Leaderboard

Huge thanks for the Sacramento Japanese Sword Club in doing this, and for you Brett to posting it up here. I remember I used to have the Yamanaka books years ago as the red cover variants. I try to avoid the Sōshū timeline as I cannot really figure it out and to me it is not that important. There is just so much contrasting information it is difficult to know what to believe. For example if Kunimitsu died at that time there are still 1315, 1316, 1319, 1320, 1322 and 1324 dated blades. For me it is also very difficult to grasp that Shintōgo Kunimitsu pretty much always signed and sometimes dated blades, yet for Yukimitsu and Masamune it is quite rare and for Sadamune I am not sure if experts accept the extremely few signed and dated swords by him as legitimate. Then Hiromitsu and Akihiro and onwards the blades are pretty much always signed again. The sword in question might be Kotegiri Gō? It is in collection of Kurokawa Research Institute Some info on it can be found here> https://www.tsuruginoya.net/stories/kotegirigou/ Sometimes it is important how things are written out as meaning can be understood in various ways. To my understanding there is a one single Ōhara Sanemori blade that has the character 勝 on it, likewise there is one single signed item by Norishige that has the character. To me drawing connection to these to smiths and two items 150+ years apart would feel like extremely optimistic. Now if the character would appear on the majority of Ōhara Sanemori blades I might feel differently but as it is on a single blade by both smiths I would think it has a different meaning and does not connect the smiths. I do think it is good and interesting that theories are researched and suggested but sometimes it can be difficult to find reference examples to support the theories as this is especially problematic with Sōshū due to lack of signed works by some smiths.

It’s fun following this discussion. I agree with Jussi: some of the theses feel a bit simplified, while others seems romanticized (“Silicon Valley” analogy :)) – though, it could just as easily have been a harsh, Spartan-like environment, separated by hundreds of kilometers of mountains, quite the contrast to the elegance and aesthetic refinement of Kyoto. Some of the counter-theses are also deliberately exaggerated (“whether and which swordsmiths ever even met”), not to make them easier to refute, but to show how the scarcity of reliable sources allows for a huge variety of interpretations – and I think that’s part of the appeal for many of us. These stories feel like little windows into significant folkloric influences, carrying an undeniable charm. Anyway, from this conglomerate, the very pinnacle of the Japanese sword as we know it emerged. I’m especially curious about Gō Yoshihiro. What else is known about him? We seem to know that he tragically died at the young age of 30 – perhaps at the peak of his fame – (which fits the Japanese poetic notion of yo no naka). I’m surprised he’s not better known, given that his life and work seem to embody that quintessential Japanese image of “falling delicate cherry blossoms.” In such a short life, he apparently left some of the finest examples of swordmaking, like the Shinano Gō katana. Do people consider Gō Masamune’s top student because his blades are especially faithful to Masamune’s style? And if he really was a samurai himself, how might that have influenced his standing and recognition as a swordsmith? Historically, samurai were not always considered noble; they were often despised, combative warriors who served the aristocracy for centuries as their "retainers", maintaining order and settling disputes across the provinces and the capital. It’s also fascinating that Gō was younger than Norishige, yet Norishige is said to have studied under him. In a society so focused on ritual, hierarchy, and tradition, that must have seemed pretty unusual. I’d love to hear from anyone who knows more about Gō Yoshihiro – his life, his work, or his influence. I’d be really interested in other perspectives and any sources you can point me to!

The backgrounds are all very similar, in horizon and vegetation, almost standardized. A missing scroll makes sense. Is the figure on the left carrying a peach, for Momo Sennin? For the missing panel, another Sennin is likely.

