Rivkin

It does appear Bizen-like, has utsuri, definitely koto. It has potential. Can't comment on signature's validity, but what is seen is decent. If you are selling, would be interested in buying. Stylewise its also does not have the Muromachi vibe, there is a chance its older.

Very likely Kambun shinto piece, maaaaybe Kaga school. Usually not profitable to restore without a signature.

Looks like decent shinshinto blades with utsuri enhanced or created by acid, sayagaki raise questions, though I am unfortunately not very knowledgeable on sayagaki overall.

Need closeup of activities, boshi etc. As of now does not look like something too recent, can be shinto, can be a bit older, but its a wild guess just based on patina's appearance.

In the first photo kissaki proportions are badly distorted, and overall it is very important to picture boshi in detail. Assuming its sugu, this most likely would be shinto. The polish is not top notch but it does underline the hamon well so its quite useful. Mino-ish style most likely. There is indeed not much to see in these photographs, but it appears as genuine though pretty average period blade.

Hamon is quite well seen, while jigane is absolutely bland everywhere, quite possibly the polisher did not do well with it and killed whatever was there. A bit tired as well. Otherwise its a typical issue that circa 1395 blade costs half of the one from 1385. It is what it is. Personally there is some decay of quality from 1350 to 1380, but 1440 is often as good or better than 1380.

It looks Soshu-styled. A macro shot of activity with light applied from a side should do the trick. Unfortunately, nihonto photography is always difficult. Nakago is also important. As is it can (big guess) be shinto piece.

It has to be a dedicated photo of the nakago, then activity, mune. Its in polish and has potential so best to look at it carefully.

Here is a photograph I did of Hizen Tadayoshi

I don't know what exactly to add - to me Hizen is just not too rich in things to see. There is a wide hamon with little activity, a wide nioiguchi, bright and consistent itame hada with ji nie. They are nice, attractive blades which are somewhat sensitive to polish level and tend to be a bit more tricky with light compared to most shinto blades - side illumination can work poorly, ji nie sparkles when the light sources is from above, while nioguchi typically stands out from beyound the edge. For some reason they are extremely appreciated in Japan and Juyo sessions where a single owner papers a few (three-four?) identical Hizen blades at once if I remember correctly are not too uncommon.

Dedicated cases are exceptionally expensive. The key is however to make sure there is no dust, no active rust and humidity is below 60%. Given this even blade in polish will typically be fine. Early shitahara is another name that comes to mind when I look at it now. Again this is all super-guessy given a very few things that are visible, without boshi etc., but ....

This is a hard question to answer because of the overall condition, however the nakago itself shows very bright showa-period steel with a lot of recent red rust. Theoretically someone could have cleaned the nakago and then it rusted, but the kengyo shape appears to be original, both holes are drilled and the nakago's surface is processed rather haphazardly. I would not be optimistic that its an old blade.

Attractive shinshinto blade.

Hizen no Kuni Yoshikane. Meiji smith. The carving of mei is almost showa-styled, deep spaced yasurime is shinshinto or later, patination is shinshinto or later. Overall I would say its a decent possibility this is authentic. The blade (as little as we can see) is sort of consistent with late shinshinto Hizen. Sesko: YOSHIKANE (吉包), Keiō (慶応, 1865-1868), Hizen – “Hizen no Kuni Yoshikane” (肥前国吉包), “Hizen no Kuni Saga-jūnin Fujiwara Yoshikane” (肥前国佐賀住人藤原吉包), “Hizen no Kuni Fujiwara Yoshikane” (肥前国藤原 吉包), student of the 8th gen. Tadayoshi (忠吉)

It does need some oiling and clean-up from active rust and overall fixture is a bit unorthodox and would not be appropriate if the blade would be in good condition, as is the damage it does is probably very limited. In regards to what it is I would say no later than 1750, probably no earlier than 1250. The polish unfortunately is very heavy on hadori so seeing hamon is difficult. Has some masame in shinogi ji; the most weird feature it has kaku mune (?) which is extremely uncommon. You do find though it on some late Muromachi swords, Bungo for example, and by default (can be WAY OFF as its all based on really tiny evidence) I would think its late Muromachi and (possibly) Bungo. Yes I would clean it a bit from active rust, oil it, and would look at the nakago.

NTHK shinsa, maybe Chicago, I don't know where else it will be (florida?), but usually they do come to Chicago sword show. You can mail in the sword. Alternative is to find someone willing to go through specialized books and compare the signature. Then you can sell it even with a photograph from a book showing identical signature. If its gimei, you'll have to sell it as is, no gain from polishing etc.

There is very faint belt darking and brightening close to kissaki.

Somebody really wanted to be Rai Kunimitsu. Jigane is a bit softer though and there is very little utsuri I guess. Can be photography effect as Yamashiro can be hard to shoot. And hard to judge without sugata and nakago. Hizen?

Kashu Kiyomitsu did suguha and those are sometimes really nice blades, but this one has quite a few kizu, unlikely to be close to first tier - with this style you expect the best to be Yamashiro looking and without blemishes. It looks late Muromachi, and most likely the attribution/signature is ok. Second blade with pronounced gunome-sunagashi is a good match for Fujishima. The polish is a bit "dealer level" and the seller is known to offer en masse blades which are out of polish, damaged etc. at bottom prices. I think both are genuine late Muromachi examples.

On the one hand looks interesting (tobiyaki? possibly utsuri?) on the other hand not much to see and the hi turned out not as well done as I guessed. I would check the signature against books (or find someone willing to do it) and depending on the answer would decide on polish.

I think the sugata is ok and the hi appear to be well cut, so there is a chance its real. A detailed shot showing work somewhere on the blade can reveal more.

Late Muromachi (short nakago, yasurime is basically straight, not sugu boshi, sugata etc.), hard to come up with school as polish is very heavy on hadori and sugu-notare hamon is not too distinctive. I would say Mino since later generations did do wide sugu-notare, though I can't see masame in shinogi-ji so might be someone provincial instead.

Late shinshinto to Showa.

Well, it looks late, maybe shinto, a decent blade, more precisely is very hard to say... Owari etc., whatever, many possibilities.

It feels more like a plaque commemorating the war rather than single specific event. Nice Americana but sword has to be judged separately