Question Of Mei

[Tony C]

Hi all, a learning lurker here with a bit of a puzzle. 

 

I got this tanto a while back, accepting it as a gimei Suishinshi Masahide, though now it's starting to bug me as to the authenticity. After coming across numerous examples of Masahide's varied signatures I am now completely confused... The yasurime and nakago patination is correct. The kanji are written with confidence in the same style, same strokes as many of Masahide's later works- even with the correct stroke direction (if that makes sense?) on the lower left stroke of 秀, which proves the hypothetical forger is attentive to details and studied genuine meis. However there is a lack of kaokuin (which isn't too much of a problem) and the kao itself is so far removed from any genuine kao I was able to find on the internet.

 

So here's what puzzles me: if the forger was able to replicate the mei to a great likeness then why is the kao so poorly done? If the forger inscribed a wholly believable signature already then why bother adding a kao and increasing the risk of a bad stroke? There is also the question of why the forger didn't copy the mei precisely, with the more common, elongated 心 character (hope you see what I'm describing here) like the other gimeis but rather copied the one which only appeared in some variations of Masahide's signature to make it more convincing?

 

Then there's the blade itself. I believe it has a ko-itame hada though it is so tightly constructed it is almost muji. I've read that Masahide forged ko-itame, though the examples I've seen were more lively than muji...

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated, with explanation on your view for learners like me. Hopefully I haven't missed something completely obvious .

 

 

nakago- http://s1064.photobucket.com/user/tc9182/media/P1020047%202_zpsrdx17ycw.jpg.html?filters[user]=146475841&filters[recent]=1&sort=1&o=2

overall shape- http://s1064.photobucket.com/user/tc9182/media/P1020049_zpsgfzx8mk4.jpg.html?filters[user]=146475841&filters[recent]=1&sort=1&o=1

blade- http://s1064.photobucket.com/user/tc9182/media/P1020042_zpscstuofzl.jpg.html?filters[user]=146475841&filters[recent]=1&sort=1&o=0

[SAS]

I can't comment on the correctness of the kanji in the mei, but the carving does not look like it was done with confidence to me. It looks very shaky....

[Tony C]

Hi Steve, yes that is what I thought at first, but then I saw something like this- https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20503/lot/1178/ and it seems his meis can look somewhat off.

[Geraint]

Hi Tony,

 

I had a look a ta few mei for him and I agree with  Steve, the manner of the cutting looks a little odd.  However the example you give at Bonhams is not to be relied on, scroll down the listing to the bottom left and you will see that they say very carefully that the sword is after Masahide.  That is auction house speak for something like this. "Well we got your attention with a really big name and we are hoping for some really big bids even though we have been told very clearly that this is gimei, (we don't like to use the word fake around here). So we were kind of hoping that you will read the big name and make a whacking great bid but just in case you do that and send it for papers and it fails we can point to this little line down here and get away with it."

 

Hope this helps.

[Tony C]

Hi Geraint and thanks for the heads up on the Bonhams page. I'm still not quite sure as to how the cutting is odd- as I've always assumed that the gimei would look faint, scratchy and shaky, with no emphasis on any part of the strokes like http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2012/12204-1.jpg as opposed to http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2014/14330-2.jpg. Is it in the frequency of the chisel marks? 

[SAS]

When you have looked at enough genuine mei, the fakes tend to stand out; I can't really quantify it definitively, but the weight of multiple examples tends to outweigh the exceptions.

[Tony C]

Hmm, thanks. Guess my old assumption was right...

[PNSSHOGUN]

The mei looks suspicious to me.

[Vermithrax16]

Looking through Shinshinto Mei Sesko reference, the last character on bottom is very different from the examples I could find. Others look ok, but something is not sitting right with me. I am new to this so don't put too much stock in that

[Tony C]

Ah the Shinshinto Kantei, might get a copy someday . I think the last character is a kao- an artist seal, so that was why I was perplexed on why the kao seems different when the name seemed right. But now I guess the name isn't quite right either...