ROKUJURO

Hi jhelmes, welcome to the NM board! Please sign all posts with your first name plus an initial. I don't see a WAKIZASHI but a NAKAGO. Smith is KANEMOTO.

Gentlemen, I am not able to add anything of value to the discussion, but I would like to ask how one could judge the NAKAGO-ANA of an old and obviously 'used' TSUBA in terms of size and shape. On many TSUBA I see extensive alterations and adaptations to different sword tangs, so unless there are a number of UBU TSUBA of that school or maker as references, I am in doubt how to evaluate this feature.

Robin, that is a nice full shape for a (contemporary?) CHAWAN! I like the colours, although they might have come out a little differently with a longer firing. What you call rough or sandy could have been caused by a slight underfiring, but this effect can also be seen on pots which have stood behind a bigger vessel. It is always a big game when the fire does its work and plays with clay and ash!

Stephen, I like both TSUBA, but I would have to see the whole KODOGU set to make up an opinion.

Tom, did you compare with other NAGAKUNI?

Jean-Luc, it is not always the case to have the KOSHIRAE or parts of it from the same period of time as the blade, but it could occur. The later the blade, the more likely it is.. The TSUBA looks like an attempt to reproduce some kind of a TEMBO style. Difficult to say when it was made, but my impression is late EDO. I do not see a MEI or remains of it on the NAKAGO of your blade. You may have seen that the KISSAKI (blade tip) seems to suffer from a KARASUGUCHI which is considered a fatal flaw. There is a considerable WARE in the HAMON as well.

Is there a horizontal crack going through the stamp or is it a scratch? If it was a crack, it could have been caused by cold stamping a while after production, so possibly an inspection stamp.

The tang pictures are upside down. Please sign your posts with a first name plus an initial, as is the rule here. Smith could be MASAHIRO.

A very good TSUBA that deserved to be restored by a master! Simply amazing!

Dave, that looks like an attempt to copy a Japanese blade, but ended up as a fail, The NAKAGO is revealing, the mounts as well.

I am learning all the time, my whole life is a learning process. This will end when my life ends.

wmarucha99, please sign all posts with your first name plus an initial as we all do. To answer your questions: It is normal to have one MEKUGI in a blade's NAKAGO, when it is a traditionally made blade. Older blades can have several MEKUGI-ANA. Your blade, by the way, does not necessarily look like a war-time blade, but could be older. To make a safer assessment, we would need a number of detailed, well focused photos shot at right angle plus at least one of the entire blade (without HABAKI).. The TSUBA is a standard one, machine-made, nothing to be excited about. The same applies to the SEPPA (Japanese nouns do not have a plural form). Your blade being shorter than a KATANA (< 60,6 cm), is probably a WAKIZASHI, if it has a fully intact tip. Please refrain from all attempts of cleaning or restoring the blade. Nevertheless, you may apply a drop of machine oil to the NAKAGO to stop the red (active) rust. Have an expert have a look at the blade to see if it is perhaps a hand-forged blade of some age and value.

Antonis, yes, it may be a KENJO style TSUBA. ( Kenjo means: presentation, a gift of an object to a superior or an equal. This type of TSUBA was often made as a gift, usually from one DAIMYO to another or anyone with the wealth to afford a TSUBA such as this, with the hope that some favour might be granted, or that an alliance could be obtained." (Haynes)). Sorry, I cannot read the first KANJI in the signature.

TsubaCy, welcome to the NM board! Your TSUBA (plural: TSUBA) looks like KAGA. Second KANJI in the MEI seems to be 'IE' (like in NOBUIE). Please sign all posts at least with your first name plus an initial as we all do.

That is mostly a technical question. It depends where the NAKAGO was cut. If the SURIAGE was done just above the MEI, then it is possible to have no MEKUGI-ANA ore remains of it. But not all swords are forged and signed in the same way, so there are tolerances in the position of the MEI.

Yes, SANBONSUGI it is.

Christian, welcome to the board! I wish you good progress and success!

Mark, in its actual condition it is difficult to decide just with photos, but with a traditional polish I think the HADA will come out quite clear.

Chris, the difference is a metalurgical one. Steel is a malleable alloy of iron and carbon, while iron has a carbon content of <0,22% and is not hardenable. The first culture to produce and use iron are the Hittites, and they made iron as early as 1.800 B.C. Meteorite iron was indeed found to have been formed by forging in Egypt (a dagger in Tut-anch-Amun's grave, ca. 1.330 B.C.). In Europe, the Celts started the production of iron at about 800 B.C. In the beginning of the Iron Age, bronze remained in use for quite a while as it was harder and more suitable for many tasks than non-hardenable iron. Steel was a by-product in the bloomery process, and while the Celts did no know how to make it, they could identify its properties and, later in their era (La Tène), used it accordingly for the cutting edges of tools and weapons. The technology spread soon, and the Romans and other ancient cultures learned from them.

Chris, that is not at all astonishing. Raw bloomery iron and steel have to be processed for homogenization before they can be used for tools and weapons, and this results in a form of HADA. That can be seen even in Celtic blades (ca. 800 - 45 BC).

Steve, i fully agree. .....My point here is that, while Darcy's advice is excellent and should absolutely be the rule of thumb in navigating the waters of Japanese auctions, we need to do our own studying and research such that if and when an important "blue moon"-type item does appear, even though we recognize that the item in question most likely will have been circulated (and rejected as NOT genuine) among experts in Japan, our own studies may allow us to remain open to the possibility that a gem has slipped through those admittedly tight cracks. ..... Did I understand that right?

It has KOINE. Impressive!

Johni, you can fold and fire-weld iron and steel in a way that the dividing lines are almost invisible, depending on the skill and the intention of the smith. Remember AKASAKA TSUBA with their SAN-MAI construction of the plate. In your case it seems that this work was done a bit sloppily, and this may raise questions whether it is old or a later work wanting to look old. The 'old' TOSHO and KATCHU smiths were quite able to do very good work, but sometimes a tiny gap in a welding is broken up and widened by corrosion, making even a newer TSUBA look old. It is not unusual to see such KIZU in 'old' TOSHO and KATCHUSHI TSUBA, but there are also many perfect items to be admired in collections and museums. So it really applies what Arnold wrote: Inspecting the TSUBA in-hand (or having a SHINSA team do this) is necessary to come to a better assessment than might be possible just by photos. In any case, I like the TSUBA, the dimensions and the execution, but that does not mean much!

Johnnyi, my feeling is that this is a good authentic KATCHUSHI (or TOSHO) TSUBA. BUT if someone really wanted to produce an UTSUSHI, forging of tapering thickness or a laminated plate is no problem at all. I think that we see fakes mainly when they are easy to make and can be sold cheaply, or when 'better' fakes might promise a lot of money. Then it might be worthwhile to invest some real work.

Rob, yes, blade looks oil quenched.