Mei assistance please.

[bluboxer]

Greetings all,

I have acquired a tired wakizashi as a study piece and am trying to confirm my translation of the mei.My take on this mei is "Shinano no Kami Nobu Yoshi"

If I have read the last character correctly,there is variance from the listed mei in my Hawley's.Minamoto was in the listed mei's where as mine has not.Both smiths that signed "Shinano no Kami" were father and son and also used the kiku.If anyone has more info on this smith or disagrees with my translation any help would be greatly appreciated.Questions I have are:what changes (aside from application of the imperial mon) would occur upon receipt of the kiku in a smiths mei?Upon receipt of the title "Kami"?How much variation would be present in a smith's signature throughout his lifetime?Of course this may also be gimei

Thanks,Alan M.

[Grey Doffin]

Hello,

Your read of the signature is correct. My guess is that this is gimei. Not only does this mei differ a lot from the example in Fujishiro (my reference of choice to turn to) but the yasurime are totally wrong also.

Grey

[Guest reinhard]

The signature is quite close to nidai NOBUYOSHI's and it seems he used Taka-no-Ha filemarks once in a while (ShintoTaikan vol.1, p.615), but I miss the "Minamoto" before the artist-name.

 

reinhard

[Brian]

I have acquired a tired wakizashi as a study piece

 

Before you get jumped on, you should maybe have said as a curiosity or novelty piece

I know there are many here who will tell you that you don't learn from studying tired and/or low class pieces. But we know what you mean. Just the first step on the way to upgrading to much better items, right?

 

Brian

[bluboxer]

Yes Brian,perhaps I should qualify my intent of a "study" piece.I am interested in metallurgy, construction and heat treatment methods and am hoping to gain insight as to these qualities.In fact a tired piece may well reveal techniques and character that can be seen only after they are brought to the surface.Many of the first class blades may have significant flaws (flaws that would reduce the apparent value) that lie just below the surface and will never see the light of day;do you not agree?As to this being low class,this smith was rated by Hawley at 75,so I may have "learned" a great deal.

I am however,disappointed that it may well be gimei tho.It's too bad there were so many false signatures with nihonto and it takes a practiced eye to sift through them all.

The signature is quite close to nidai NOBUYOSHI's and it seems he used Taka-no-Ha filemarks once in a while (ShintoTaikan vol.1, p.615), but I miss the "Minamoto" before the artist-name.

The next question I pose is would this smith have changed something as important as including or excluding the "Minamoto" from his mei? i.e.Could this represent one of his earliest works?

Thanks again for all of your help.

Alan M