ROKUJURO

Me neither. A photo with the respective KANJI (no plural 's') would be helpful.

Jay, the first question is of course: What oil do you use? And then: How much did you use? How long was it on the blade? There is also a slight possibility that the KOGATANA is not made with TAMAHAGANE and that a different steel reacts differently with the oil, as Chris already mentioned.

Justin, the KIZU are not nice, but they are small. The one in the SHINOGI is not too bad, looks a bit like spider rust in a KITAE WARE. I think, both will be reduced in size in a good polish; the blade seems to have a lot of NIKU. The starting corrosion looks as I would expect from a handmade (TAMAHAGANE) blade. It is a kind of a gamble, but if you could negotiate the price a little down and save enough money for polish and SHIRA SAYA, you might have a nice and valuable GENDAITO with a potential. But keep the complete costs in mind; just possessing the blade in that state won't be a solution.

That is really generous, but we should see the respective blade first, see the condition and have measurements. There is still some time until Chrismas! And Christian, you will look fine on a sledge with a white beard, a red coat and jingle bells! Do you like reindeer?

Yes, that is correct. Not a tempering KIZU, but a forging/fire-welding fault, which tells something about the quality and about the fact, that it is not signed. The smith knew exactly what he had produced! If there is really HADA to be seen, the blade might not be GENDAI, but more late EDO. It is difficult to say only with photos.

Chris, just to underline what Franco wrote: There are really cheap, but good KOSHIRAE/TOSOGU parts for sale, IF you know to find them. You are obviously not in a hurry, so why don't you get informed first about this (vast) subject of NIHONTO and buy on a better knowledge basis? We have a KODOGU orphanage forum here on NMB where you could trade or purchase authentical parts for very little money! A simple but genuine TSUBA might not ruin you, if you can identify it. By the way, a TSUKA core is not made of bamboo! Know your stuff, NIHONTO is an amazing world!

Dave, the age is not so important, but quality is. Your blade has a bad FUKURE (blister) under the HABAKI which lets me believe it has been shortened to hide this KIZU. This means that the value of the blade will be considered quite low among collectors.

Martin, the TAMEYASU is beautiful, has a good polish, and is nicely filmed! Thank you!

Chris, much better photo, but still I have no clue! It starts with SAN, fourth KANJI could be KAMI, third-last probably GATSU. The inscription seems not to be made by a steady and well trained hand!

Wow! This must have been a gorgeous TSUBA before corrosion took over! Not because of the gold used, but for the work! What a pity!

Luis, MEI seems to start with TADA-. I think this is a later EDO revival piece, aiming to look like KO-TOSHO, but a really nice one!

Chris, apart from the bad photo (not focused, probably only part of the inscription)), I think that this is a date. What about the other side? TACHI-MEI?

WAKIZASHI NAKAGO Greg, they are not well focused!

Patrice, for my eyes, there is absolutely nothing giving it away as cast. As Grey says, it might be later, but is a fine one. From a technical point of view, it would be much more difficult to cast a TSUBA with such a design than making it by hand. Just my opinion, without seeing it in hand.

Matthew, yes, that is a KAMON, a family badge. They were widely used and after the SAMURAI era also by commons, so it will probably be difficult to relate it to the family of the former owner. I have tried myself to give a sword back, but to no avail.

Brad, to help you understand how one could get an idea of the age of a blade by just seeing the NAKAGO (tang), I will give you a hint: The filing of the NAKAGO is called YASURI-ME, and in former times the smith did this very carefully and evenly. In SHINTO times it was even sophisticated and very decorative, so guessing the age was not so difficult, when you took the patina also into consideration. Your blade is in good condition, and so is the NAKAGO. Very light rust, which just started to form a patina. The filing is quite irregular and not carefully done, which is typical for these war-time blades. By the way, the signature (MEI) is nicely and carefully written/cut, and a lot nicer than in many other GUN-TO. Your photos do not show the full NAKAGO without HABAKI which would be helpful in further identifying the blade. So I am not sure if there is a stamp giving it away as SHOWA-TO. From the photos of the HAMON, it seems to be non-traditionally made, so nothing special. There will probably be no activities in the HAMON which you would expect in a traditionally forged, water-quenched blade. All in all, a very nice item for the military collector!

Henry, it seems they had similar heat treatments in the same period in Europe, but even long before in Celtic times. Look for the research results of Stefan Mäder. (http://www.schwertbruecken.de/pdf/staehle.pdf)

Krystian, the MEI of the second TSUBA reads KUNIHIRO, I think.

Brad, yes, that looks like HARU. KUNI is 濃州 (Noshû), modern MINO.

Vesper, welcome to the NM board! I'll give it a try: NOSHU no JU FUJIWARA NAGANORI with SEKI arsenal stamp, so probably not NIHONTO but factory made.

Jean Paul, the signature does not look o.k. at all, and this is not a question of readability. There are some KANJI on the tang that would have a meaning on other blades, but not here. Corrosion on steel is always iron oxide, as you may know, and in most of the cases it is (red) rust (Fe2O3). It is difficult to make up an opinion of your blade just by looking at the pictures, but it seems to be a crude weapon that lacks good lines and surfaces. It looks like an unfinished amateurish attempt of making a blade. The blackish colour could be from scale (Fe3O4), but that may be an effect of the photos. I am not so sure about the provenience of the blade. It could have been made everywhere in some backyard in south east Asia.

Matthew, as you can see from Dave's attached info paper, folded steel and HAMON are different features. Quenching in water for an 'active' HAMON requires a very pure steel free of alloy elements (except carbon), but most industrial steels (which can contain elements like manganese, silica, chromium, nickel, vanadium a.s.o.) have to be quenched in oil to prevent cracks. Certainly it is 'an o.k. sword', depending on what you were looking for. It is a modern war relic, not a SAMURAI sword.

Guy, I think you are going the wrong way. Look at the blade first, at its features, at its bad flaw, and then you get a sense of the quality. The signature of the smith should confirm the blade, and its features should reflect his working style and quality. The smiths you found out are famous for their exceptional work. So whatever the signature is, first question is what the blade tells you in terms of quality. The actual shape is heavily damaged, but a restoration will have more of a problem with the FUKURE (blister). I understand that you are curious to find out who made the blade. The signature may help in a way to guess the time when it was made. If a blade bears a (GIMEI) signature of a famous smith of the 19th century, you can be sure it was made later in an attempt to profit from the reputation of this well known master smith. So cool down a bit - I can understand your excitement, as I suffered it several times myself! You will learn from your blade, and that is the main thing!

KASANE really 0.9"? That sounds like a lot!

Guy, to me, the YOSHI looks more like 善. I counted 12 strokes, not 6. But that may well be my old eyes....