John C

Max: Nothing there suggests WW2. If it is real (need better pics or link to site), it would be much older. John C.

Matthew: Just a tip - when you get it, there is no need to take off the handle. There won't be a signature or date and you may damage the sarute. John C.

The origami seems legit. Dated 1999, which matches the imprinted dots in the upper left side. It also notes it is a wakizashi, if that's what you are looking for. John C.

I know this type of fake has been posted before, however not for 125,000 dollars! Just an FYI to new folks not to believe everything you read. https://www.ebay.com/itm/176072699289 John C.

Not likely. Sometimes an exact smith may not be identifiable, however the particular style and school is. Additionally, the shinsa team is made up of experts. This is what they do (after years of study). I would feel comfortable with their assessment being accurate (see discussions on "green papers" for additional information on older paperwork). John C.

Just a general note. Some schools of thought actually prefer mumei blades that have shinsa attribution. No debate as to whether or not a mei is genuine. John C.

Not sure if this has been posted before, however the link is to a short video that talks briefly about iron ore production, tartara, tamahagane, and swordsmithing. Not great detail but interesting if thinking of travel. https://www3.nhk.or....emand/video/2007489/ John C.

I have seen something similar on US marine corps sword tassels. John C.

@Bruce Pennington @Jcstroud Thoughts? John C.

Kane something. I'll let the translators finish it correctly for you. Here is the proper orientation. John C.

Interesting one. I'm sure I'll be corrected, however I have not seen one with two mekugi-ana before. In addition, does the nakago look as if it has been welded on then filed? What does that look like to you guys? John C.

Wimpy, of course! John C.

Is that the same sword? John C.

Thanks for the correction. I had not seen one with just Naval parts. John C.

Just my opinion, however I think this is a legit kai gunto, albeit late war fittings. Possibly retrofitted with souvenir fuchi?? John C.

Ditto. I would like to know the answer as well. Interestingly, the California Penal Code does not define a dirk or dagger by its shape, but rather by its intended use: "A dirk or dagger is a knife or other instrument with or without a handguard that is capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death." John C.

You may want to post this in the translation assistance forum. BTW, aside from this kai gunto, what else was in the lot? Was the dagger also navy? John C.

In addition, I would lean toward a sword with some sort of guard based on the taper/slant of the "fuchi." John C.

J. p.s. - the date is Showa 19 (1944). John C.

@Bruce Pennington two dots on the nakago jiri John C.

Looking at the tang recess, it doesn't seem to have the shape of a Japanese nakago (neither tapered nor screwed end). John C.

Could be. Here is a picture of another one (disregard the "yours" label). John C.

Ditto. John C.

Roger: I don't think that is generally true. The issue is how the Japanese sword is sharpened. It achieves its edge from the polishing of the two sides and not from sharpening the cutting edge itself (as in Western style). So being out of polish along with going in and out of a scabbard for 80 years is probably what makes them dull. That said, some parade swords and others were issued without an edge. In addition, swords issued early on came with sharpening stones, which ended up tearing the edges so were not used for long. This is my understanding, however others may argue differently. John C.

Bruce: Other than the double hanger and thicker tsuba, what else differentiates a 94 from a 98? Ohmura-san lumps them together and I have wondered. John C.