shinkai sword 1681

[1tallsword]

this is my recent addition folks. this has come with letter dated from my translation nov.20 1970,issued by the school board of miyazaki prefecture (signet) mei reads inoue shinkai and dated feb. 1681. letter mentions how some of his swords are designated as important cultural properties of Japan. sorry for the crumby pics, the flash washes out a lot of patina and age on nakago. for our discussion... question number one how many of these letters have you seen? also how many swords by this maker are known to be important cultural properties and such? also anyone dare hazard a guess to aprox value :D

[1tallsword]

couple more pics

[1tallsword]

here are some clear pictures of letter :D

[Tokaido]

Hello Jeremy,

the "letter" is no more than the so called "toroksho". It is the registering certificate, ANY sword in Japan requires because of the Japanese guns + sword laws.

The toroksho contains the measurements of the blade, the kanji of the signature (if any present) and the province and date of registration.

The toroksho do NOT contain any information about the autenticy of the signature.

The toroksho has to be turned in to the autorities at the time a sword ist exported from Japan to a foreign country.

 

Greetings

Andreas

[paulb]

Dear Jeremy,

If this were an authentic Shinaki it would be a valuable sword. He is one of the top 4 or 5 shinto smiths and very highly regarded and his work sought after. As a result there are many, many fakes of his work, some of them of good quality.

The paperwork you have is as has been suggested meaningless with regard to the blades authenticity.

To realise its potential value it would need to be submitted to Shinsa. Until that is done the majority of the market (other than maybe some very knowledgeable people willing to take a risk) would treat it as gimei and price it as such. The value would reflect this.

regards

Paul

edit BTW I have seen as many of those papers as there are swords legally held in Japan. As Andreas says it is a legal requirement to register swords there and this certifies it has been registered.

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Wrong location of the mei an date + kikumon which don't resemble those of Shinkai (too flat and imprecise) => very very likely gimei.

[mywei]

Hi,

 

Here's a papered Shinkai Juyo katana for comparison, dated Enpo 7 (1679) August

http://www.iidakoendo.com/info/item/a458.htm

[1tallsword]

it has been papered by nbthk and dated 2001, if you research his latter mei dated 1681 and before his sudden death 1682 you will find it to be correct. the question was never if it was authentic...lol I just simply asked about the paper and to make good conversation maybe opinions as to value. why are so many members so eager to throw out the word gimei, I know of many that wont even post on this sight anymore due to this. out of all my swords I have only 3 are not lettered, all are either nthk or nbthk. thanks fellas for your input on the mei but your all wrong, I to am leaning towards not posting pics for enjoyment anymore as the gimei word seems to have been embedded in all your vocabulary :D its a shame because pics are needed to share knowledge and to futhure the learning. However with that said when an item is in no question 100% fake, recent made or Chinese then it is important to mention it is gimei. however on here it seems and appears and not only feel this way that word is abused. I have posted pics just to see of lettered swords mei looked good and more than once everyone was so eager to scream gimei. one friend I know warned me of this when I first joined and he too tested with pics and is no longer even posting pics of his collection.just answering questions ect. I too will no longer post any pics of my great swords and will only ask questions and answer questions. good day, Jeremy

[1tallsword]

well matt just posted a link proving all what Jacques D. mention to be inaccurate. when comparing the two mei I see a striking resemblance! thank you to all for your info, Jeremy

[Brian]

I guess the reason so many people throw out gimei calls...is because there are so many gimei out there. In fact...far more gimei than shoshin swords I hear.

And when it comes to a sword with a big name that "comes out of the woodwork" suddenly...if it hasn't been papered by now out of Japan, then the chances are very good it is gimei. Readers have to take the info they are given, and work from there. They don't know the background of a member, and if he chooses to omit the important info, then you cannot blame anyone for advising people of the risks of unpapered attributions.

The number of "gimei" blades here that went on to be papered as shoshin is probably less than 2%

Any sword posted here is obviously going to be checked out by members eager to see if it matches up or not. Failing to ask for that opinion is irrellevant...it is part of the process people go through and is human nature. We have always advised that opinions are checked out later, regardless.

You didn't mention it has papers, and you act like a novice asking questions about torokusho and letters and "important cultural properties" and provide a vague pic that shows nothing much of the workmanship.....how are you going to get any other call besides gimei?

