What is the Meaning of "Den" ?

Hoping for some help in clarifying the meaning of "Den" when referring to Japanese swords;

I have an unsigned wakizashi Chris was kind enough to submit for me at the recent Minneapolis Shinsa, unsigned, scored 75 points to Den Mito Sukemitsu, Ansei (1854) . I've seen Den referred to school or tradition but also having a different meaning from what is normally thought, as related in an article written by Robert Benson. I added a link below to the article as well as pasting in part of the article's text here:

http://www.bushidojapaneseswords.com/Den%20article.htm

"I asked, “ What does Den mean in the use of Den Rai Kunitmitsu, etc?” He said, “The Den means that that sword is almost a Rai Kunimitsu.” He said, “We use it meaning almost”. I said, “ You mean the sword is lacking so it is almost a Rai Kunimitsu” He smiled and said “No. That is where the misconception by collectors comes in. In some ways the sword might not have all the traits produced by that smith, but most of them, so we say Den. In this case it may be lacking somewhat, on the other hand it might have all the traits of a Rai Kunimitsu but in addition, it has work that is better or could be considered his best work. In this case it displays greater ability and qualities not normally seen in the smith so here again we use Den."

Understanding the whole process of kantei being very complicated, I was wondering if a simple way of looking at the use of the word Den before a smith's name would give an attribution to a certain smith as in Mr. Benson's article, and Den after the smith's name would be attributing it to his tradition or school?

Also, would anybody have any links or good close-up images of swords made by Mito Fujiwara Sukemitsu's hamon and hada they could share here or PM me? I'd like to compare mine with any other examples. below are a couple pics:

Thanks in advance for your time,

Lance

I think put simply 伝 or DEN translates as "tradition / style" in the shinsa context. "Den Mito Sukemitsu" could mean "in the style of Mito Sukemitsu"

This reminds me of how each newspaper company will have an in-house list of English terms and usage and meanings, according to that single corporation or rag. The same English word next door might have a different nuance.

There will be a difference between the absolute meaning of Den, and then the localized meaning in Kantei depending on each organization or even each Kaicho. To ask directly is to get the specialized meaning, I guess.

Very interesting what you have quoted above. Thanks.

In the absence of being mind readers in this specific case, perhaps, the best approach to take is begin going through the books that list a kantei description for this swordsmith and school to see just how closely this blade follows in detail as well as differences. Which is pretty much what student/collectors should be doing anyway with swords returning from shinsa. Then go back and reread Mr. Benson's Den article.

There are several definitions of the word "den" and all of them mentioned here are correct.

This article by R. Benson had been cited here a couple of times.

Imho the most essential statement by Tanobe San "He stated that he didn’t think that was the same thinking in Japan but conceded that the value might be ever so slightly lower", is usually overread.

The rest of Tanobe San´s very very polite and careful try to explain the meaning of "den" to a westerner unfortunately leads to a lot of wishful thinking of a lot of collectors who own a blade with a "den" attribution.

The sad fact is that a blade with a "den" attribution has less value than a comparable blade wth a direct attribution to the individual smith .

Even if such a blade might have interesting and unusual features not often seen wth this smith it might be of interest to some collectors but will not increase the market value!

Most collectors are conservative and they will prefer a Kanemoto with sanbonsugi or a Tadahiro with suguha to other hamon variations!

I had 2 Mito Sukemitsu katana a while ago. When I find the pictures, I will post them.

Regards,

Here they are!

Unfortunately old bad pictures and no details visible. Both blades unsigned but hozon papered. Mokume - masame hada and gunome hamon like on you sword are quite typical!

here's an article discussing the same topic,

http://www.nihonto.ca/classification.html

Thanks, the one part pasted below of the article was what I was asking:

"One very important thing to note is that if Den is used before the name of a swordsmith, it is not talking about a tradition. For example, Den Kinju or Den Niji Kunitoshi means in regards to an example of their work that it is not exactly the sum of their known characteristics. In the case of these smiths where many unsigned works have been attributed, the characteristics are formed from old written reports and what can be observed in the realm of the signed works left to us. For smiths with only few (or no) signed works left, it makes it hard to establish a complete reference to their overall style. Given that a smith could work for decades, and styles evolved, it should be clear how difficult it can be to make a perfect reference out of a handful of examples. When Den is used like this, the work may be considered to have a small number of features that are over and above the expectations for the smith, or it may be missing a small number of features. It absolutely does not mean that the work was made (or possibly made) by one of the smith's students and it is not a mark of uncertainty of the attribution. "

I was going to ask Chris how NTHK uses "Den" prefix in attributions, but I figured I bugged him enough, and that post shinsa/show he could use a rest. I'm aware that what would be considered "schools" like Bizen Soshu etc. didn't really exist any more in the classic sense in later times but I would have figured if the Shinsa judges weren't somewhat sure of a smith they'd just attribute it more vaguely to Mito or Naoe and era? I also completely understand and appreciate the value that a textbook example generally has over out of the ordinary work as it's more easily identifiable. I'm not really concerned too much with value at this point, and realize the board gets alot of "what do I have and what is it worth?" posts but this isn't one of them.. Just trying to learn more about the school and smith, which is why I added a request for any pictures to compare it to. I've been told why bother trying to shinsa an unsigned Shinshinto blade and it's only because I liked it and wanted to learn as much about it as I can.

Sukemitsu is said to have used gunome choji midare with itame hada, the books I have don't really show any illustrations of these, just nakago oshigata, history and lineage stuff. Fujishiro's mentioned a smith thought to be a successor of Yokoyama Sukemitsu, with the same name but it's just one line and the description seems like it's possible he stayed when the Elder left for Mito and took over his name in that school? Nihonto Koza mentions him moving and becoming a personal smith of Mito Daimyo, and that he doesn't seem to have been of the Bizen Yokoyama group. Hawley's has a listing for Mito Sukemitsu but it's dated 1804 which is too early for when he was supposed to have moved there. Thanks for the pictures Martin, going onto my hard drive study folder for this sword.

If I could be a pain again, I attached one more picture: part of the worksheet showing what the judges wrote down for the kitae and Hamon, I'd be very grateful if anyone could make out what it says, as it's beyond me. Kitae was filled in as other, as the grain is a little unusual.

Regards,

Lance

here is a papered mumei katana of Sukemitsu,

http://www.nihontoantiques.com/fss347.htm

As a further comment on the subject;

When concerning a sword of Tokubetsu Juyo level where no viable signed examples by that maker are known to exist, it is the policy of the NBTHK to add "den" to the certificate regardless if the sword was attributed directly at the Juyo level. A good example of this would be a smith such as Go Yoshihiro. Thus, the den classification is not detrimental to the judgement of the work and I seriously doubt any real diminishing factor of value either.

here's another Sukemitsu tachi,

http://www.nihontocraft.com/Mito_Sukemitsu_Katana.htm

Thanks for all or the links, interesting how there were 3 (4 if you included mine) unsigned examples to 1 signed piece online. I've noticed a lot of Mumei Shinshinto swords compared to Shinto period, and wonder if it was part of the whole sword making revival that was going on at the time, trying to recreate Koto or if there was a concern of their signed swords turning up on the the wrong side in uncertain times?

Regards,

Lance

Also, when some people or groups ordered swords, they may have specified that they wanted them to be left unsigned for what ever reason.