mike yeon

Sometimes on the pink paper, the shinsa team will state gimei but verify the true maker of the piece. They still won't issue a paper but this can be a good start to deciding whether to remove the mei or not. mike

Part of me wishes it were not the case. (After the 3rd blade in 2 months, I had to buy my girlfriend a $1600 gucci bag to keep her quiet about the thousands I've spent on "pieces of dirty old metal") Can't pass up great deals though. Carlo, as soon as she finds out how much the polish will cost I'm going to need you to stage an armed robbery of the Fendi factory over in Italy. mike

Thank you Peter. I've always used quality US polishers. But I've recently purchased a bunch of blades (when it rains it pours) and I need to spread out the work or I'm looking at 6 years before I see my last blade finished. mike

Has anyone here had dealings with Aoi-art as far as polishing services? I know they have a pretty solid overall reputation. I'd be grateful if anyone can detail their experiences with them polishing or otherwise. Thanks. mike

Are you drilling a hole in the nakago or are you drilling a hole in the tsuka? If nakago, then traditionally speaking, the mekugi-ana should be the width of roughly 3 fingers from the hamachi. (4 fingers for tachi). mike

Tim, any other picts of the blade itself?

gotcha. Thanks Carlo, I wasn't thinking about the mune... Also, don't you think that there's something wrong with the munemachi in the pict? Like there is none? Maybe itis tired? mike

Hey Carlo, Wanted to say hi since I joined and saw you here. It's mike from the other forum. Anyway, I could have swore I read somewhere honami signed 9 on one side and 11 on the other. or some other odd number lines. Fujishiro signed like 5 and 7? mike

I've never seen a nagashi that looked like that. Usually there are lines parallel to the mune. For example, 9 lines on one side and 11 on the other (odd #s) might mean it was polished by a togishi trained in the honami tradition. Never seen anything that would resemble a character. But that certainly does not mean that its not out there. Here's a pict of nagashi from nihontocraft.com (excellent site)

The cases where the sword was signed by a student or signed by someone who knew how to sign (as many early smiths were illiterate or someone else was just a good carver) is not considered gimei. It is very expensive to remove a false mei from a blade. Only a highly skilled polisher can do this correctly. The mei is carved/cut out, and the tang reshaped and repatinated. Darcy was right in his analogy. Look at it this way. Some guy finds an old unsigned impressionist painting. He then decides to sign the painting "monet" and tries to sell it for the millions an original monet would fetch. Then an experienced art dealer examines this painting and realises it's not a Monet but really an unsigned Van Gogh! The value of the painting is diminished because of the "blemish." No museum or self respecting art collector would hang up Van Gogh painting signed Monet. Most would try and restore it to its original state. with a blade you can correct this situation. in the above case, it would be wise and responsible to remove the gimei. In other cases, that "monet" might turn out to be made by a 2nd year art student at your community college. In this case, it is not necessary or advisable to remove the mei. Just my 2 cents. As always, someone correct me if I'm wrong. mike

For the NTHK: If you want the blade evaluated, you submit just the blade only, no fittings. For the blade's koshirae, you submit the whole package. 2 seperate evaluations. 2 seperate papers. 2 seperate fees. Not sure of the NBTHK submital process. mike

In the eyes of collectors and serious appreciators of nihonto, gimei is looked at as a bad flaw that alters the state of what the blade in question should be/represent. There are many reasons for forged signatures but all of them are meant to decieve and change percieved value. Lots of negative connotations there. (this is a flaw that is less physical/more cultural/cerebral) Sometimes a blade with a gimei is a quality blade. (you can't forge masamune on a crappy blade and expect to fool people). It is still looked at as a flaw. so the mei must be removed for the blade to return to its "honest" state. Value is intrinsic. Sometimes a gimei blade has such history being passed down through generations, the owner would leave it alone since sentimental value trumps market value. However, most collectors collect without such provenance so the value is in the blade itself. therefore the mei is removed. Gimei blades also cannot pass shinsa at any of the organizations. some people like having papers. And finally there are some folks that don't care so much about the signature and like the blade for what it is and see no need to change a thing. Hope this helps mike

To mention: Chu-kissaki Boshi is hard as it is scratched up a bit but I'd say midare-komi or omaru.

Hello everyone, Hopefully someone here can help me gain a better understanding of a blade I just purchased. Here's what I know: Shinogi zukuri wakizashi Suriage (started its life as a katana) 2 megukiana (ground out from both sides, not drilled straight through) Current nagasa is 22.5" Sugata is tori-zori Hada is a very nice looking o'mokume Hamon is ko-nie based (best guess) choji/gunome Can see nice activities like sunagashi/ashi, etc hamon is not as bright as a younger blade would be (so my guess is koto) Nagako is pictured as is the mei (2 charater "YASU TSUNA") Nagashi left by polisher is 9 lines 11 lines (honami school?) Blade screams BIZEN!!!! Now I did find one Bizen Yasutsuna (ko-bizen). Highly unlikely for a number of reasons. Other yasutsuna encountered were the Kanbun echizen Yasutsuna (another no) and Hoki Yasutsuna (no need to even get into pondering that one) I've attached a pict of the nagako. Don't have picts of the blade (camera died) I'll try and post soon. Thanks everyone in advance! mike

hofhine@att.net Just put a wakizashi on cue with him. 16 month wait period! excruciating... but the name of the game if you want quality work.

Many early koto blades are unsigned as the practice was not "en-vogue." (I believe it was thought of as a little arrogant to sign one's work.) You start seeing many signatures towards mid/end of kamakura on as the practice caught on. The sengoku period brought signing into fill swing as constant wars = demand for swords = smiths/schools putting a calling card on their blades. For example, there are many signed sukesada blades but that just meant it was made by a smith in the sukesada mon. Another reason can be the smith is apprenticed to another smith. Good example would be gassan sadakatsu. He produced swords for years but did not sign them with his name until his father (sadakazu) died in 1918. These are some reasons along with what's already been mentioned. Mumei does not necessarily mean low quality. In fact many masamune blades are unsigned as are blades by dozens of masters.