Is this a Japanese blade? Help with ID please

[Anfoz]

Hi,

I am after any information on this blade. I believe it’s Japanese but I could be wrong. Blade length is about 56cm from the Tsuba to the Kissaki and looks as tho it is hand forged. I can see folds in the blade (not sure if photo picks it up) and is extremely sharp with a Nice Hamon. It has only the two mei and what looks like a bar code under the Habaki. 
Thankyou

[Shugyosha]

Hi Andy,

 

You're correct, it is a Japanese blade. The signature on the tang reads 包次 - "Kanetsugu" - the maker of the blade. The bar code part is the polisher's signature, sometimes there is something similar on the back edge at the tip too. If you can get some close-up pictures of the blade you will no doubt get some more detailed comments.

[ROKUJURO]

Hi Andy,

this looks like a mixture to me. The blade (signed KANETSUGU) seems to be of Japanese origin. The TSUBA has suffered an angle-grinder treatment, and if it ever was Japanese and authentic, it is now worthless.  The TSUKA is a bit strange and might not be original.
The blade was treated chemically to show the HAMON.
My advice is to show it to an expert to know more. 

[Anfoz]

Thanks for your reply’s John and Jean.

Yes, I thought the Tsuka looked a bit odd as well but I don’t really know much about Japanese blades anyway ( still learning ). So if the Hamon was chemically treated does this mean it’s not an old blade? I will do some googling and see what I can find on Kanetsugu. 
 

 

[Shugyosha]

Hi Andy,

 

No it is an old blade. The chemical treatment has probably been done relatively recently to "tidy up" an older polish. You will find lots of Kanetsugu - remember to use the same kanji as on the blade as there are a couple of ways of writing "Kane" and yours is associated with swordsmiths in the province of Yamato or in schools linked to it. If you're able to provide a full length shot of the sword taken from above so that it shows the shape of the whole blade  it might be possible to estimate a rough date.

 

 

[Anfoz]

Thanks John, does this help? I added a couple off close up of the blade, using an IPhone ,so not the best. It has about 56cm (22 inches) of sharpened edge if that helps as well.

[Gakusee]

How did we decide on the 'chemical' treatment of the hamon? The photos are not clear and are taken at an odd angle for assessment. Also, while not the perfect candidate for a sashikomi polish, some sort of sashikomi-like polish could have been applied and that is a polish which makes the hamon stand out more. 

[mywei]

Could possibly be Kanetsugu - Monju school (offshoot of Yamato Tegai)

 

see reference https://www.samuraishokai.jp/sword/11308.html

[ROKUJURO]

Michael,

it is a typical appearance. The YAKIBA becomes darker instead of brighter, and the whole blade gets a somewhat 'matte' look. SASHIKOMI is quite different. 

 

[Shugyosha]

Hi Andy,

 

If you are able to take a shot standing directly over the blade and ideally with something with a straight edge along the back of the blade so that it hightlights the curvature that would perhaps help.

 

There were a several smiths signing in this way (two character Kanetsugu). The one Matt posted looks plausible as there is some similarity in the way the kanji are written - I think this one was working around 1661. There was another guy in the same school working in the late 1500s early 1600s who might be a candidate too but a better shot of the blade's shape will be helpful.

 

Also, it looks like the blade has been shortened and that the lower peg hole in the tang was the original one. Are you able to measure the distance between the lower hole and the notches at the start of the cutting edge? This distance added to the length of the cutting edge ill give an approximate idea of its orignal length and might help with dating it.

 

 

[Anfoz]

It looks like it’s about 9.5cm from lower peg hole to notch at start of blade. I can’t remove the Habaki all the way, I don’t  want to force it as it’s not my blade and don’t want to damage it so just pulled it down a bit. 
The mei does look just like the one Mat posted ( thank you Mat ) 

[SAS]

The mei seems a lot brighter than the patina on the nakago and seems to have been added much later.

[Shugyosha]

There’s chalk in it. 

[vajo]

I like the koshirae! 

[Anfoz]

5 hours ago, SAS said:

The mei seems a lot brighter than the patina on the nakago and seems to have been added much later.

I rubbed in a bit of chalk to highlight the mei

[SAS]

Hard to judge from photos, 

 

 

 

[Shugyosha]

Hi Andy,

 

I had a brain f@rt - it's the distance between the two holes added to the length of the cutting edge that will give an approximation of its original length.

 

Looking at the curvature of the blade and the size of the point, my feeling is that this blade is likely to be earlier than 1661 (Kanbun was the era that started at this date and is associated with a change in blades' shape to a more shallow curve, smaller point and some taper from base to tip) - but I'm not able to tie it down any more precisely than that from photographs alone. Depending on where you are in Oz, there might be someone on NMB who can look at it in hand and give you a more informed view.

 

 

[Anfoz]

Thank you for all your help everyone, this is a great forum with an incredible amount of knowledge and information.