cabowen

Not strange at all once you research the smith and reach the correct conclusion....

All of the ones I have seen appeared to be period fakes.

I take it English is not your native language so there is no shame in a misunderstanding. I am both amazed at the language abilities of those in Europe and ashamed at the lack of such in the US.....Let's move along,,,,

Anyone here thinking of bidding would do well to research this smith thoroughly......

Um, Masayuki (Kiyomaro) was not a gendai smith....

These were made by the boat load in Seki as souvenirs.......

I have seen several gimei Yasukuni-to, and many gimei ningen kokuho works (Sadatsugu, Akihira, Masamine, etc.).....Most of these were in Japan but I have no doubt they are working their way west. There are plenty of them on ebay, for example....

It will only hurt the blade if you have less than a professionally trained polisher touch it...I would be happy to assist you. Email me privately.

Let me clarify a few things: No one has said that only a shinsa team can make an accurate call. It is all about who you as an individual are comfortable with and who you wish to trust. That includes yourself. If you have the knowledge to make the determination yourself with confidence, then that is your prerogative. Everyone makes mistakes, though, including shinsa teams. Some many more than others. It is entirely your decision as to what you wish to believe, and ultimately, what you decide to do with your sword. Personally, I would look for the most informed opinion possible, which is usually obtained from a top rate shinsa team. When I am sick I seek the opinion of a physician, not a med student. Removing a signature is not something that should be undertaken lightly. The NBTHK shinsa supplies simply a stamp on the notification post card that says the items failed. Nothing more is said. There is no pink slip. The NTHK-NPO gives a pink slip. When the sword is a good one, they will usually indicate such. They will often indicate a period as well and if the workmanship is such that it points to a particular school or smith, they will often indicate that as well. I can not speak for any other shinsa groups. It seems you have it thoroughly digested.

Of course Morita san is correct.... The period should be kanbun as well, not tenbun. And the location is not Takamatsu, but Osaka.... thanks for the correction.....

讃州住文珠四郎藤原包清 Sanshu ju Monju Shiro Fujiwara Kanekiyo Originally from Yamato, worked later in Takamatsu. Tenbun period......

The NBTHK is the largest and most frequently used and they are of course the traditional choice of dealers. After the NBTHK, reputation, which is usually directly correlated to their experience, is what separates the rest of the field....

almost anything is possible.....may have even been done already....not something I give much thought to....

Here is my understanding: Smiths have a certain number of katana, wakizashi, and tanto they can license every month. Blades that must be licensed under the law are those that are over 15cm in nagasa. A blade over 15cm but less than wakizashi length would be counted as a tanto for purposes of the monthly quota.I recall from an earlier thread that after reading the JuToHo (statutes governing swords and firearms) that there is no overt mention of a mekugi, they simply refer to "nihon-to" without a definition of what a "nihon-to" is exactly. I have always been told that three things make a blade a nihon-to requiring registration: a yaki-ba, mekugi-ana, and over 15cm in length....The law, as mentioned above, doesn't mention these other criteria, but the fact that sushi knives (not requiring registration) in excess of 15cm exist, all of which are differentiated from tanto solely by their lack of a mekugi-ana, makes me believe the anecdotal accounts I have heard from authorities in charge with enforcement of the laws that a mekugi-ana is indeed a characteristic of nihon-to. I should mention my own personal experience with this: I once took a yari to registration that was only 14cm in length. They told me it had to be licensed despite the fact that it was less than 15cm in length because it had a mekugi-ana and was thus a weapon....So go figure.... As far as kogatana, etc., being outside the licensing requirement, as long as they are less than 15cm in length, yes, they are outside the requirement. I had a smith make me many 14.8 cm tanto miniatures once (osoraku, hocho masamune, katakiriba, etc.) with mekugi-ana and they were not licensed.....

If it fits within the established and known criteria for a daimei, the same way they judge the Kunisadas as mentioned above- they are awarded papers.

Be aware also that not all shinsa teams are equal. Some have more experience than others and their opinions are more respected. A simple metric is the number of submissions they handle a month in Japan. Some groups get many, some much less, and some next to nothing... It is always a safe play with a close call to submit to more than one shinsa team.

