Help Identifying Old Unsigned Swords Please!

[ichiku]

These swords are unsigned and being new to this I am having difficulty figuring out what era these blade shapes relate to. Any help would be greatly appreciated as they do not seem to fit into most shapes I have found. The third sword may be calvary sword? They all have legitimate hamons (pictures below) and were brought back from WWII. I would also appreciate advice on the different methods that more knowledgeable people research an unsigned blade to properly assess its age, era, style, etc.

I am also wondering what alternatives there are to professional restoration for blades such as these which may not have the high value which requires such exspensive treatment. 

Thank You!!!

 

#1.   

- nakago 4.8 inches

- nagasa 16.2 inches (although there seems to be some alteration to the ha-machi?? what do you think that is?)

- sori 0.3 inches 

- kisaki 1.4 inches

- kasane .25 inches

- width at ha-machi 1.1 inches

- width at yokote 0.8 inches

- very thin delicate hamon, which is difficult to see in any photo I took, I tried many times.

 

#2 

- nakago 5.9

- nagasa 21.4 

- sori 0.6 inches

- kisaki 1.4 inches

- kasane 0.25 inches at ha-machi, 0.2 inches at yokote

- width at ha-machi 1.15 inches

- width at yokote 0.8 inches

- very wide hamon, almost entirely straight 

 

#3

- nakago 7.75 inches

- nagasa 30.75 inches

- sori 0.9 inches

- kisaki 0.55 inches

- kasane 0.2 inches at ha-machi, 0.12 inches at yokote

- width at ha-machi 1.1 inches

- width at yokote 0.5 inches

- thin slightly wavy hamon 

 

[SteveM]

1. Edo period wakizashi. Kanbun-era or later. 

2. Unknown era wakizashi, but I would guess late Edo. 

3. Possible replica? The shiny nakago at first looks like it might be part of a stainless steel (anti-rust) Japanese navy sword, but without a signature or stamp, the whole thing looks dodgy to me. The hamon looks suspicious to me. It looks like it could be an acid-etched hamon.

 

This forum doesn't recommend or promote any "alternative" restorations, as any such treatment will likely ruin the sword.

Best to just preserve as is, or maybe lightly wipe with lightweight machine oil. 

 

There is no quick tip to learn how to judge swords. There is only a long and often confusing process of reading and studying. 

For sword #1, the length is wakizashi length, and though it has three mekugi ana (meaning the size or the placement of the tsuka has been altered at some point), the three holes are very close to each other, and the end of the nakago looks original, so the sword length may have been altered by machi-okuri. To me it looks like it has always been a short sword. Not much of a sori to it, as is typical for Edo-era wakizashi. The machi doesn't look out of the ordinary. Genuine Japanese sword.

 

#2 looks interesting as it has a bit of length and a bit of a sori to it. Still wakizashi size, though, and the nakago looks unaltered. Everything else is completely obscured by the very rough condition of the sword. No stamp on this sword? I can't tell if this is a WW2 sword or if it is a pre-WW2 wakizashi. Probably doesn't mean much in terms of price on the open market, at least not in its current state.  

[Ken-Hawaii]

Please sign your first name on all posts, per Brian's rules, so we know how to address you.

 

Red is active rust, & must be removed with antler or ivory to prevent further damage. Do not attempt any restoration on your own!

 

Agree with Steve on most items. Third blade is obvious fake. First blade is real, Shinto period, & the reason you can't take photos of the hamon is that it's obscured by years of neglect. Second blade looks odd, to my eye.

[Prewar70]

I don’t think the third sword is fake. I think someone cleaned the nakago with a file to remove the rust and patina.

[Bruce Pennington]

I don't see any machi on the third blade?