[tom hyle]

It looks like bone to me, too, which would be far more typical. An easy way to tell in this kind of situation is you can see the natural cavity (yes?), and that in bones is of a different shape than that in ivory; if you've seen many pieces of each you will tell this instantly. The carving on yours is quite toward the nice end; some of the best I've seen on one of these; 1/2 figural bas-relief, well executed, and note the dragon's inlaid eyes; most of these type pieces are more toward the direction of scrimshaw, with minimal or no relief carving, and often with stiff layout and straight unskilled lines at that. Also the blade looks to have a swedged/relieved spine at the tip (ie, thickest in the middle, not at the back of the blade), a nice traditional feature on this type of dagger (aikuchi or else tanto). Often called a woman's dagger or sometimes a kimono (tunic/robe) dagger, aikuchi were daggers for often concealed civilian wear in traditional Japanese society. They lack a guard, or have only a minimal, basically vestigial one (such seems to be missing here? and would also be bone, almost certainly). Tanto is a sword-hilted dagger with a handguard (I think this is the main technical distinction though, of course, old aikuchi are usually lighter than old tanto). In modern times they have remained poplular as letter openers, often very traditionally shaped, but rarely hardened. This looks like a fair quality one, and though the blade is likely (not certainly) untempered, it may well be traditionally formed (hard to tell in the photo, and some are and some aren't; it's a cross-sectional question, mostly; does it have the relieved tip? A fine edge? Is the spine (back edge) of the blade flat, humped, or "peaked" (ridged at a blunt angle)? How thick is the blade? How well does the habiki (the sheath tensioner at the top of the blade, where it goes into the handle) fit the blade? As far as it being for foreigners; I've never seen any evidence that this is or ever was exclusively the case with the type (19th/20th bone-dressed daggers), particularly of a nicer one, like this; certainly an ivory-dressed sword, while out of the ordinary, would not be particularly un-Japanese. I also suspect a bit of the sheath tip is missing, but only a small cap to cover the cavity in the bone end. Keeping, killing, and working the corpses of cattle was, in traditional Japanese society, the work of a seperate (and I think originally either foreign or aboriginal) caste. These people are called "Eta" though I think that's an insulting term, and I forget their other name.....I don't think traditional Japanese ate cattle, but they valued the usefulness of the hides, horns, and bones. So it's possible these are the work of a specific ethnic minority in Japan. The carving often strikes me as more Chinese or Korean than Japanese in style.