There has been enough research done that indeed daimei by Shinkai for Oya Kunisada are recognizable by style and technique and are attributed as such.

George, I don't mean to offend, but when you say that the workmanship fitted well, I have to ask you if you are basing this opinion on what you have gleaned from books or from actually handling enough work of the Masayoshi school to be familiar with the standard and variations seen among this group? Among the students of Masahide, Masayoshi is second only to Naotane in his ability to work in various traditions and as with Naotane this makes things difficult and gimei abundant. Also, his students, while primarily working in a florid Bizen choji, also worked in other styles occasionally. I know this because I have owned more than one blade from this school and have handled many more. I also attended several times an exhibition in Sakura city of Masayoshi and his students so I have some practical experience with this school. I have not seen enough of your blade to give any sort of solid opinion and would be happy to look at photos of the blade and more pictures of the mei as well....I just want to caution you about drawing conclusions from books as this is seldom reliable.... First, there is no way a shinsa team will call it daimei even if it is because they have no way of knowing with certainty, and given the large number of gimei Masayoshi, they will certainly lean towards gimei. There are very few smiths with established and recognized daimei traditions- Oya Kunisada and Inoue Shinkai are the most well known, but it is very rare. I should also mention that it is not uncommon to remove a signature and then have a blade paper to the same school or smith.... In the case of the Kunisada smiths, daimei are recognized and papers awarded. There is no need to remove a signature. As to your last set of questions, I think they have been addressed here several times. What to do with a gimei blade is a personal decision usually based on what your goals are. If you plan to maximize value, most remove the mei and resubmit. If you couldn't care less, leave it alone. Merit is in the eyes of the beholder, but given the overwhelming majority of opinions suggesting a good sword is just that, it would seem most people do indeed judge a blade on its workmanship not its mei..... While my own opinion is not of much importance, I will say that in my case I do not own any gimei blades and would not. Perhaps I am not a purist as others are, I simply find there are too many attractive shoshin blades available to be beholden to a blade that is gimei....I know every time I looked at it I would be thinking "too bad it is gimei"....I have had signatures removed (have even done it myself under the guidance of a smith a few times) but I do not own any mumei blades either, not for any reason other than I collect mostly early Showa Tokyo smiths and there is no such thing as a collectible gimei or mumei Showa period blade....

My apologies for offending you, as I assure you it was not my intention. I have not read each of the posts you have made wherein you note you have made your plans clear, perhaps if I had taken the time to read each of them I would have seen that indeed you have been clear as to your intentions. If you do follow this hobby long term you will come to understand why many experienced collectors may not always be so patient with newcomers asking for help. I can't tell you how many times I have received inquiries such as yours, spent countless hours trying to help while providing information few have access to gratis, only to have this help used for personal financial gain with rarely a thank you in return. This happens on this site routinely and it ruffles feathers. It appeared to me that your intentions were ambiguous and I felt it only fair to those taking the time to assist you that everyone understand where things stood. Thus I asked you to clarify. Obviously I could have done so in a less abrasive manner. My offer to help still stands. Again, my apologies and best of luck to you regardless of how you choose to proceed.