This is an example that you need to compare oshigata with photos. And the matching text. https://www.transfernow.net/dl/202602097pJBrlkZ

Wanted to share an Aikuchi koshirae, entrusted to me by a very good friend. I've held it in my collection a number of months now, so thought it was about time I put together a short post on the piece. The koshirae once housed a Sunobi-Tanto. It must have been a blade of spectacular quality, to be paired with such a koshirae. Visually, the fittings themselves these are quite interesting. Each piece of the set is colourfuly adorned with crabs and water plants, set against a soft background of Nanakoji. Upon closer inspection, I suspect these "waterplants" to be wild ginger, or hollyhock; as stylistically they are similar to the 'cloves' seen on certain Kamon. I thought that this may have been an intentional choice; perhaps to celebrate family ties/allegences of the original owner who commissioned the piece. I feel that these being in *gold* of all things is no coincidence. Now onto the saya... I'm especially fond of this style of urushi; I particularly enjoy the inclusions of aogai and flaxseed/rice husks within the lacquer- it gives the piece a very "three-dimensional" feel. It must take a great degree of skill to achieve such a finish. I do not believe the kozuka itself is original to the set, yet it's subject loosely follows the "aquatic theme" The kozuka shows good workmanship. We see "Omori-esque" beads of silver set into the base, which is a nice touch. The tsuka itself is neatly bound in Jabari maki, black silk over white samegawa. Several sizable 'emperor-nodes' are visible. The selection of samegawa is a telling sign of the overall quality. Again, we see the nautical/riverside theme continuing into the Menuki, with a singular crab peeking through the wrap.

The quality of photos in old books is much better than we often think Here is a cutout from the Kurokawa Institute book - the brightness level is increased to better show the steel structure And since NMB has file size restrictions, here you will find HiRes https://eu.zonerama.com/Nihonto/Album/14700507?secret=uQXIq3PO20V89iRtO23e4D59N

Regarding defects, everyone has their own perception of what they can accept. Some want only perfection, while others don't mind the signs of aging. Often, this is also related to financial resources. The key point, however, for me remains awareness: If you're not aware of what you're buying, you risk overestimating the item. Just to give you some food for thought on the blade you posted: - The fact that it's 500 years old (to be verified) doesn't make it valuable or rare. That's when the most blades were made, and the high demand is generally synonymous with poorer quality. - The signature needs to be verified, but generally for Bizen blades beginning with "Bishu Osafune" isn't synonymous of quality blades, but rather with blades made for purely utilitarian purposes, which are called kazu-uchi mono. - The blade seems hard to read in this condition; you can see little or nothing of the "pattern"—hada, hamon, activity, etc.—the cost of a restoration (If possible) will be around €2.000 (€ 20 -25 per centimeter is the average cost of a professional polish), with the real risk that the restoration's value will be greater than the value of the blade itself. This is just to name a few things. Based on this, as I said, you might still be convinced to buy it. I don't want to convince you otherwise...the important thing is that you're aware. Giordy

Yeah, It's authentic. Just out of polish and of mediocre quality. But likely a good pickup if the hamon is still there.

Maybe it's just me, but one particular tsuba of mine always gives me a bit of a laugh. It's this little shrimp/prawn and the way it's little mouth is rendered just is quite humorous to me. What do you think...does it qualify for the laugh if the day? Damon

Great observation. I was going to say that the shi-shi menuki had a more complex mane than most I had seen. Then you linked it back to a Ko-Goto set with similar complex mane. Good example of later generation pulling from earlier generation example. I have a good example of 7th gen Kenjo copying one of his father's (Tokujo, the 5th gen) designs. Very similar, with small differences.

I disagree with that. While there have been several big mumei ones like the Miyamoto Musashi tsuba and the Hayashi Matashichi, there was also a huge signed one that someone managed to buy before auction ended. I think there is a fair chance that one will make Juyo next year. Unfortunately, not mine, so it has to stay at that for now. I've papered a few signed ones like Jochiku Murakami. Like Norisuke, Ikkin works seem to be at whatever level someone was paying.

@Lawrence_Lee requested the latest version of the Mantetsu Survey chart. All are welcome to it. Over 445 blades now! See attached. kiipu-mantetsu serial numbers (rev1).docx

Perhaps 大和守外永作

I like them both — each set has its own character. And yes, according to the origami, it’s a joint work made at the same time. Sokujo and Teijo were cousins. Sokujo lived a very short life and passed away at the age of 31. His son Renjo was four at the time, so although he was the intended successor, uncle Teijo stepped in to take over the mainline, raising and training Renjo until he came of age. Renjo, assumed the position at 25, becoming the 11th-generation head.

