Crusader22

I was told by the seller it is Edo period or older. The urushi is faded and there are repairs. But I absolutely love raden, and this particular piece really struck me, the limb over the fence is just really cool in my opinion. Jeff

Thank you very much! I really do like it. Jeff

!!!

Well. It appears, despite historical assertions to the contrary, you can, in fact, polish a turd. Learn something everyday. Jeff

It does the job, I think it looks complimentary to my acorn Nihonto / Shin Guntō collection. Nothing fancy, but it struck me. Jeff

Thanks, thats exactly in line with my (lowered) expectations! I mean that in a good way. And, I forgot to answer, but no, nobody named "komonjo". Yes, ebay, but ~280/98% feedback, and almost all swords, I decided to try with my limited knowledge. All on me, though. I figured if 280 people didn't get hosed it was likely I wouldn't, certainly some of his sword sales would be "known" in that way if he were a fraudster. I looked around but saw nothing so far. Anyway, I do still like it, and despite my modest means, (that the $ amount I paid is likely high) I am ok with the whole thing. In my mind, it is a Japanese low level smith, altered blade, and non original koshirae, and wear and condition issues., but not new, the older, the better, if someday I get more info. Maybe Chinese junk, too. Oh, well. Lesson learned. Let it be a cautionary tale. Jeff

Ok, thank you all for sharing your knowledge and opinions, I do appreciate it. Jeff

Ok, I guess it's time to shift this conversation from what I hoped for - "Don't worry, Jeff, it's probably original nihonto", to the apparently more likely - "Jeff, you got hosed". Having said that, and considering the confident assertions of the latter, can anyone answer the following (just for education on fakes)? When might this have been faked? (For instance, in the 1900's as a display item?) If so, why sign it? Is the mei a good, or a poor forgery? Was a specific period or style of engraved mei attempted? If so, why? Was this blade a "good" or a "poor" forgery, and has it been altered? What level of skill was involved? AGAIN, discount the koshirae in this evaluation, obviously they are not original to the sword, but are any of those parts, or all of them (or none), authentic? I think Im done posting on this sword, I admit defeat. Sorry to be a pest, or the archetypical "dumb new guy" that does exactly as I have here...back to reading/lurking. Jeff.

The other side does not look like this. The lighting greatly exaggerated these markings in this photo.

Im really struggling with the photography, especially light sources. I apologize if the crappy photos make my crappy blade seem....crappier. Jeff

Well, Im thoroughly confused (and somewhat concerned and disappointed). I will provide pictures as requested. Jeff

I also like the shape and form of it. It is thin, and the arc of the blade is shallow, less pronounced, and the width is such that it looks more delicate and slender. All in all, it looks unique to me, and I love the deep blue ito and Mantis/Cricket theme, as an expression of duality in those two insects - the hunter, and the sound of the "aum" in the cricket song So, yes, Im ok.

Thanks! I am learning too, its a steep curve. With a lot of info to sift through. Jeff

Thanks, and like I said, I love it, though no museum piece. All that concerned me was authenticity, not necessarily "quality" of a better smith. Just hope to nail down an era and location. Thanks! Jeff

More

More

Again....I know the tsuka and all fittings are not from the sword. I know it is by no means "high end". My only concern is the age (and now, legitimacy) as a real Nihonto, hopefully Koto.. If not, Ok. I took a bath. @GeorgeLuucas Jeff

Amazing, almost a study unto itself. In my previous collecting of WWII Mauser rifles, the same type of topics come up, pictured are thousands of K98k rifles stacked like cordwood, leaving collectors with a challenge in studying "known examples" of variants, and this is with rifles, all meticulously serialized and with existing wartime paperwork on production, etc,. Far more murky is this discussion on swords. Funny, K98k rifles were everywhere at wartime, sold in wooden barrels in hardware shops postwar...mixed with imported guns, and, of course...they are firearms. Subject to actual use as a practical weapon for hunting for many years postwar, so many more were converted to "sporters" and lost to collectors. Jeff

Well, still have not made it to the fabric store (I live in a very rural area). I did find this, though, @Shugyosha, it matches what the seller told me, but Im just getting into reading three hardcover books I purchased so I can better ID the 5 Gokaden on my own, to see if the location is consistent. This is what the seller sent a link to, but I cant for sure make out the top character. I also found what looks like a matching tsuba to the other metalwork, even if not period to the blade, it will be a set. Jeff

Tomorrow I am buying a black cloth sheet, and will follow the excellent photo advice of @GeorgeLuucas , and I will provide good photos of everything.

I agree on the open available connection to the best experts here. I have privately had exchanges with a few, and everyone has been helpful. Im not concerned at all, I guess if I'm this happy with it, what could be wrong? Im anxious to get a solid ID of the blade and smith/period for sure. I know I need to provide more photos of higher quality first. No comments or opinions are unwelcome! Jeff

Uh, ok. I think you may have misunderstood me. As I clearly said in the first post of this thread, once I had it in hand, it was obvious to me that it was made up of parts likely none of which are original to the blade. That does not bother me, given the price. I also am fully aware that the the torokusho is NOT any sort of "pedigree" or registration besides the Japanese gov't being made aware the sword exists and is not illegal. I put it in a cheap $5 frame because it looks nice and is part of the story. The blade has "nasty wear" and a "poor polish". I don't care. All I want is to know when it was made, and where, and by whom if possible. If this carving on the tang is not from the maker, and from that period, then is it Chinese junk faked to look like something it is not? Or is the blade original, but not attested to this signature? If so, who signed it, and when? And why? As for "how bad I was ripped off", again, don't care. I paid about a third again over your high estimate because it appealed to me visually, and I felt it was worth a chance that it was, in fact, a pre-1800 blade, with original fittings, as the seller stated to me. I also knew the tsuba was not original to the sword, and am looking for a mote fitting replacement. I bought it based on my subjective opinion. I did not think I was buying a NBTHK rated and papered sword for $2000. What I did buy, was an amazing collection of period parts that makes me just as happy. I only posted to show it, learn a little, and have fun participating rather than reading and not getting off to a collecting start. Thanks for all the info posted, all valuable to me, and deeply appreciated. Jeff