stekemest

Yes, that would certainly be the best possibility. Unfortunately, as I have neither a car nor a license, it's not possible for me to attend meetings anywhere else than in Baden-Wuerttemberg. But maybe I can find someone to whom I can send the sword. Thank you all again.

Thank you for the explanations. Do you think it would help to show the sword to someone in person?

Thank you. I didn't ask the polisher for a perfect polish, so he just opened a window to see some of the blade's structures. It was in a very bad condition and it was hard to work it to this point, he said. So this polished part can not provide any more information about the date of the sword, together with the first pictures? Thanks again. Peter

Can nothing more be said?

Hello, Maybe some of you remember the handachi sword that I showed several years ago. In the meantime I got a part of it polished and would like to know if the polished part can provide any additional information concerning the age of the blade. I would be very glad for any answers. Peter

Thank you for the new answers. Is koto correct nevertheless?

He has been discussed here earlier. He seems to be an honest, but not very knowledgeable seller. He does provide splendid photos, so every bidder has to judge himself... certainly not a seller for beginners. I think 500 including shipping is okay, but that's just my personal opinion. Peter

I already saw this documentation earlier. It's one of the few good ones about Nihontô; highly recommended.

Hi Ralph, If you want to decipher the kanji yourself, you might check out http://www.geocities.com/alchemyst/kanji/kanji1.htm. It will take a while comparing all the characters, though.

That's a usual WW2 gunto handle. I don't know how much you know about these swords. "Gunto" are swords that were used by ww2 officers and that resembled earlier samurai swords (tachi). They often had machine made blades, but sometimes traditional (nihonto) blades were used, antique or modern ones. Yours seems to be such a traditionally made blade, just not as old as you probably thought.

That seems to be a gendai blade that fits the gunto koshirae. The complete package seems to have been made around ww2 era, not earlier than 20th century. Can't figure out the smith name yet, but someone else will surely tell you who made the sword.

Hi drewas! I think better pictures of the sword including details such as hamon (if visible) and nakago (tang) are needed. Can you remove the handle?

How can you distinguish between fake and "occupation" swords?

No, that's Rococo. Can't say which painter though.

Thank you for the replies. Ian, very interesting, thank you very much for the explanation. If I understand that correctly, it would mean that no daitô with such a koshirae can exist, because only bushi were allowed to carry long swords, right? Do such swords belong into the late edo period or how can they be dated? Peter

I have just read the tiny discussion within the "Edo Period Corner" thread about what is often called "rebellion koshirae". IanB states that he doesn't think this label is correct, and refers to them as "okkashi-to": viewtopic.php?p=29524#p29524 As it seems, the matter hasn't been discussed in any more detail, so I'd like to focus on this question again. What exactly is an "okkashi-to", and are there any other proofs that support IanB's opinion? What is generally known about those koshirae, are there books in which they are mentioned, if yes, as what? In what time do they belong, and so on? I'd be glad to read any information you have. Peter

First of all, I think this is an interesting discussion and it would be sad to see it drifting into some personal quarreling. Here's the tang of a katana of mine and it shows traces of what must have been a shumei. I would guess that it's older than late edo or meiji....? Best regards Peter PS: If this discussion is getting off-topic, I would propose to divide this thread.

Well, I quote from http://www.nihonto.ca/ratings.html : "In some cases it is extended to suriage swords, if the opinion of the appraiser is that the piece was never signed to begin with (these attributed mei are sometimes done at the time of shortening, so the appraiser may have solid data about the original state of the nakago)." I always considered Darcy Brockbank a very credible source of information. And I thought there were, for example, shumei-signed blades by Go Yoshihiro which are suriage as well. Peter

Really? I thought that shumei were also done on a suriage sword when the appraiser thought that it was never signed.

- no longer actual, can be deleted -

Looks cleaned. :?

Judging from the rust on the nakago and the clearness of the mei, I'd guess that it's not too old. Maybe (very) late Edo to Gendai, between 1850 and 1940 or something.

It's not so easy to distinguish between gimei and real. Keep in mind that gimei does not mean that the sword is a modern fake, but a true Nihonto - just not by the smith pretending to be. Best way to find out would probably be to compare known mei by this smith with your piece.

Very likely a koto blade (before 1600). Nice.

I'm turning 22 in a few months and have been interested in Nihontô for 2 or 3 years. Although I do have a few swords, I'm not sure if I'd call myself a "collector", as the age of a sword is most important to me and I don't care much about details as hada, hamon, certain smiths or schools etc. I value swords in bad condition very much as well (so before you throw your "junk swords" into the trash can, rather give them to me :lol: ). Could be because I have been collecting european-medieval and ethnographic weapons for years, and criterias are slightly others there.