Gimei

[ShuShinKan]

I have heard a lot about gimei since I started being interested in swords.

 

It would be great to get some points of view about Gimei from all of you who are reading this.

 

Are the gimei swords well done?

 

Is shape, length and hamon, boshi etc alike the copied smith?

Or are there mayor differences?

 

Thanks for reflecting your experiences here.

 

Gunther

[John A Stuart]

Hi Gunther, They run the whole range. Poor copies with false signatures and everything to good copies, even legimate swords with false signatures. There have been swords that had what was determined gimei removed that ended up being papered to the exact smith the mei was indicating. One of the reasons to look to the sword not the signature. Having a shoshin mei is a definite plus, but, there are good swords with gimei. John

[reinhard]

There's a great lecture by Tanobe-san about shoshin-/gimei and mei in general in Menome antiques magazine 2/2009, including infos about (in)famous Kajibei. Strongly recommended:

 

http://www.ribun.co.jp

 

The following teaser (from the article mentioned above) is for investigative minds: Two nakago inscribed: Awataguchi Omi-no-Kami TADATSUNA. One is shoshin-mei, the other is gi-mei. Which one is which? and more important: why? - This is not supposed to be a lecture, just a kick for those who like it and a reminder of the difficulties jurors/collectors are sometimes confronted with. Those already familiar with the article are asked not to spoil fun for the others.

 

reinhard

[Brian]

Thanks Reinhard, I think this will be an excellent exercise.

For those looking to tackle it, a reminder of the article here: http://www.nihontomessageboard.com/mei_exercise.html which should give some excellent points to look for.

 

Brian

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

I would say the right one is gimei.

 

1 - it is not perfectly centered on the shinogi as it should be,

2 - the kanji are a little bit too large.

[Brian]

Oddly, I have a feeling that the right one is the one that is supposed to give a gimei feel at first glance, but I think it is the shoshin one, and the left one is gimei. Just a gut feel from a few things I see, but could be way off.

At work, so will try and post reasons a bit later. Vertical alignment is one. Position of one atari as per Darcy's article is another. The strength issues could be due to later age. I'll post more a bit later. Let's see if I am wrong...again

 

Brian

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

At work me too, Brian, but I would consider the placement of the first stroke as "signal"

for mekugiana drilling. Left one looks more appropriate but can't right now look at all te other

details.

[sencho]

I remember this from Darcy's post a while back... and I must have learned something for once, because the right hand one immediately struck me as gimei due to the meguki ana placing, being off... then examining the center line of the mei backs this up.

 

So I say right side = gimei.

 

Cheers

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

the right mei is definitely gimei, the left stroke in the "oka 岡" part of the ji Tsuna starts too high in regard of the horizontal stroke.

 

This added to my preceding post.

[Jean]

  Quote

the right mei is definitely gimei, the left stroke in the "oka 岡" part of the ji Tsuna starts too high in regard of the horizontal stroke.

 

This means Jacques that you have compared it to other shoshin mei (I did the same).

 

The exercise given by Reinhard is the following :

 

I have 2 swords with two mei, I know one is sho shin the other is a copy (Gimei) which one is the copy and why?

[Jean]

In an another way, without references, in front of 2 mei are we able to detect the gimei from the sho shin? I am not

[ShuShinKan]

To make it even more complicated,

I only have one mei (that is why i actually brought up the topic), on a (from all participants in this discussion well known) tadamitsu sword.

And as there seem to be as many Tadamitsu as I have chicken in the shed,

how in hell is it possible to find if the mei is a gimei or not?

 

Anyhow, I appreciated the archived discussion where darcy explains her way to identify the gimei. I learned a lot and I can see that the photos I have are not good enough to look at stroke strength.

I have 3 different mei from tadadmitsu swords on picture and all of them are in a way different.

Big miracle!?

 

I love to see you posting!

And I learn a lot.

Shall I submit the mei again or do you want to check out in the other thrad?

[Brian]

G (I still prefer a first name, as I am not going to call you Mr Schmidt )

I have a Tadamitsu too. Sometimes you discover that there are so many with that name, that all you can do is use knowledge to narrow it down to a few, and then accept that it is likely one of them. Without a shinsa, we sometimes just reach a dead end. I expect opinions won't narrow it down much. I have a Mizuta Kunishige with the same problem. Too many in that school unless you are a serious expert with examples of mei from most of them.

 

Btw..no longer confident in my call above. I still see some things that make me think the left is gimei, but if I don't compare and just go with the examples given, then some of the strokes on the right hand one are not confident and shaky. Some strokes consist of multiple strength lines that don't appear fluid. I was putting that down to later work and age, but given just the info presented, I would call the right one gimei. Some kanji are too wide and again not fluid.

 

Will take another look later and see if I can make a better call.

 

Brian

[Grey Doffin]

  Quote

And as there seem to be as many Tadamitsu as I have chicken in the shed,

how in hell is it possible to find if the mei is a gimei or not?

Look at the work, not the signature. While there may be quite a few smiths with the same signature, for each of them, it the signature is legit, the work must match what he did. In an instance like this even the shinsa team might just paper the blade to the smith, without designating a particular smith out of that group.

