Sukehiro blade?

[rolfe]

I am a novice collector, I admit. I have a few blades, mostly mumei from the early Edo period. My uncle loaned me his "sukehiro priceless blade" to get more data on it. Several years ago, I met with some Japanese swordsmiths and they felt the signature (mei) was forged. They said it was too forced. They said it would be worth more if the original signature was intact. (It seemed as if the original mei was filed off, or so they say)

 

My uncle, however, insists it is authentic, and signed in the last part of Sukehiro's life. (After all, he was offered a kings ransom back in the early 70's for the blade....)

 

I last researched this blade on google about five years ago, but I began a new search recently, which let me to this forum.

 

I have found some interesting images of Sukehiro's mei which seem very similar to this blade in my recent searching. Apparently this blade was forged in 1673.

 

The temper line is that of the twin breast, similar to the ocean temper line, but two undulations instead of one.

 

Can I get some insight on this wakazashi form anyone on here?

 

I put up a set of detailed photos and some Kanji script about the sword which I cannot read in a subfolder my own website. The address is -

 

http://www.f45.com/sword/

 

I'd appreciate and information positive or negative.

 

Thank you, Rolfe Horn

[Eric H]

Sukehiro is a „big“ name and often faked.

 

Eric

[Jean]

If Eric pictures are of wakizashi and the shoshin ones, look in the other example where start the mei and the nengo compare to the mekugi ana.

[rolfe]

Thanks, I can see the difference.

 

I was told there are 100 fakes for every one authentic.

[Stopper37]

My 2 cents worth, here are examples of his signature from toko taikan. The mei style of those examples in the book look very different themselves, could it be his students signing his mei with his blessing (I was told it was acceptable and not gemei, but not sure)? And from what I have read, he has his developed his own style of hamon and that means before that time he did make some blade not typical of suke hiro school.

 

 

I started collection some mere 2-3 yr ago and there is so much to learn, but one of the fellow collector gave a a very sound advice concerning my own Wak that's also signed Suke Hiro: "there are so many fakes out there and some of them are actually nice swords with a fake mei on, unless it has been passed shinsa, treat it as gemei. But what the hell, a fine sword is a fine sword, just worth a lot less." I have since seen some another 2 or so blades that failed shinsa, but one of them looks so great that I really wouldn't mind having.

 

BTW here is yet another example of "most likely gemei" Suke Hiro II, gemei or not, I love it all the same.

 

http://s791.photobucket.com/albums/yy19 ... e8a003.jpg

[Mark]

The maker changed his signature over the years. The key is to find references from the same period as the blade in question (as it has a date), the first references posted were from the same year, one the same month, so they are the best reference.

[Stopper37]

oops only looked at the name and not the date, didn't even consider it, should have know better.....

[estcrh]

Dai Mei

 

This is a signature of a smith which is chiselled on a nakago by his family or students, with his permission. It is regarded as a genuine signature.

 

 

Dai Saku Mei

 

Swords made in a smith's style by his students with his permission were often signed personally by the smith. This is called dai saku mei and is regarded as genuine.

[ububob]

Eric, thanks for the definitions.

[tom]

Here is a link from a real Tsuda Sukehiro dated from 1674.

 

http://www.japanesesword.de/?site=sword&id=14&lang=en

 

Thomas