Big Money Tadahiro

[Prewar70]

Beautiful sword with provenance and pictured in a book, but not papered.  Is the signature good or suspect?  I'm not a bidder, simply wanted to see if anyone was interested in discussing.

 

http://czernys.com/auctions_lot.php?oggetto=61514&asta=59

 

[brannow]

I think I'm pretty safe in saying this will not sell at the prices listed.

[Gasam]

I think I'm pretty safe in saying this will not sell at the prices listed.

 

I agree. But unsure how much we can discuss ongoing auctions....

 

Cheers,

[Jean]

You can discuss the mei, but not the price. The market will decide.

[paulb]

sorry Jean my post came up at the same time as yours!

[Jean]

No harm Paul

[Gasam]

Heyas,

 

Tokubetsu Hozon example. It is the same smith, yes?:

 

http://www.ricecracker.com/japanese_swords/past_swords/s1/s1-3_omidaijo_tadahiro_katana.htm

 

Cheers,

[Jean]

The blade is dated 18th century by the auction house, should be 17th. Mei: Hizen Koku jū Omi no Daijō Fuji Wara Tadahiro. This one is not forged in the Yamashiro tradition, hamon is gunome midare. There is a plus with the koshirae and the fact that the blade has been published by INTK.

[Jacques]

Would not bid a cent for this sword as it is obviously gimei.

 

No decreasing of the width of  kanji from up to bottom, no increasing of space between kanji from up to bottom. On the square of ji hiro left tagane is on the wrong way (same as daimei) as well the horizontal bottom one.

[Prewar70]

When looking through Roger's book, there are many things that are off with the signature but two things continued to catch my eye.  The mei, in relation to the mekugi ana, it's unusual for this sword.  And the Tada, what I would call the "j" looking stroke, it's sloping and curved.  In almost all the oshigata I looked at 2nd Tadahiro signed with a very flat, angular, horizontal stroke, whether the sword smith himself or student.

[Mark]

maybe the auction house is trying to be honest when it says 18th century. If i read the description they say what the mei reads but do not say "made by ___"  and anyone who knows even a little about swords (or does even a little research) knows the era Tadahiro worked. I am thinking the auction house is saying "this is a 18th century sword with the following mei"   the price aside (who know what someone will pay and at auction the market sets the price) it seems the auction house is not taking a position that it is a genuine Tadahiro but a later Shinto sword

[brannow]

One might also note aside from the obvious gemei signature the low quality koshirae.

[Keiji]

Hi all,

 

interesting discussion.

I know about this sword, in the technical sheet of the book is not written as Shoshinmei (orginal signature), and there is no written made by Tadahiro.

 

The signature is not sure of this blade, but live view is nice, and probably it's a Hizen school.

 

Thank you for kind attention and collaboration in the study.

[Keiji]

14000 euro......