Removal of MEI

[drbvac]

Anyone think the mei could have been removed from the nakago of this Katana.? Looks little strange in a couple of spots below the upper mekugiana.

 

 

 

IF so looks like it is very well done but it is odd to see the darker areas as noted earlier

[hxv]

It's possible. The yasurime seems to be inconsistent above the top mekugi ana, in addition to the spots you noted.

 

Hoanh

[John A Stuart]

I see something. The longer I look the more I see, could be a bad sign for my eyesight or indeed there was a mei. ?? Not sure. John

[seattle1]

Hello:

Yes there seems to have been something there, and yes mei removal is an option. However the problem is that such an action, like all things in the Japanese arts, encounters the problem of finding a sufficiently skilled craftsman for the outcome to be value adding. Consider how many claim to be able to polish, make habaki, make shirasaya, restore an abused tsuba, etc., and the result that then often ensues. It really isn't a must do issue in any event as if done reasonable on an existing sword, as on yours, the Japanese seem to have some sort of social convention that leads them to behave almost as if they don't see a residual mei or that it doesn't matter. Such things do not seem to be a hinderance to receiving a paper commensurate with what the blade is entitled to.

Arnold F.

[cabowen]

You need to look at the nakago from the mune side down. Usually, if a signature has been removed, there will be a concavity where the signature use to be. It can be hard to see unless you look at it on edge.

[drbvac]

Looked edge on from above and below and with straight edge across nakago at various places and no depression in any area between the two mekuginia is more than .25mm deep. Must be as John states and stare at it long enough I can see the face of Jesus in certain places. With one with the deep rusting pits like this I guess it could be what it would look like if the mei were removed a couple hundred years ago -- or it is simply mumei blade for a Daimyo :lol: :lol:

[runagmc]

Persoanlly, I only see a nakago that has been corroded and probably cleaned at some point, but I can't see any areas that look like there was a mei crushed... Of course, it's hard to tell much with all the glare...

[Ken-Hawaii]

From the rounded shape of the nakago, I think there would be more of a depression/concavity for a removed mei than what I see. But the area above the mekugiana does look a bit strange....

 

Ken

[george trotter]

I have found that when a mei is rather "crudely" removed, and I mean that the mei side of the nakago has not been uniformly re-shaped,

then looking from the nakago-jiri up towards the machi (into a light), the line of the shinogi is uneven...if this is uneven say from the mekugi upwards, I'd say a mei has been filed off there...and the shinogi line looks uneven in this place on yours IMHO (but it is just a pic).

Regards,

[drbvac]

Picture may not do it justice and in this pic you can see the shinogi on the blade itself and although it wavers it is generally fairly straight and the wavers seem to be due to pitting - its just as wavy on the other side and from the mune it doesn't seem that much narrower than the rest. The Ura is just as pitted and the shindig is all over the place as well

 

I don't think the mei was removed but - it aint there so I will say it is mumei until someone can hold it and say it was removed

[cabowen]

Looking at the first photo, there is indeed a concavity that is consistent with mei removal. It may be due to something else- it bears further inspection, the kind you need to do in hand...

[drbvac]

Agreed - still some good info - thanks to all !!

[ROKUJURO]

Gentlemen,

 

reading through the many opinions on this subject, I would like to add my view as well.

 

As far as I know, removing a MEI the Japanese way does not necessarily mean to remove material. In the first step, it is not done with a file, but very carefully with a blunt chisel, hammering down the 'cushions' on the edges of every single chisel cut. This works of course best with rather fresh signatures and might be more difficult with older blades. If the MEI strokes were not too deep and wide, a signature could be removed almost without visible traces by this method. Some patination would enhance the result.

 

That is what I have been told.

 

On the photos of the blade in question it is very difficult to see. I think you have to play around with light from the side to make any small irregularity visible. If a MEI removal is suspected to have taken place, I would also use a microscope to examine the surface and not only search for a concavity.

[cabowen]

I have helped a smith remove several signatures so I have a fair idea of how it is done:

 

A chisel is used to push the metal around the signature "together" as much as possible. Then, using a punch, the complete signature is covered with small dislocations. Finally, this is filed over to match the existing yasuri mei. Then, repatinated.

 

Whether or not there will be a noticeable concavity in the nakago after words depends on a variety of things- how the signature was actually removed (not all were skillfully and carefully done as above); how deeply the old signature was cut-pushing the metal back into the chisel cuts will leave a visible depression if the existing cuts are deep.

 

Hope this helps.

[ROKUJURO]

Thank you, Chris!

 

That is the difference between practice and theory.....