Sukekane/Sukenaga

[Lee Bray]

I have a "mumei" wakizashi which papered to Owari Seki about ten months ago.

That was after it failed shinsa with a very nice mei - Omi(No) Kami Fujiwara Tadahiro - which was then removed on advice from a Japanese agent and resubmitted.

 

Roger Robertshaw saw the blade originally and said bad gimei. The mei was wrong and the blade was wrong.

Then he realised that Hizen Tadahiro never signed that way. Quick check in Hawleys and we found TAD44, who signed this way and worked in...yep, Owari...

 

NBTHK said gimei.

Whether they thought it a gimei of Hizen Tadahiro or the little known Owari smith, we'll never know, but for them to then paper the blade to Owari Seki after the mei was removed...

[NihontoEurope]

Then he realised that Hizen Tadahiro never signed that way. Quick check in Hawleys and we found TAD44, who signed this way and worked in...yep, Owari...

 

We, as collectors, want to find swords that is unaltered during their long history. Ubu and if shortened rather suriage than o-suriage, original tempering, untouched and uncleanded nakago and so on...

 

Still, when we get our hands on a sword, we tamper with it... Why not just leave it be? I know there is a thread somewhere here regarding the removal of alleged gimei.

 

There are more smiths that signed like other smiths that we don't know about. Hizen kuni Tadayoshi, many smiths signed that way. Not only the famous one/s.

 

Some thoughts.

 

/Martin

[Lindus]

May have mentioned this way back but seems to apply again re shinsa.

 

Some while ago a local chap bought a Koto Tachi from a well respected US dealer,lot of money but came with NBTHK papers {Sorry cant remember the details} and was a stunning blade.

We,I and two others saw the blade and suggested it be sent again without mention of the previous shinsa and see if it would get better papers.

Duly done and some months later he received from the same Man who had signed off the previous paper, declared to be a later date by a different smith and no paper issued.

[paulb]

Roy

you are right and there are many such stories of blades being resubmitted and gaining different attributions. I think the record quoted is far is an American Gentleman who submitted his sword 5 or 6 times until he got the result he wanted.

The process depends on humans and is therefore not perfect. In addition research continues and as a result what was believed to be correct 10 years ago may be seen differently today in the light of that research. I think this even more the case with fittings when at one point the NBTHK were recommending resubmission every 5 years to have attributions validated (not sure if this was ever stated policy but has often been repeated so may have an element of truth)

Is the system flawed? yes almost certainly. Is there a better one? not that anyone has come up with yet.

[Eric H]

It is a commonly heard saying that the blade confirms the maker, not the signature. The place to start is the blade.

 

 

Nakago - Kantei - Appraisal

 

The nyusatsu kantei should be a means to distinguish individual blades due to the understanding of the sword itself. Also if at the kantei the nakago remains hidden until the very end, the attention should be given yet on the shape, the niku, the characters of the mei, the yasurime etc. Here I remember the words of Sato Kanzan: When viewing a sword, the professional examines first the nakago and then the blade, the amateur looks first at the blade and only then at the nakago. This may be sound somewhat arrogant, but this means of course when judging a sword in the literal sense to verify accurately first of all the mei and the nakago.

(from an article by Tanobe Michihiro)

 

Eric

[cabowen]

That's fine for professionals with an intimate knowledge of how Japanese is written....I don't know many outside of Japan....

[cabowen]

May have mentioned this way back but seems to apply again re shinsa.

 

Some while ago a local chap bought a Koto Tachi from a well respected US dealer,lot of money but came with NBTHK papers {Sorry cant remember the details} and was a stunning blade.

We,I and two others saw the blade and suggested it be sent again without mention of the previous shinsa and see if it would get better papers.

Duly done and some months later he received from the same Man who had signed off the previous paper, declared to be a later date by a different smith and no paper issued.

 

 

I could tell you dozens of such stories, some would curl your hair....As Paul said, you are dealing with a process based on opinion, run by humans. It is by its very nature imperfect. The best you can do is to get the most experienced opinion possible.

[Eric H]

Since this thread deals also with the subject of gimei and questionable papers and attributions, herewith a Sukenaga, tachi-mei, dated Tenpo 10, 1839. The mei is incredibly different of Sukenaga's mei one would expect from this time, although slight changes can always be observed inside and later of this period.

 

Eric

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

 

Eric, link please.

[Lindus]

I am glad that we have cleared that up

So, we are sailing in uncharted seas with with a navigator who may or may not know all there is to know about navigation,in a direction based on a general opinion proposed and regenerated every few years if not lost at sea.

 

Or....

 

 

 

PS. That mei above looks pretty Showa'ish, the cutting of the Chry: is damned right terrible.

[paulb]

Hi Roy

there is of course the other standpoint which is "The only opinion that counts is the one of the owner"

As said before no Shinsa system is perfect but it is certainly a hell of a lot better and more accurate than some of the opinions which appear with great regularity from those who believe they know better.

[Lindus]

Hi Roy

there is of course the other standpoint which is "The only opinion that counts is the one of the owner"

As said before no Shinsa system is perfect but it is certainly a hell of a lot better and more accurate than some of the opinions which appear with great regularity from those who believe they know better.

 

 

Of course you are right young Paul, I just enjoy how some of these threads unwind {Rats there I go again}, one of the most content collectors I have ever met was my much mentioned Ron Gregory, who if he had the details of the officer who surrendered the Gunto mounted Kiyomaru did not much care if the blade was a genuine Kiyomaru. For him that was fine and fullfilled the purpose of collecting for him. {Read Brian}

[paulb]

thank you for the "young" :D

we all collect for different reasons and most are seen here at various times. I understand dear old Ron's point of view well, I even apply some simillar principals in my other collecing obession.

Just as well we are all different.

[Eric H]

The sword was offered sometimes last year in a Sword Shop in Japan.

 

It is confusing with these Sukenagas...first, second, possibly third generation.

The blue Hawley lists 2 Sukenaga -1830 -- 1844- with different ratings.

Sesko Lexikon dates Sukenaga first generation 1830-1844, second generation 1848-1854, and there are signatures between 1850 and 1865

 

Eric

[cabowen]

Several generations and lots of students.

 

By the way, the old NBTHK papers are not considered the most reliable these days by lots of people.....

[Eric H]

Some additional information on the Sukenagas

 

1 - early mei reportedly dated Bunsei 7 - 1824

 

2 - NTHK origami states nidai Sukenaga

 

3 - dated Genji Gannen

 

4 - dated Keio 3 - 1867

 

5 - signed Tomonari gojukyu daison

 

Eric

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

Eric, Why do you provide examples which are not reliable? the first one (from ejapanese. com) is not papered. Are you sure this one is genuine ? And if yes, what makes you going to this statement ?

 

The "Genji gannen" is in the same case....

 

http://www.militaria.co.za/nihontomessa ... c&start=15

[Eric H]

Well, I have provided these examples as a general information. Read carefully...early mei reportedly...BTW do you know who runs this homepage?...obviously not The Ganji gannen pic is from a member of this Board, if you dig deep enough, you will have your "link" you always penetratively ask for.

 

 

Eric

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

Some additional information on the Sukenagas

 

 

I'm still wondering where they are even if there are ....

[drjoe]

i've misplaced the original link, but this was from aoi-art. unfortunately, it's pretty tough the see the mei.

 

 

[drjoe]

ok here is the mei from the above blade, magnified and brightened in photoshop:

 

 

and a scan from a sukekane blade from an aoi-art kantei page:

 

http://www.aoi-art.com/kantei/kantei184.html

 

http://www.aoi-art.com/kantei/kantei183.html