Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Good evening:

 

This Wakizashi is a recent acquisition. As you can see it has the kiku and is signed Omi No Kame Hisamichi. However, I am not sure it is genuine or gimei.

You thorughts and opinions are welcomed.

 

tq97.jpg

 

qxjg.jpg

 

Thank you

 

Edward G. :dunno:

Posted

The mei looks suspect to me. Comparing to references, it does not look to match to the 1st or 2nd gen. The stroke style, stroke width, and position of the mei on the nakago do not align. According to Fujishiro, there was a 3rd gen but none of my references have an example. I'll see if I can upload a few pages of examples for comparison.

Posted

Dear Edward,

The signature does not match ( or come close to ) the First or Second Generation Hisamichi, and since the Third generation and onwards used an eda-giku ( chrysanthemum and branch ) rather than a kiku-mon ( just the flower ), and the signature still does not match the third generation, ... one can safely assume this is a gimei of the first generation. The second generation made many ghost works signing as his father and is known to have used both the kiku-mon and the eda-giku but the signature on your blade is way off in my reference books. As well as the above, ... the kiku-mon appears to be poorly carved which on correct blades is never the case.

... Ron Watson

Posted

I am sincere when I say thank you to both Matt & Ron for your opinions on the inscription. I can see that in Fujishshiro it is not an exact match, but way off is an exaggeration I think, perhaps not an exact match, but then no one I know would sign their signature exactly the same each time. I agree that the kiku does not have pointed petals. Opinions are what I am interested in, so please continue with the comments.

 

Thank You

 

Edward G.

Posted

I checked all of the examples in Fujishiro and in Nihonto Zuikan, which does have an example from the Sandai.

All of these examples have a consistent way of chiseling the kikumon in which the petals are cut farther toward the center of the kikumon, and it is characteristically different from the kikumon on your sword. This was mentioned by Ron in his post. Matt also summed up nicely how the kanji are chiseled differently. In fact, all of the kanji are different from those on papered swords, and I don't really know where to begin. One obvious example is the bottom stroke of the last kanji "michi." In fact, one can find very substantial differences in every kanji. I would venture a guess that it's gimei.

 

There is a NTHK-NPO shinsa next month in the US. This would be an obvious venue to settle the issue of gimei or shoshin.

 

Hoanh

Posted

Thank you all for your input. I will be the first to admit that I am not a know it all type person. I concede that it seems clear from the posts on this subject that this sword is indeed not correct to all the references! Thank you again for all the important information provided by each of you. I appreciate your efforts.

 

Life is a learning process, sometimes filled with disappointment.

 

Thanks Again

 

Edward G. :thanks:

Posted
the kiku-mon appears to be poorly carved which on correct blades is never the case.

To add a little, kiku mon of Shodai Hisamichi show a lot of variance and in general are one of the less uniform mon on nakago (e.g. as compared to Yamashiro Kunikiyo, the Aoi mon of Yasutsugu, etc).

post-951-14196893568341_thumb.jpg

Posted

Dear Edward,

Jacques ( a man of too few words ) has posted a couple of images of genuine signatures for you to compare with your wakizashi signature. The differences will be quite obvious. Also compare your wakizashi signature to the ones posted by Matt.

... Ron Watson

Posted

Dear Jacques,

As you probably know, ... but not all of our members will, ... on some of the shodai's works, the kiku-mon petals are cut from left to right, while on others the petals are cut from right to left. Perhaps someone here can give a photographic illustration to better explain. An illustration is better than a 1000 words. Examples of each can be found on pages 49 and 50 of the JSSUS Volume Seven, Art and the Sword 1997.

... Ron Watson

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one, unless your post is really relevant and adds to the topic..

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...