16k

Probably a stupid suggestion, but why don’t you take a picture of one of yours? Why doesn’t it need to be museum quality?

Actually, the nakago could be real. If the habaki is soldered to the blade, I wouldn’t be surprised if an original nakago was welded to a junk blade. Nice carvings anyway.

That would be my take too. Even though the sculpting looks good, it reminds me a lot of those bone tourists pieces from the late Meiji period. More blade pictures are necessary here.

That’s a nice saka choji!

Happy for you and the buyer!

Well, again, something is seriously wrong here. I can’t tell you what happened to this blade exactly, just the modifications are huge: - you have a mune machi but no ha machi - the nakago has been extremely thinned down, probably ground down - I can’t conclude whether the vertical lines we see on the nakago, near the Habaki are the result of the blade being in a vise or if a new nakago was welded (which wouldn’t make much sense with an unsigned nakago) oh, and I still can’t see the stamp you’re talking about.

If you can wait three months, you have a deal! No actually, scratch that! I could in three months, but it would have to be lay away payment.

Beautiful and jaw dropping, Ray, as usual.

I sympathize, my friend, I sympathize. Actually, I feel the same.

I’ll be honest, I don’t like the shape of the nakago. Something looks very off here. I’m not at all implying it is a fake, but something went wrong here, as if, maybe on the field, the nakago was modified, perhaps for repair. Also, the kissaki and the lack of Yokote look odd.

Juan, I like your sword. The trouble with an Ō-suriage sword is that it greatly change the original sugata. Since it is shortened, it takes away from the sori, the nakago is also modified, so what looks like Kanbun Shinto May actually be something else. That’s the problem with rules, you always find something to contradict them. At first sight, it looks Kanbun, and it might have been made around that date, but it could also be slightly earlier when the shape wasn’t already entirely set in stone. Then again, I believe, probably falsely, that you’re not too far off in terms of period.

Nice! Thank you Peter.

Yup, that’s the real McCoy!

That’s a very interesting find Peter! Thanks for showing it to us. While you’re here, I also wanted to thank you! I’ve discovered, by pure chance, that you had written a book and have bought an read it. It was a real, enjoyable read. Sir, you have talent!

> > >