Can anyone help me assess the quality of my katana?

[JordanJOT]

I've recently inherited this sword, and based off what little knowledge I have, I can tell it's authentic. I'm obsessively interested in finding out the origins of this. (My dad died before he could tell me where he got it) -

Attached are images of the blade; I've attached the detail of what I think is the forging pattern, it looks like its closest to itame-hada. I can't tell the detail of the Nie & Nioi to decide if it suits either. The hamon looks like it suits suguha/ Ko-Midare. Boshi looks most like saki-togaru. Filemarks look most like O-Sujikai. Note that I'm only using a small handbook for reference and with an untrained eye, my assumptions are likely to be way off. It looks to be recently remounted so I've' not included the handle, but the tsuba and habaki may be original, but I'm yet to photograph those. It's also been suggested that this is a suriage blade. Do let me know if any of you have any thoughts on the origin/era/school/smith.

[ChrisW]

Assuming that it is suriage, you can assume that its original nagasa is more than the current. From the clear differences in patination along the nakago, it looks to be around an original length of at least 26".

You can reliably predict its original length based on the distance between the nakago-ana and the differences of the patination.

[16k]

Can you provide more pictures? The kissaki, the Hamon... looks to be a nice sword even though it is suriage.

[quoshy]

Based on sugata I'm guessing Muromachi (mid 1500s ish) and the jihada looks Bizen to me but I'm more than happy to have someone else tell me I'm wrong

[JH Lee]

To my (inexperienced) eyes, it looks like a tachi that was shortened.  The blade dimensions are rather slender but looks very well made and nicely preserved.

[JordanJOT]

Here's some more images of the detail of the hamon and kissaki..

 

[JordanJOT]

Here's what I have of the Nie/Nioi, and the Tsuba. Any clues?

[Jacques]

Sorry to be frank but its' pretty tired and of poor workmanship.

[vajo]

I think it is an o-suriage, machi-okuri koto blade. A little tired but not bad at all.

[JH Lee]

Looks nice to me as well.  I don't see any noticeable kizu or ware or any edge damage that detracts from its overall quality or beauty.  Some of the core steel is being revealed in spots, I think, which partially speaks to its ancient age and repolishing during its long life.  I think it has a very pleasant shape and graceful sori.  Looks to me like a lot of care was taken when it was shortened to preserve the sugata... and I really think its slender dimensions is reminiscent of other tachi I have seen.  Your father would be happy for you to continue to take good care of it. 😊

[Ron STL]

The close-up shows nicely formed what is probably ko-nie and the line of sunagashi  seems to indicate a masame forging along the cutting edge, which is a promising thing to look for in an koto sword. Always important to see if the  nie (or ko-nie) is made clear and consistant, not blotchy and oversized here and there. 

Ron

[JH Lee]

Just now, Ron STL said:

The close-up shows nicely formed what is probably ko-nie and the line of sunagashi  seems to indicate a masame forging along the cutting edge, which is a promising thing to look for in an koto sword. Always important to see if the  nie (or ko-nie) is made clear and consistant, not blotchy and oversized here and there. 

Ron

Ron,

 

Is that something to look for as indication of good quality overall (across all JP swords), or specific to determining if a blade is koto?

[Jacques]

A good blade is well made from the tip of the kissaki up to the nakago jiri, as we can see nakago is badly done, hada is not smooth so not signs of quality. 

 

From what i can see, the start for hamon looks it's ubu and O-sujikai yasuri would be very very unusual on a suriage nakago.