Hi Howard Maybe the middle panel depicts a sennin/arhat/(whatever we call them) reading an unrolled scroll. The missing door would have depicted a similar subject, not necessarily any particular story or theme…..but others with greater religious imagery knowledge may disagree.

The Sacramento Japanese Sword Club has been given permission to re-present and upload Albert Yamanaka's Nihonto Newsletters online, which they are doing one newsletter at a time as Leon Kapp finds the time to work on the next Newsletter. It is an incredible effort and credit needs to be given where credit is due. I have managed to track down links to all the available Newsletters and will post every new one as they appear online. In the mean time I encourage everyone who downloads these newsletters to follow Sacramento Japanese Sword Club on Facebook and drop them a line thanking them for this excellent work on providing access to this invaluable resource. Albert Yamanaka's Nihonto Newsletters Volume 1 Yamanaka V1 NL01 Yamanaka V1 NL02 Yamanaka V1 NL03 Yamanaka V1 NL04 Yamanaka V1 NL05 Yamanaka V1 NL06 Yamanaka V1 NL07 Yamanaka V1 NL08 Yamanaka V1 NL09 Yamanaka V1 NL10 Yamanaka V1 NL11 Yamanaka V1 NL12 Yamanaka V1 NL12 Extras Volume 2 Yamanaka V2 NL01 Yamanaka V2 NL02 Yamanaka V2 NL03 Yamanaka V2 NL04 Yamanaka V2 NL05 Yamanaka V2 NL06 Yamanaka V2 NL07 Yamanaka V2 NL08 Yamanaka V2 NL09 Yamanaka V2 NL10 Yamanaka V2 NL11 Yamanaka V2 NL12 Volume 3 Yamanaka V3 NL01 Yamanaka V3 NL02 Yamanaka V3 NL03 Yamanaka V3 NL04 Yamanaka V3 NL05 Yamanaka V3 NL06 Yamanaka V3 NL07 Yamanaka V3 NL08 Yamanaka V3 NL09 Yamanaka V3 NL10 Yamanaka V3 NL11 & NL12

Overall, 400 Euros seems like a fair valuation to me. I'm happy the seller was honest with you, and I hope this piece is just the beginning, encouraging you to continue your study of Nihonto. All the best Giordy

Hello, Sorry, I never claimed that just because it's old, it's valuable. I just wanted to express that I don't really care if it's worn; authenticity is more important to me. I never asked about its value. And since the sword is already mine, I don't need to think about it. The hamon is definitely there. If you turn the blade in the light, you can see it quite well, but I just can't get a picture of it. I only paid 400 euros for the sword, so everything's fine. Thanks for your reply. Regards, Gerry

Thanks for the link. You're right the resolution and contrast is good enough in those examples to see the fine detail in the hada.

Hello Marcus, It honestly read a bit like an auction description — well written, so credit where it’s due. That said, I would consider this a decent koshirae rather than a “stunning” one. To my eye it’s mid-level work at best. The nanako, in particular, isn’t especially strong. Describing it as housing a spectacular quality blade feels a bit overstated. Just my two cents..

Yes, the saying You never see a ghost or a Go, certainly adds to the mythology and exceptionalism surrounding his work. I think part of the problem is that there are no signed works in existance (except maybe one tanto I read about in the Homma's Kantō Hibi Shō). And that at various levels of Shinsa the attribution flip flops at the whim of the panel in charge that year. There is no doubt the blades attributed to him are amongst the best examples of Soshu-den, but there is a certain degree of ambiguity in the attribution, due to the lack of signed reference pieces. To me it really signals a level of quality and that the attribution is secondary.

In keeping with your discussion of counter-theses: there is of course a school of thought that believes Go did not actually die young, and that this was essentially a marketing ploy invented by later collectors to make his blades seem even more rare and mysterious. The template of the meteoric artist, a generational talent tragically cut short, is well-known and well-worn and in the swordsmithing world repeats itself centuries later in Kiyomaro, whose works are (along with Masamune, Go and Kotetsu) some of the consistently highest-selling and sought-after blades on the market.