As you already know the maker and signature, there is little to be gained by removing it if it is stuck currently. You stand a great chance of doing damage without the correct tools. If it is further information you seek, you have all you need to get started though I will tell you in advance there is very little additional info available on the net in English about the nidai Sukenaga as he was not nearly as well known as the first generation. About all you will find is his affiliation (Yokoyama Sukesada school), the period he worked, the location, his title, and his work style. All of which you have already. There is never much more available for smiths of lower rank in English (especially those that worked at the close of the Edo era), though sometimes one can find a bit more by researching Japanese sources. As I recall I was first contacted by your uncle who told me his family had inherited a dozen or so "museum quality masterpieces" and wanted information on shinsa, telling me he thought it would be best to paper the swords before selling them through Christie's or the like. I told him I could perhaps save him a lot of time and hassle if he sent me some photos to verify if these swords were first of all worthy of shinsa and secondly, masterpieces...I was subsequently contacted by you. In the first of dozens of emails we have exchanged you expressed your desire to gather information about these swords so that you could be an informed seller. I subsequently spent several hours sorting out all the mismatched photos and papers for you and provided you with rudimentary information on each sword. I told you that papers do indeed help in most cases to maximize a sword's sales price. I gave you all the necessary information about shinsa and offered to submit the swords without papers for you. I also offered, for a small fee, to do comprehensive appraisals on each sword as you repeated your desire to obtain accurate valuations. I explained in detail why accurate value determinations were not possible from pictures alone and that proper valuation takes experience, time and research. I also explained the pitfalls of posting pictures on the net in the hopes of obtaining the same. At this point it I think it would be fair to all if you stated your intentions here. If you are gathering information to aid you in your attempts to market these swords, and/or fishing for valuations, please say so. If you spend any time looking at the archives here you will quickly learn that while people are generally generous to a fault with their knowledge, they do not appreciate being used. If, on the other hand, you are a budding collector and are genuinely trying to enter into this esoteric hobby, then I suggest you follow the tried and true path suggested here already, which is the purchase of books. You are in a rather unusual situation in that you already have swords. Most people start with books and learn the fundamentals of vocabulary, history, schools, construction, etc. first. Your current attempts are akin to learning mathematics by starting with the calculus. One generally does not have a great deal of success understanding integral and differential calculus without first knowing basic arithmetic, followed by algebra, geometry, etc. You will save yourself and others here a great deal of time and effort if you buy the recommended books and get yourself up to speed. It will also go a long way in establishing some credibility as a bona fide collector.

In many cases it is very obvious that a signature is fake- gross differences in kanji formation, size, placement, angle, depth, location, age, style, formation, etc. Sometimes it is not so obvious unless you are a native Japanese and then more subtle nuances are apparent, like the flow, confidence, and rhythm of the script. Given the above, it is usually a very quick process for those that are attuned to these nuances. Many times it is simply a "feeling" that one gets- something just doesn't seem correct. The ability to glance at a signature and know without references if it is fake or not is not an ability quickly or easily acquired. In most cases simply knowing whether a signature is gimei or not suffices. If one wishes to acquire the skills necessary to make these determinations and/or understand why a particular signature is not genuine, then perhaps a good start would be to collect and study the Condell Conundrums published in the JSS-US Newsletter in the past. It wouldn't hurt to study calligraphy and the written Japanese language as well. While I can't speak for others, I know that I do not have the time to host a classroom every time some asks if a signature is good or not.... While short "gimei" proclamations may seem rash and leave some wanting for details, equally off-putting is the constant stream of posts simply asking if a signature is good or not without any visible attempt by the poster to do any self analysis. If someone posts asking for oshigata of a certain smith, then asks questions based on their own comparisons and analysis, it encourages more detailed replies and gives people the clear impression that the poster is a serious student. I for one enjoy helping serious students. When I get a short "is this signature good?" kind of inquiry, I answer in kind with a simple "yes" or "no"...You get what you give.....

As the topic of this thread concerns the issue of gimei blades, when I say that initially only a photo of the nakago is usually necessary I am speaking to the issue of determining if a signature is valid or not. In most cases that is all that is needed for this singular purpose. Of course there is more to sword appreciation than the correctness of the signature....And there are cases when a forgery is quite good in which case one needs additional info, i.e., pictures of the blade....Hope that clarifies things....

It may never be known if they were all in fact made with tamahagane but given the huge number of them I have seen, all appeared water quenched. Water quenching is usually a sign that western steel was not used.... I have read a personal account written by the father of the deceased polisher Yoshikawa Kentaro, who was also a polisher, of his visit to a prison in Okayama during the war where he observed first hand this prison school of sword smiths. He was quite moved by the experience as I recall....I consider this verification. You are fortunate as "rather wonderful" are not words that the 75-100 or so that I have seen bring to mind...They say every dog has his day though....

Oshu Shirakawa Ason Teragayama Masashige

It would be easier to help you if you uploaded your photos to a place where one doesn't have to download software to view them...