SteveM

Your friend is right, it is indeed a Fujiwara Kanetaka fake. Not sure if Mino is right. Shinto, yes, but Mino... I don't think so. 藤原金高作　Fujiwara Kanetaka saku Possible to get a close-up of the bottom end of the tang? There are some kanji characters there I would like to see.

忠廣 Tadahiro

Date is 天和三年八月日 Tenna 3, Hachigatsu (August 1683). The writing to the right of the date is illegible to me.

I think it used to be a charitable association of doctors, started in late Meiji to spread medical knowledge around Asia, then it morphed into another doctor's organization that is more focused on research. http://www.dojinkai.org/index.html Here are the articles of incorporation for the Meiji organization https://blog.goo.ne.jp/1971913/e/84d4d4e02a696f91f4292372d330155d

洛陽千本金剛鍛錬所 囗囗 Rakuyō senbon kongō tanren-jō, then possibly a signature after this, but I can't make it out as it is written in a highly stylized version. Maybe 正貞 (Masasada?) This would be the name of the forge where the sword was made, but I can't find any reference to this forge. Presumably it is located in Kyōto (Rakuyō is another word for Kyōto). Date: 昭和廿年七月日 Shōwa 20 (1945), July This, it goes without saying, would be an extremely late date for a WW2 sword. But the late date may also explain why the sword is in such pristine condition. Maybe Bruce or one of the other guys has heard of this forge.

Yes, WW2 sword. We could tell more if you removed the handle to reveal the tang, which is where the swordsmith signature will be (if any), and possibly a date. The writing on the little crest on the handle says 寺澤 (Terasawa), which is, presumably, the name of the person who owned it. The grease-like substance may be degraded cosmoline. It can be wiped off. Search this site for tips on care and handling. And also check this site for tips on how to safely remove the handle.

No, it isn't common, except for where the design incorporates a scroll or a poem of some kind. I agree with John, I think these are just places where it banged against something and damaged the menuki.

天井金 or maybe 天井板 is preferred. 天井 (tenjō) means ceiling. https://www.mokuzai-tonya.jp/05bunen/zuisou/2009/nihontou/11/index.html

Hello Alain, There is no attribution on the label. It says it was in the possession of the Tōjuin temple, and describes the items. It has the date of Hōreki 13, October (1763).

I think in this case 初霜 is another name for October.

Your Dad picked up an authentic Japanese sword. Props to your Dad for doing this. Unfortunately, it looks like your Dad's friend seriously damaged it. It's not uncommon for well-meaning people to destroy Japanese swords. What happens is they take modern tools or abrasives to the steel, trying to scrape off rust, and they end up grinding off the outer layer of steel and screwing up the shape of the tip and mucking up the patina on the tang. In some cases this damage can be ameliorated, but it needs to get sent to a Japanese sword polisher (which is not cheap). The scabbard is nice (well, I like this kind of lacquer effect). I think the ensemble has a value of around $1000. Maybe slightly higher value if the sword is authentic and the damage isn't fatal. Slightly less if the signature is fake or the sword is too fargone to be saved. There are a few clubs and dealers in the UK who might be able to take a close look in-hand and advise on it.

濃州関住伊佐地兼弘作之 Nōshū Seki-jū Isachi Kanehiro saku kore Isachi Kanehiro is the smith's name. You can find more info in this thread below https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/3912-a-little-help/

Kind of an unusual way to write the length, I think. 一尺〇三分半　(the last one means "half") The zero in front of the three is unusual. I'm guessing it means zero sun, and then 3.5 bu. So 1 shaku, 3.5 bu.

I think what Geraint was hinting at is that the sword itself is perhaps much older than WW2. Maybe several centuries older than WW2. And, is the scabbard really plastic? Are you sure its not lacquered wood (which has the same texture and sheen of plastic). Anyway, I'd suggest to set aside the fittings for a moment, and concentrate on the sword itself, as maybe 90% or more of the value of this ensemble will be in the blade itself, rather than in the hodgepodge of fittings.

The only thing I can think of is 元亀, with a funky variation of 亀 (of which there are many). But I have no confidence in this: even if it is 元亀, I can't account for the lack of the year number. I would expect 元亀囗年 (or maybe a zodiac year, or possibly 歳 instead of 年). But nothing after 元 really looks like this. The last two are obviously 八月, but the preceding kanji elude me. 元亀 is plausible for a 祐定 smith, but again, I'm on very tenuous ground.

Sayagaki is by 清水孝教 (Shimizu Takanari - other possible readings for the given name), dated January 1930. He was a scholar of Japanese swords and author of a Japanese sword index c.1925.

Hello @Bob M. Yes the signature on the tsuba is 山城国之住　忠次　 (Yamashiro-kuni-no-jū Tadatsugu) Wakayama (p.456 of the Japanese version) says this signature (without the 之) belongs to Tadatsugu of the Shōami school, and that this metalworker is from the late Edo period. When I do a search on this name, I get some hits from auction sites that suggest the artist is from the Umetada school, but nothing in Wakayama says Umetada. The image is an Ise-ebi, which usually translates into English as "spiny lobster". It is a symbol of long life (and therefore good luck).

No, I'm afraid the first one is a long way off from Kuni (国 or any of its variants). Also, the various signatures of Kunisada (father and son) are well known, and none of them are like this one. I really think we're looking at an 19th century smith - Moritsugu, Morisada, Morisada (守次、守定、守貞), or some other name. Looks like a good candidate for shinsa, however, and that would hopefully clarify things.

Tsuba is signed 江府住序之　Kōfu-jū Tsuneyuki Made by Tsuneyuki of Edo.

Dug around and found other examples. First one is the middle part of a triptych by an artist called Ginkō (c.1887) https://www.yamada-shoten.com/onlinestore/detail.php?item_id=59177 2nd and 3rd are, as Chris says, by an artist named Kōgyō. https://www.harashobo.com/ukiyoe/ukiyoe_detail.php?print_id=24027 https://www.yamada-shoten.com/onlinestore/detail.php?item_id=60732 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kōgyo_Tsukioka

I don't see anything under the signature. The reverse side has painted markings on it - we usually call them assembly numbers, probably used to help match the sword with its intended furnishings. In this sword it looks like it says 白八 (white 8).

Yes I would like to have a better photo of the whole mei too. I was looking around for an example of a Hiramatsu Masatomo mei on the internet, but couldn't find anything. If this is Masatomo, it will be nice to have a good picture of the mei. I do agree that it is a horribly executed 昭 for Shōwa. Was it an attempt at an obscure variation?Or, did it look better at one point, but became somehow scratched and garbled? Anyway, no doubt it is intended to be the "Shō" for Shōwa.

村上正忠作 Murakami Masatada saku The opposite side is a dedication to Sasaki Shigesuke 佐々木重輔

Sukidashi 鋤出

I agree - its information that best comes from Seikōdō, rather than us try to guess at what is going on in a low-res photo. The sword already received a Tokubetsu Hozon certificate (not to mention a sayagaki from Honma Kunzan), so it isn't a fatal flaw. Or, to be more precise, it wasn't a fatal flaw at the time it received the TH appraisal. Now it could be that the sword was sent for polishing after it received TH, and that polish revealed a fatal flaw, but somehow I don't think that's likely. https://markussesko.com/2016/08/25/honma-junjis-kun-in-kunzan/