Dear Gerry, We live in a strange world, but I doubt you'll ever hear anyone say they prefer Gimei blades as a matter of fact. Have you ever heard of anyone preferring paintings with fake signatures? I don't think so. It's possible that a gimei might still be recognized for its technical/artistic quality, It can happen of course, but it's not the norm. There's always a tendency to give the advice, "Buy the sword, not the signature," but this should be taken with common sense and requires experience in evaluating a work. The market in general strongly penalizes Gimei blades. Whether this is right or wrong is something you can find plenty of insights on the forum. All the best Giordy

Slightly off-topic, but a friend has a signed Sadamune which they sent off to the NBTHK for shinsa. It was sent back 'horyu' because allegedly the panel had never seen a legitimate Mei to compare it with, and thus felt unable to authenticate it. Subsequently this friend had the Sadamune Mei erased, and then sent it off again for shinsa. This time it came back attributed to, yes, 'Sadamune'. By now they had found an old meikan entry with a photo of the same blade, with Mei, but as they had by then registered the sword as unsigned, they ended up in some kind of a Catch 22 bind. (Any factual errors in the story above will be from my failing hearing and lack of ability to follow high-speed explanantions in Japanese! ) PS I know very little about Soshu and look forward to reading the articles linked by the OP (Brett) above. Thank you.

Jussi - I have a theory on the lack of signed works by Soshū smiths and it involves the establishment of Rinzai Zen Buddhism another cultural revolution for Japan that was introduced with the introduction of the Kamakura Shogunate that encourage austerity, the abandoning of self and the strict adherence to loyalty within the master/ disciple relationship. I also subscribe to the advise from the Kotō Meizukushi Taizen and Tōken Kantei Hikketsu that both explain why we have blades signed Shintogō Kunimitsu after 1312 and that is because both Hasebe Kunishige (Kunimitsu's eldest son) and Shintogō Kunihiro (Kunimitsu's Fifth son) at various times signed their blades Shintogō Kunimitsu to show lineage after their father's death - of course this also had the enormous commercial benefit of using their father's good name to sell their wares. But agree with you - when it comes to Soshu smiths there is a lot of information missing and a lot of information that contradicts due to lack of documentation at the time and then you have people (like me) relying on documents written 200 years or later to understand what was going on at that moment in time. This is not ideal.

Rich: Here are the Kaneyoshi listings in Sesko just for Mino tradition. Not all are muromachi, however it should get you started. John C. Kaneyoshi - sesko.docx

Meh. I stand by my statement. A few examples out of tens of thousands doesn’t hold water

Yup, this is the pain of our current hobby. Very few photos are of the quality we require to truly study this art form from a distance. This is why we need to create a Catalogue Raisonne for the great smiths. It will make a world of difference not only for the hobby but for academic study.

I did wonder if it was the Kotegiri-Gō. Here are a few colour pictures of the sword.

Thanks Brian. Yes, I definitely enjoy these pieces! I'm deeply impressed by the workmanship that went into them, particularly the one with the theater mask. That hair! Those cranes! Even the tiny flowers(?) on the edge of the nakago-ana are an 'unnecessary' detail that only emphasize the artistry of the maker. And I've learned a ton just by asking for assistance here. I'm looking forward to continuing learning.

Hi Bruce, I totally understand the confusion! It does look like a wild coincidence, but in the Japanese sword-making tradition, this is actually a very structured practice called Shūmei (襲名, Succession of Names). It wasn’t a coincidence that two guys named Hosokawa used the same name/seal; it’s because they belonged to the same lineage. The WWII smith (7th Gen) was the direct professional descendant of the 1800s smith (1st/2nd Gen). In this culture, inheriting the "Brand Name" (Masayoshi) and the family "Seal" (Kokuin) was a way to show legitimacy and honor the founder. As for your question regarding the specific Kanji in the Kokuin: as a native Chinese speaker, I would describe this as a highly stylised or artistic form of Zhuanshu (Seal Script). It is quite difficult to pinpoint the exact character it originates from just by looking at the strokes, though I suspect it could be "義" (Sometime the '我' part was written in a separate way, as the picture below shows). However, based on my experience with Chinese seal carving, the minor variations in detail you pointed out don't necessarily constitute a different character or identity. In this context, they are effectively the same Kokuin. Given that this functioned much like a Family Crest, it is not surprising at all that Masamori would use it even before officially inheriting the Masayoshi name. Regarding the different form of writing the first Kanja of Hosokawa, the one has a '糸' on its side is a very ancient way of writing it in China. The '小' part was simplified into three dots sometimes, so it was consequently written as '細'. Therefore, they are the same Kanja in fact. However, when Japanese was being standardised during the Meiji Restoration, the '糸' version was designated as the sole official form, which is likely what caused this distinction. Lastly, I've sent some messages to your facebook account about the Mantetsu survey (it was that survey led me to this post in fact), I'd appreciate it if you can have look whenever you are available. https://meitou.info/index.php/細川正義#i8e2d584 https://tokka.biz/sword/masamori.html

