typical Gimei?

[cisco-san]

Hi,

 

For me is the difference of the color of the Mei and the color of the rest of the Nakago a typical indication that it is a Gimei.

Am I right?

Many thanks in advance.

[drbvac]

I don't think that in itself is a sign that it is gimei on its own - looks like someone either cleaned the rest of the nakago and it didnt go into the carving OR someone put a coloring into the mei? Need to see the rest of the blade - then compare it with the mei itself and then decide.

 

The carving of the mei certainly looks like it was done purposefully, and not a lot of hesitation or corrections of the strokes while being carved. If it matches an oshigata of the same smith - go from there.

[cisco-san]

I would be happy if somebody could post the Oshigata for comparing "Yokoyama kozuke kami Fujiwara Sukesada". I think it is SUK893 in Hawleys book?!

 

It could be also SUK929 ?!

[cabowen]

I would be happy if somebody could post the Oshigata for comparing "Yokoyama kozuke kami Fujiwara Sukesada". I think it is SUK893 in Hawleys book?!

 

 

Here you are...

 

Yokoyama Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada:

[cisco-san]

I would be happy if somebody could post the Oshigata for comparing "Yokoyama kozuke kami Fujiwara Sukesada". I think it is SUK893 in Hawleys book?!

 

 

Here you are...

 

Yokoyama Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada:

 

Dear Chris,

 

many thanks.

Which Sukesada is yours (HAW893?)?

Because I found out that at least 2 Sukesade signed with Yokoyama Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada (HAW893 and HAW929)

 

Thanks

[Eric H]

Another example for comparison

Eric

[Brian]

Is this the one that signed on the other side of the nakago:

"Bishu Osafune ju nin.." ?

 

Brian

[Amon]

Comparing Erics pictures I would say gimei

 

Kind regards,

[cisco-san]

Is this the one that signed on the other side of the nakago:

"Bishu Osafune ju nin.." ?

 

Brian

 

Yes. What do you think about that?!

 

Now I am very confused - because after the Oshigata from Chris I thought it is no Gimei, but now...

[Takahashi]

Dear Klaus,

 

Well, I am just a novice studying mei/Kanji but I can see clearly some differences in the mei you posted compared to the two others. Just look at the upper part of the mei. Some strokes are shorter and not cut in the same fashion as on the reference mei. IMHO the signature is therefore gimei.

 

Cheers,

[Markus]

I want to qoute Tanobe-sensei from his article on gimei. Here he writes on Yokoyama Sukesada:

 

"Yokoyama Sukesada is not so highly valued today, but he nevertheless belongs to the smiths who were affected by gimei. This shows us that must had been quite in fashion during the Edo period. One of the characteristics of a shôshin-mei is the character for „sada“ (定), namely the start of the last stroke (the lowermost bow which ends to the bottom right) projects over the next to last stroke. One has to be cautious if this is not the case. But also the blade has to be examined, namely it is not so good when it shows a shallow notare in nioi-deki with a compact nioiguchi, because the strong points of this smith was a complex gunome-midare with variation in height as well as a nioiguchi with ko-nie."

 

Picture below: shôshin-mei left, gimei right

 

[cisco-san]

Dear all,

 

many thanks for your comments.

Especially to Markus and Erich for the pics.

IMHO I think it fits the explanation from Tanoba-san and it is very near to the shôshin-mei in Markus picture. The only doubt I have is, that the strokes in my pic are too clear (fresh?!) --> therefore for me Gimei ?!

 

Again, many thanks

[cabowen]

To me, the shoshin example looks to be more "block" like (kaisho) and with more air/space between the kanji. Yours seems compacted and less precise....Sometimes, like music, the space between the "notes" is as important....

 

The only way to know "for sure" is to submit to shinsa.....

 

Have you posted any pictures of the blade?

[raven2]

Hi Klaus,

 

I have a wakizashi papered (NBTHK Hozon) to Yokoyama Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada and after comparing the mei's I too would have to say that your example is gimei. This is SUK 893 and as Markus has pointed out "the strong points of this smith was a complex gunome-midare with variation in height as well as a nioiguchi with ko-nie." Below is a picture of the hamon.

[cisco-san]

 

Have you posted any pictures of the blade?

 

some more pics

[Eric H]

A variety of hamon made by Kozuke Daijo Fujiwara Sukesada. Furthermore his hamon starts always with a short yakidashi, regardless of suguha or midareba.

Eric

[DirkO]

Here's a previous gimei/shoshin discussion on the same smith :

 

http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5248

 

If you do a search on this forum, you'll be sure to find more references to this smith.

[cisco-san]

There are so many thinks which have to be considered

Here in Austria we have a proverb "the first horse is always a lame nag" , for me it is quite similar with the first good sword.

I am reading, reading, reading, asking, asking, asking ...... but

 

Again, many thanks for your comments!!