Odachi on auction. What time period is more likely?

[JeanEB]

https://www.jauce.com/auction/c1191432860

https://www.jauce.com/auction/u1193456293 some extra pictures

 

I don't see ubu odachis for sale too often. This one has been sitting for over a week already...

97cm nagasa, chu-kissaki. 3.6cm torii-zori sori. 

pictures arent the greatest to look at the hamon and jihada

My first bet would have been early-mid Muromachi but the secondary mekugi-ana I thought didn't appear until the Edo period. I wonder what members of this community would think

All opinions are welcome as always!

[Rivkin]

Based on couple of things I would guess shinshinto or later purposefully made to appear old, but its a guess.

[Lewis B]

The 'patina' on the shirosaya is not very convincing. The whole setup does look a little engineered to appear older and as for the provenance and backstory.... crazy...as you would expect for Jauce. 

[JeanEB]

While I never take the descriptions on Jauce seriously, I have a hard time distinguishing truly old nakago from those artificially aged. Are there any usual telltale markers of fake aging? and wouldn't a Showa 26 torokusho technically make it less likely? 

[Shugyosha]

Hi Jean,

You're presuming that the torokusho pictured is genuine and not faked or, if it isn't a fake, that it goes with blade and isn't just a generic Showa 26 document for a mumei blade. After all, if they carry out the deregistration properly the buyer will never see that document in the flesh. 

 

Regarding nakago, a healthy looking blade with a well proportioned kissaki and rounded fukura, deep hamon and deep machi but a dark, very even patina on the tang should make you look twice. Also, if a blade has been "shortened" but any hi don't run into the nakago or if the hamon stops at or just after the hamachi (not conclusive as a good suriage can have the hamon removed from the tang but something to bear in mind). 

 

Clear yasurimei on an old blade are unlikely, if the patina inside the kanji for a mei is different to that on the rest of the tang that can be a tell, if it has a generic gold painted attribution to a big name smith not backed by modern papers, if it has more mekugi ana than seems right for the blade's health that points to it being messed with to look older. Look inside the mekugi ana too as sometimes the colour of the metal inside the hole can point to it being a recent addition.

 

Be suspicious of blades with cutting tests as these sell blades and inflate the price. Be particularly if they refer to lots of bodies being cut and with the more difficult cuts and, as usual if they have no modern papers confirming the tameshimei. They are less likely to be faked if they are inlaid rather than painted on and carry the name of a recorded tester who is from one of the families authorised to carry out tests and has his seal and if it is possible to verify that he was alive/ working on the dates when the test was carried out and that these tie in with any date on the tang relating to the blade's manufacture.

 

Essentially if you're looking on Japanese and other auction web sites you should be presuming that the blade isn't as described unless it has modern papers but even then be wary and do your homework as to exactly which smith the blade could be by, and check that the papers match the blade and that they don't show signs of being tampered with. If you have the slightest doubt or what you are looking at seems too good to be true for the price, look away - it's better to walk past a hundred fakes or misrepresented blades than get rolled once.

 

Ultimately the bottom line is buy from a trusted source and don't go "treasure hunting".

[Jacques]

Quote

Said to be a sword donated to Toyotomi Hideyoshi by Go Yoshihiro, a sword dedicated to a famous temple, over 3 shaku long

 

Quote

My first bet would have been early-mid Muromachi but the secondary mekugi-ana I thought didn't appear until the Edo period.

Shinobi ana existed since Kamakura era.