I try it, John.

Woke up to a handful of replies here. Interesting insights. I’m not sure I would agree it lacks refinement but I get how the design looks a bit plain. Since I’ve been looking around for an Ikkin I’ve seen some mind blowing pieces and some relatively simple ones. Considering Ikkin’s son used the same kao it certainly makes it challenging to identify shoshin or gimei or just the son. Either way I took some photos of the nakago ana but with the quality limit they might be hard to discern any details.

Thank you @MassiveMoonHeh for a very interesting and thought provoking op-ed. The analogy to the early days of Silicon Valley and how this brought together a critical mass of knowledge and advancement through experimentation and collaboration is just so apt. One can only imagine how Soshuden might have evolved had the Kamakura Bakafu stayed in power and these early Grandmasters remained in close proximity..... @eternal_newbie made a timely resurrection of the thread discussing historical connection between Go and Yamatoden. Only one extant blade attributed to Go exhibits a clear Yamato and Soshu influence but there are blades by other makers that blend the forging styles and deki of these two gokaden. I think old oshigata show blades by Go existed with Yamato influence. The obvious exponent of Yamato and Soshu styles is Shizu Saburo and his followers. But also Senjuin Yoshihiro can be added in the mix. Working back from his active dates and examples of blades with nengo, we arrive at a DOB ca. 1280, it's certainly within the realms of possibility he was Go's father. I'm curious how Go could have been smithing in Sagami and also be a retainer of the Momonoi family in Matsukura, given his young age. Whatever the truth given what he achieved in such a short time clearly establishes his prodigy status. The pact with the devil theory is a unique perspective Exploring the connection of Go with Senjuin Yoshihiro, we can see how the young Go might have been taught Yamato styles of sword making. I have a small, thin 62cm o-suriage kodachi (shortened approx 10cm) that has NBTHK attribution to Senjuin. However it has strong Soshu forging style influence, and thus is open to some interesting possibilities, such as being by Senjuin Yoshihiro. The hataraki, the ichimai boshi with hakkikake, chikei throughout some with an angular shape, yubashiri, sunagashi and ara-nie with tightly forged itame hada and surface nie throughout giving the blade a wet appearance. All that mixed with the Yamato features of masame with a high and wide shinogi. I need to spend time comparing the features on this sword with those of blades attributed to Go, especially the Kabuto-Giri Go This blade was originally part of the Tsukamoto museum collection and I can see how it would have appealed to a collector from an academic standpoint. The juxtaposition of characteristic features from two different gokaden in one blade is quite unusual.

Dear all! I do not know how to classify this piece: it could be an investment (the total weight is around 217g which means that we are talking about a significant amount of gold) or a nice addition to your collection. The quality of the workmanship is fantastic, it is ubu (no hitsu-ana) and undamaged. Dimensions: Height: 8.08cm Width: 7.64cm Thickness: 0.55cm (becoming slightly thinner towards the Seppa-dai and Mimi) Nakago-ana (Height): 2.74cm Nakago-ana (Width max): 0.79cm Asking price: 1,400.00 EUR plus shipping costs Shipping costs: Germany EUR 13.99 EU EUR 28.99 Worldwide EUR 54.99 Best Chris

Yeah, these were definitely not acquired in Japan, as they would have been very illegal there.

