark on the tang (seki) confirms the era. John C.

Love that arsenal mark. John C.

Bruce: Is that a souvenir sword? John C.

Update: the tanto sold for 5,450 dollars. John C.

I think probably semi-traditionally forged. This would not be a "gendaito" in the sense it was made from tamahagane steel, hand hammered and folded, then water quenched and tempered. But probably made from "puddled" or mill steel, air (machine) hammered, then possibly water quenched (I cannot see the typical oil quenching signs from the pics, however most blades of this type were oil quenched). That said, it is not a type 95 NCO blade, which was completely machine made, oil quenched, and unsigned. So, yes. Typical of the period but a decent part of military history. John C.

I think number 3 in the first pic could pass as army if unaware. John C.

I believe the navy also used brown tassels. Are there any differences between the army and navy ones or are they interchangeable? John C.

A little bit of info...the white painted 50 is a type of assembly number and is period to the blade. John C.

Matt: I recently bought a lot of 80 photos, in which about 20 were signed like that under the glue and black paper. Some of them were a real bear to clean. Several of mine had army inspection stamps so I assume they had been sent home from the field. John C.

Blurry pics but looks legit to my eye. There will be a serial number on the mune made up of a katakana letter and some numbers. That will legitimize the blade a little further if they match since there is a pattern to them. John C.

Rob: For what it's worth, I thought the same thing. I was thinking maybe a female who disguised her identity in order to fight. But I guess a young male could also disguise his true age for the same reason. Thank you to Moriyama for the clarification. John C.

I wouldn't surprise me to see a Kanemoto signature based on the style of hamon (pic is an example of one). John C.

Interesting. The Ashi on the sword above is the same as the example in Bruce's stamp doc. John C.

The link to the auction is in the first post. The hamon appears to be saguha, which seems simplistic for Naotane to me. John C.

Thank you for the links. I guess that explains why the mei date does not match his actual age. Much appreciated, John C.

Hello: The information on this Naotane tanto reads "age 80" Ansei year 2 (1855) dragon 8th month (I believe). Here's the issue (seller not withstanding): Naotane died in 1857 at age 79. How could he have been 80 in 1855? Am I reading the dates wrong? In addition, Ansei year 2 was the year of the rabbit not dragon, which was Ansei 3 (1856). Can anyone please shed some light on what might be going on? Is it totally gimei or am I not reading this correctly. https://www.ebay.com/itm/145142940110 Thank you, John C.

Paul: Sorry for your loss. But I do have some questions. Is the dark area under the bubbles a crack where rust had gotten in or just part of the softer, low-carbon metal? Also, are the bubbles a result of excessive heat during the heat treat? John C.

Thank you George and Bruce. My Rinji Seishiki did not come with a tassel and I had wondered. John C.

Never looked at mine that closely, however now it looks like a heavily black lacquered cloth of some sort. The pattern seems too tight for burlap but too prominent to be canvas (as we know burlap and canvas today). But depending on the weave, I suppose it could be either one of those. John C.