Many of the people crying about gimei calls are hurt that what they think are national treasures might be gimei. Others don't get the fact that any sword without papers has to be considered gimei unless the workmanship is irrefutable or it has current papers.

As you obviously know...even earlier papers are suspect.

Please do post a pic of the papers. A simple Google search should show the value of papered Shinkai blades. They are usually fully in polish too.

And I am not aware of any jūyō bunkazai Shinkai swords, but I may be wrong.

 

brian

[cabowen]

Please post the papers....

 

People post their opinions. You are free to agree or disagree. It is within this exchange of opinions that opportunities for learning exist and hopefully, the truth is exposed.

[Jacques]

Hi,

well matt just posted a link proving all what Jacques D. mention to be inaccurate. when comparing the two mei I see a striking resemblance! thank you to all for your info, Jeremy

 

Please have a look at the position of the first kanji (井) in regard of the mekugi ana and compare with the juyo. This smith never signed Inoue Shinkai with the ji I (井) above the mekugi ana, it is the same thing with the date. You cant find mei beginning above the mekugio ana when he signed under the name of Kunisada only.

 

Have a look on the ring of the kikumon too....

 

You can compare with this one (made the same year as yours)

 

[Brian]

As Chris said...people post their opinions. We really don't even have to post that every time...it is obvious that everything here is an opinion.

Take what Jacques just said. Now it is up to someone to go to their books, and research the matter for themselves.

Either they find out what he just said is true....or they find evidence to the contrary. So they have ultimately learned something.

If they care to post the evidence here...then we all learned something. Win win...and someone learns something new.

If we just ignore any questions about the authenticity...then what do we learn?

 

Brian

[Veli]

Dear Jeremy,

 

The mei of your wakizashi is clearly different - both in terms of placement as well as in style of handwriting - from the other examples available on-line or in reference books. Thus it would be very useful for the Nihonto community if you could post pictures of the paper, so that this case could be used as a reference when examining the authenticity of Inoue Shinkai mei.

 

BR, Veli

[cabowen]

this is my recent addition folks. this has come with letter dated from my translation nov.20 1970,issued by the school board of miyazaki prefecture (signet) mei reads inoue shinkai and dated feb. 1681. letter mentions how some of his swords are designated as important cultural properties of Japan.

 

People are expressing doubt about this sword's authenticity because the signature and workmanship do not match well with known examples. A "striking resemblance" is not enough. Personally, based on my in hand experience with authentic Shinkai blades, I would be quite surprised if this blade was genuine. Not having it in hand makes rendering any sort of opinion little more than a hunch; for your sake, I would be happy to be wrong.

 

Secondly, your claim about the torokusho, which I have quoted above, illustrates that you have very limited knowledge and experience with both Japanese swords and the Japanese language. It makes one wonder if what you are calling an NBTHK kantei sho is in fact accurate. Please do post these as there is no surer way to clear the air.

[paulb]

Jeremy,

I wasnt going to join in on the later discssion but as the first to respond to your original mail I thought I should.

I do not know what motivated you to post the mail, especially in the way you did. The implication, deliberate or otherwise, was that as a novice you had bought a sword and were placing great weight on the "papers" you had with it. The whole tone adopted was one of an enthusiatic beginner.

I didnt say it was gimei (though I confess I still have severe doubts it is right) What I said was that you should submit it for shinsa and that the papers you illustrated did not say anything about the blades authenticity.

What were you trying to do exactly? if it had NBTHK Papers why didnt you say so? even with very basic knowledge you must be aware that they carry more weight thean the registration document.

All in all I fail to understand your motives or what you hoped to achieve. Whatever it was I hope you have satisified yourself.

Like the ohers I would like to see the NBTHK papres because as has also been said the images you have posted of the sword do not look like most of the illustrated examples I have seen and if yours is right it is worth keeping images for reference.

Regards

Paul

[Jim P]

Hi Jeremy, I posted these so you can see what we see, Have a good look at the mei of Shinaki and you will see why the ?

[takakage]

A very strange Shinkai for me too........I want to see the NBTHK paper too.

[Jiro49]

Does anyone else think the horizontal strokes in the "I" kanji are actually two strokes each instead of one?