It's interesting that the tsuba was signed after the sekigane was added. This means the tsuba was originally made with it installed, for later fitting by the owner. We tend to think of tsuba being made to fit after they were purchased but this shows (if shoshin) that they could be made with that already installed for fitting to your blade. hmm

The dealer I purchased my sword from was good enough to provide me with a high-quality photo of the 1958 Torokusho registration. I know it has to be surrendered upon export in a couple of weeks, so I'm going to print it out life-size on to some cardstock to keep with the sword. I think it's cool to have. I've also done some further research on the craftsmen who signed the fuchi, Maruyama Sōzan. It looks like he was active from the Kyōhō to Hōreki era (ca. 1730s to 1750s). The Maruyama school was known for producing high-relief, sculptural fittings that combined traditional themes with a refined sense of balance. It's possible the tsuka has been re-wrapped since then, and it's in hineri-maki style. All of the mountings are a common and coherent motif for mid-Edo; dragon in clouds/waves (representing celestial authority, power, and dynamic force) on the fuchi and kashira, abstracted futatsudomoe forms (associated with natural forces such as wind and water) as the tsuba, and abstract vegetal imagery (evoking growth, vitality, and the sustaining rhythms of the natural world) for the menuki. I found this info in the Haynes Index and Markus Sesko's Signatures of Japanese Sword Fittings Artists. It's been a real joy diving into these little details and learning about them. For me, this is what it's all about when I buy an antique.

If it has been obscured by scratches or rust, a new polish will most likely be able to restore it. If it is gone due to fire damage, then yes, the blade must be re-hardened (saiha) to restore a nioiguchi. If it is gone due to tiredness then the blade is beyond recovery - too much material has been lost to even attempt re-hardening it. You can see an example of this re-hardening process on the Usagiya website: http://www.ksky.ne.jp/~sumie99/sword6.html

Norishige is an interesting one... The Kiami-Bon Mei-Zukishi of 1351 states that Norishige was the student of 1. Shintogō Kunimitsu from 1308 to 1311 (aged 18-21). That was only 3 years which is not long enough to become a smith under normal circumstances. What it does not state is that it was only three years because Shintogō Kunimitsu got ill and shortly afterwards died. Meaning that Norishige needed a new Sensei and so we are told he moved to Toshiro Yukimitsu's forge to continue his study under him in 1311. As we know Yukimitsu is said to be the father of Goro Nyūdō Masamune and the most senior student of Shintōgo Kunimitsu, so this move makes logical sense in the context of the relationship with Shintogo Kunimitsu. FYI, Kunimitsu died a few months after Norishige left in 1312 - he was only 62. This move is captured in the Koto Mei-Zukishi Taizen who expands on Norishige's studies and states that Norishige studied for a further 15 years (18 years in total) and had a total of 3 more sensei after Shintōgo Kunimitsu. They read like the proverbial whose who of Soshu smiths: Sensei 2:⁠ ⁠Toshiro Yukimitsu (Time spent: 1311-1321) He spent 10 years with Yukimitsu and as such Yukimitsu can be considered Norishige's foundation smith (although he was just teaching him what Shintogō Kunimtisu taught him... Soshu Style. *As a side note, Yukimitsu was actually older than Shintōgo Kunimitsu by two years. That his first dated blade appears in 1319 makes sense in this context. "Saeki Norishige made this." Sensei 3:⁠ ⁠Gō Yoshihiro (Time Spent: 1321-1324) He then spent 3 years studying under Gō. Many assumed Norshige taught Gō but it appears the opposite was true. This is while we know Gō was 9 years younger than Norishige and died 1 year after Norishige left his forge in 1325. Norishige was clearly seeking knowledge from the best regardless of age. Sensei 4:⁠ ⁠Masamune (Time Spent: 1324-1326) After Gō, Norishige finally went to go study under Masamune and spent a further 2 years studying under Masamune - Gō died the following year in 1325. Norishige according to the Koto Mei-Zukishi Taizen literally learnt under the greatest smiths ever - I am not sure there is any other smith that can claim such an incredible lineage of sensei. If anyone was a product of Sagami/Soshu, it was Norishige. Unreal! It also shows the amount of thought and experimentation that was going on during this time - Norishige's blades are renowned for showing all his learnings and experimentations (some great and some not so much) and you can definitely more than any other smith track his progress and development through his blades. He was a keen learner and experimenter and wanted to learn under as many smiths as possible to find out what worked and what did not in persuit of the perfect blade. This included studying under his junior by age, Gō Yoshihiro, just like his Sensei Yukimitsu studied under a younger Shintogō Kunimitsu. It is therefore appropriate that the Etchu School of smiths can rightly be called the Gō School. It also shows how close and familiar all these Soshu smiths really where with each other. To explain the period I can only really compare it to the early days of Silicon Valley, everyone came in from everywhere share ideas, learn, experiment and build a brand new way of doing things. Because everyone was willing to share, everyone literally knew everyone! This is why this period really was the Golden Age. I also want to share a little side story here about Gō which is kind of fun in terms of chronology. From the above we know that Norshige studied under Gō in 1321, but what makes this date even more interesting is that it gives us an end date for Gō's studies with Masamune. That is Gō started his studies under Masamune at the age of 21 according to both the Kokon Mei-zukishi Taizen and Oseki Sho, this means if we do the math then Gō only studied for a total of two years or so, from 1319-1321, under Masamune - as he was aged 21 in 1319. This means this kid somehow managed to download everything Masamune was teaching in just 2 years (creating blades that equalled his master) and then he went on to teach Norishige at just 23 years of age. This kid was a trip. Yup - mind truly blown. I also have some ideas as to what encouraged Masamune to start teaching as I believe Gō was one of his first students, but I will leave that for another day. What is not answered is how this boy genius already possessed enough smithing skills and gravitas to impress Masamune enough in the first place to allow him to study with him at age 21 (I am still researching this - was there a Yamato link, which specific blades suggest the link? Much to learn.) What we do know is that Mount Tateyama, in whose foothills Gō grew up and had his forge (Matsukura District) is one of the three Sacred Mountains of Japan and as such it is said to be the home of heaven and the underworld, so perhaps Gō on one of his hikes up the mountain did a deal with the devil? Would not be the first. Also explains why he died at age 27 like every other legend. I think he may actually be the first to join the 27 club? (I jest by the way - or do I?) Regardless, if the stories are to be believed then, the word prodigy in the ilk of Mozart or Da Vinci is deserving of this kid from Etchu and he definitely deserves to be one of the Tenka-Sansaku. 🤯 Here is a image of a cross section of one of Gō's Tokubetsu Juyo Masterpieces where the Hamon looks remarkably like the reflection of Mount Tate in the Mikuriga-ike Pond. If I was to guess, this kid Gō clearly loved this mountain - he is said to have climbed it to get it's iron sands for his swords from the streams as close to the source as possible. That the quality of his blades have lasted 700 years, some as fresh as the day when they left the forge, speaks volumes to the secret knowledge he had managed to collect in his short life.