  Quote

I appreciated the archived discussion where darcy explains her way to identify the gimei.

Darcy, How are you feeling? That must have been one painful operation.

Grey

[Brian]

Tanto slipped.

 

...his.....

 

Brian

[ShuShinKan]

Is this an insider, Brian?

Sorry for not understanding the tanto thing.

Of course you can call me G but my real name is Gunther (you are allowed to call me Gunther, too)

 

I assume the right of both pictures to be Gimei, because of the placement of the hole and (i googled for the smith and found pictures of a blde for sale) the pattern going from nakago towards the tip.

 

Gunther

[gumanthon]

Hi learned friends, In my humble opinion they are both good signatures just that the one on the right was when he was younger. If there was any doubt in my mind it would be that the 1st character on the right looks like it was chiselled after the hole was drilled. Regards John

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

  gumanthon said:

In my humble opinion they are both good signatures

 

Either Reinhard got more evilish then Guido's twin *or* something doesn't work in your answer...

 

  reinhard said:

One is shoshin-mei, the other is gi-mei. Which one is which? and more important: why? -

 

Stand with my previous opinion. Left one Shoshin, first strike to place mekugiana better placed, calligraphy and

fluency of the strokes looks better as when you copy something you'll likely make it a little bigger rather then smaller.

For what it's worth...

[reinhard]

  Jacques D. said:

Hi,the right mei is definitely gimei, the left stroke in the "oka 岡" part of the ji Tsuna starts too high in regard of the horizontal stroke.

 

This left stroke starts a little higher sometimes. For comparison a wakizashi-mei which is definitely shoshin.

 

reinhard

[reinhard]

  Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini said:

  gumanthon said:

In my humble opinion they are both good signatures

Either Reinhard got more evilish then Guido's twin *or* something doesn't work in your answer...

 

I'm still Dr.Jekyll at the moment and therefore I will try to explain what I'm doing here. First of all, imagine yourselves at a sword-fair or in a row before an auction. You're into Osaka-ShinTo, but all you have at hand is your knowledge and maybe a little handbook. You are looking at one of the above mentioned swords and it might be made by TADATSUNA. Workmanship seems to be OK, but condition is not what it should be and its mei seems to be the most reliable source of information. I confess: I could hardly tell the difference at a moment like this. Gumanthon is absolutely right: "they are both good signatures". There are very few experts capable of telling the difference immediately without checking their library. Tanobe-san is one of them. - Going back to the examples posted: One is shoshin, one is gimei. No tricks, no games.

 

Now I'll go down to the lab and get me some medicine.

 

reinhard

[Jean]

  Quote

While there may be quite a few smiths with the same signature, for each of them, it the signature is legit, the work must match what he did.

 

The main problem, is if you have no access to Japanese books (not even sure some on Tadamitsu's lineage have been printed)

 

Nobody knows what are the distinct characteristics of the 30/40 Tadamitsu smiths during sue Muromachi, I doubt very much that that all their different mei are listed. You'll get a general tendancy for this school saying : very fine/refined hada, generally suguha based hamon with a tendancy to broaden at the level of the kissaki. problem : mine has ashis which is an exception in the lineage, but no books I know are talking about it, a few tadamitsu made koshi no hiraita hamon, some (in fact I have encountered many blades like this) used niji mei and not so often the Bizen Koku ju Osafune/Bishu Osafune mei.

 

Just to tell that you don't have to bother, if the blade has the charactéristics of a sue Bizen sword and a Tadamitsu nijimei there is fat chance it is gimei. To pin daown at 50 years the date of your smith (it is not 100% bullet proof) based your judgement on its length

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

  reinhard said:

There are very few experts capable of telling the difference immediately without checking their library.

 

  Jean said:

In an another way, without references, in front of 2 mei are we able to detect the gimei from the sho shin? I am not

 

Far by me to try to resemble what is obvious I'm not.

Just very interested in the exercise (an its outcome).

[Eric H]

left shoshin - right gimei......just by comparing with shoshin signatures

 

Eric

[Brian]

Whichever one is gimei..all I can say is that it is damn well done. Very very good job that would have me fooled if I only saw one of them at a time anywhere. Kajihei maybe?

 

Brian

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

  Brian said:

Very very good job that would have me fooled if I only saw one of them at a time anywhere.

 

Guess this is what the matter is all about.

To have both side by side might give you chances, but hardly one at a time.

 

A reply not yet given is that the Gimei has been spotted by the details of the blades

that aren't showed. Would be a great lesson :lol:

[Jean]

Eric,

 

Without any sho shin mei references, would you have been able to detect the Gimei one?

[Eric H]

Jean

 

Of course not - no chance - but... is the answer right

 

Eric

[Jean]

Eric,

Of course, the answer is right. :lol: :lol:

 

What I would like to stress is that even it is very difficut even for a graphologue to sort a genuine signature from a fake (paintings for example). Meaning that we have absolutely no chance with a Kanji mei.

[Jean]

Afterthought, Brian you are right, it is a very vaery good gimei

[ShuShinKan]

What do you think, now that the brains have had their warming up gimei or not?

 

?????