John C Posted October 27, 2022 Report Posted October 27, 2022 Good day everyone: I would like your opinion on the validity of the mei on a tanto. In an effort to increase my understanding of signatures and dates, I have been studying mei and nengo kanji from pictures of nakago online. Below are two samples; the one in question with the seller's hand is from an auction site I have (hopefully correctly) translated and the other one from NBTHK paperwork from the same smith. In comparing the two mei, they appear to be very similar. The issue is with the dates. The NBTHK papered tanto was dated 1442. The one from the auction is dated 1461. Information I can find on the smith was that he worked with the Bizen/Bishu school from 1398 to 1441. Does anyone have an opinion on the validity of the signature given the terrible pictures and date discrepancies? I have translated (took 3 days!) the mei as Bishu osafune Sukemitsu. Full disclosure: The mei is from an auction site, however I am not interested in purchasing the blade. Just trying to develop translation and mei interpretation skills. Thank you very much for helping me learn. Regards John C. Quote
Rivkin Posted October 27, 2022 Report Posted October 27, 2022 No, there are later generation Sukemitsu and also 1460s dates are commonly encountered. Without looking at books (treat with salt) - I think the main generation for this lineage is not Oei but Eikyo Sukemitsu. And he was like 1440-1465. The signature can be ok, but without seeing the blade itself its hard to be certain. Taking in mind Sukemitsu did a lot of non-mainstream work. 2 Quote
Jussi Ekholm Posted October 27, 2022 Report Posted October 27, 2022 Kirill had the same thought as I did. Work by Ōei period Sukemitsu (祐光) seems extremely difficult to find. However the Eikyō period Sukemitsu is the famous one. For him I have been able to find dated swords from 1437 until 1462. And he was followed by 2nd gen. 1 Quote
John C Posted October 28, 2022 Author Report Posted October 28, 2022 Kirill and Jussi: Those were my thoughts as well, however I was concerned that the more famous Sukemitsu may be the one more "faked" than a lessor known Sukemitsu. I hope to someday own a sword from pre-1868 and I am trying to hone my research and interpretation skills in case I come across a decent prospect. Thank you both very much for your input. John C. Quote
Jacques Posted October 28, 2022 Report Posted October 28, 2022 According Fujishiro, the best Sukemitsu (jo saku) was Yosazaemonnojo who worked during Koji (1555). Note that during the Oei era there were no great artists (saijo or jojo saku) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.