[Brian]

Ok, we all know there are some odd points with the mei, but I also see some strokes that are pretty close. Can't tell more from the posted pics. Lighting also plays a big part, and can make a nakago look off. I think we have all seen so many gimei that it is indeed easier to assume fake than real. The rule is assume gimei unless convinced otherwise..which is a terrible but necessary way to approach this hobby

I think we have all made the point now...so let's give the OP a chance to post the papers and take it from there?

 

Brian

[1tallsword]

thank you to all and respectfully good day. guess I opened a can of worms here with this one, at the least it woke everyone up anyhow I was fully aware of the cert. but just wanted to know if anyone had seen many here as they were not common to see here, also my second question was just a general opinion of value, sure I have my research on sales and values but was just being curious encase someone mentioned one selling that I was not aware of. once again thank you to all and I appreciate your time, Jeremy

[cabowen]

Are you going to post the NBTHK kantei sho?

[runagmc]

Why would someone be so offended by getting good advice about a BIG NAME sword, that DOESN'T LOOK QUITE RIGHT, and was THOUGHT TO BE UN-AUTHENTICATED? What advice would you expect other than 'it's likely gimei, and should be consider so until a shinsa panel says otherwise'?...

 

There have been some in the past who were too sure of themselves, and too quick to say a sword was gimei... but this isn't one of those cases, in my opinion... mainly, because nobody said it was absolutely gimei...

 

BTW, I would also appreciate a pic of the NBTHK certificate, if that's possible...

[cabowen]

While I have been wrong before, I would be very surprised if we indeed see a genuine NBTHK kantei sho for this sword....

[Veli]

I am disappointed that the OP has so far been unwilling or unable to bring this discussion to a happy conclusion by providing proof of his claims. I would have been so excited (as well as surprised) to learn that this blade was Shoshin despite all the obvious differences with other Inoue Shinkai works...

 

This is just my personal opinion, but I shall consider this blade to be Gimei until I see a picture of a reliable certificate.

 

Veli

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

We will never see the kanteisho which likely does not exist. I think he thought to show off with his Inoue Shinkai and he is bitterly disappointed hearing that it is gimei.

[Tokaido]

anyhow I was fully aware of the cert. but just wanted to know if anyone had seen many here as they were not common to see here,

 

Dear Jeremy (please add your name to your posts)

 

You are "fully aware of the cert", so you "played the fool" showing the certificate and asking "novice" questions?

That behaviour do not qualify your post for starting a useful topic of discussion.

 

The toroksho are "not comon seen" is obvious, because it is ILLEGAL to export a sword form Japan and NOT turn in the toroksho.

Since you are "fully aware" you should know.

You should also know that the contents of information on "the cert" means NOTHING concerning the value of the sword or authenticity of the signature.

 

 

Greetings

Andreas

[Dr Fox]

I appreciate your time, Jeremy

 

I for one don't think you do, or you would not have wasted the resources this board offers freely! If I am wrong! then man up and produce the paper requested.

 

Denis.

[mywei]

Hi Jeremy,

 

It's not my intention to pile on you here, as my sentiments are exactly as those above here.

 

But to post pictures of an 'out of the woodwork' Shinkai blade with no authentication papers (Torokusho do not count as it they are not an certification of authenticity) with unclear pictures of the blade itself, and then be dismayed when the good folks here (some of whom have handled hundreds and thousands of blades) raise the possibility of it being a gimei is frankly ridiculous. Any expert will raise the possibility of it being a gimei in 100% of cases in this scenario.

 

My 2 cents

[1tallsword]

alright to put this to rest I purchased it from a gentleman that had it for a very long time, guaranteed its authenticity or money back and has always been honest with me.he guaranteed a letter with it, he has other swords and kept all papers in drawer. now as he looks through papers he cant locate this one..LOL I have several other papers and sword from this source that are good, now he is old and not as sprey as he once was and thinks it was an older paper dated 1971 now. not 2001 as that one he had in mind was to another sword. non the less even if he does find the paper its old and I would still be sending it back in for a new one. so what I will do is submit this sword and I guess we will find out for sure. so there you have it, I will keep you all posted on the results, non the less he said if it did not pass he will refund my money so how can I go wrong :D on another note happy I woke the forum up a little thank you to everyone that commented good or bad, I have big shoulders and can take it Jeremy