wakizashi (better pictures) for evaluation

[lorn9800]

This wakizashi was in possession of my father-in-law who died and I just would like to know the century it was forged, who forged it and (approximately) what it is worth

I posted already in another part of the forum (wrong part, sorry for this) and I had some comments on the picture quality so I tried to take better photos this time.

 

Really thank you for your help! 

 

 

[Jacques]

越前住宗次 Echizen (no) ju Munetsugu. According to the literature, there are 2 generations working in Kanei (1624/1644) for the shodai, and Kanbun (1661/1673) for the nidai. 

[lorn9800]

Thanks a lot Jacques. So in your opinion this wakizashi could be forged in the 17th century? Sorry I am a real newbie. 

[Deiro]

Considering Jacques has not said it is gimei (falsily signed), this is most likely the case.

 

due the lighting I can't really judge the patina.

A full picture of the blade would suffice, even if it is lower resolution. 

 

another suggestion is to look up and compare it with other works of the smith(s) and see whether it is an oddity or typical (though tbh doing this without having seen them in person is not the best approach)

 

[Deiro]

I might also add that it has quite a good habaki. Take good care of it!

[Shugyosha]

Hi Laurent,

There were some examples of this smith's signature given on the other thread. I don't like to give bad news but it looks like someone has added a false signature to the tang of what looks like a genuine Japanese sword. So IMHO you are essentially looking at evaluating the price of an unsigned but mounted wakizashi. 

 

It looks like it might be from the shinto period as Jacques said, but if you can post a full length picture of the blade with everything taken off it, a view of the overall shape might give a clue to confirming its age.

 

[Jacques]

2 hours ago, lorn9800 said:

Thanks a lot Jacques. So in your opinion this wakizashi could be forged in the 17th century? Sorry I am a real newbie. 

Most likely. They are minor smiths, so there are no examples of their work in the literature, which makes a declaration of gimei hazardous. That's not to say it's not a gimei, only a shinza shipment will tell, but is it worth it?

[lorn9800]

6 hours ago, Shugyosha said:

Hi Laurent,

There were some examples of this smith's signature given on the other thread. I don't like to give bad news but it looks like someone has added a false signature to the tang of what looks like a genuine Japanese sword. So IMHO you are essentially looking at evaluating the price of an unsigned but mounted wakizashi. 

 

It looks like it might be from the shinto period as Jacques said, but if you can post a full length picture of the blade with everything taken off it, a view of the overall shape might give a clue to confirming its age.

 

Thanks a lot for your answers

 Here an additional photo full length of the blade

6 hours ago, Shugyosha said:

 

[Jacques]

At least the nakago jiri matches.

[lorn9800]

Bad news. I found this at the place my father in law. So it is a copy

 

[Scogg]

@lorn9800, 

Your sword is a genuine Japanese sword. NOT a copy, fake, or repro. 

The paperwork that you have is misleading; maybe incorrectly and/or poorly translated. (or maybe even for a different item?)

The signature may or may not be genuine, but the sword absolutely is! 

Take good care of it. 
Cheers,
-Sam

[Brian]

Yeah, for a change we get to say "NOT a copy"
Nope..genuine and decent antique Japanese sword. Look after it.

[lorn9800]

Thanks a lot  @Scogg and @Brian. 

 

The problem is that my wife and her sister are sharing the goods of my father in law. So the one who gets the sword has to pay the other one for the "half of the value". What would be a reasonable value for such a sword where both parties can be happy with? 

Thanks so much!

[Brian]

Just my opinion, but I'd say $600 total for your purposes would be a fair value

[Tohagi]

...for that money, pay the other side and keep this nice little sword.