By the way, the idea of using a peg to hold in a cord like that is neat, but I haven’t seen any evidence that the holes in the pinch flaps were used for that purpose. It’s an idea, and a small pin could serve to stop the cord blowing away at ignition, but cords burn constantly and need to be moved forward with every shot. A locking pin for carrying then, to prevent misplacement or loss of one’s match cord? Many serpentines do not even have holes there. There is also a theory that they were to allow air to permeate the cord, helping to keep it alight. Or were they simply decorative? Anyway just something to think about, as the answer is not yet clear. We’ve had this discussion before. The answer must be out there somewhere.

Morning, I acquired this statue from an estate sale last week which I was lucky to snag him, since he has an aura that really wanted me to possess him. I haven't seen anything like this before, would it have been a temple or shrine, or home altar where this statue could've been? overall length is 34 1/2 inches, Fudo is 25 inch without the platform w/ 27 3/8 inches, and the flames are 34 inches There is a bit of damage to the flames and repairs (not by me) are present with nails and glue, some chipping of the black paint on the statue and a missing gem on the forehead which is interesting

Looks like a WW2 Kai Gunto tsuba, part of a set of various numbered fittings used on the more mass produced Naval swords in WW2. How it ended up in CT I have no idea. That is a very weird one.

Red flag? Not familiar enough with WW2 mounts to know if mods were made.

Here’s a long, actually very long shot, pun included. Neck on line. In 韮山 Nirayama there are the remains of Japan’s first reverberatory furnace where they once made cannon. ‘Barrel made at Nira’ could be got from these two kanji 韮張, assuming of course that the reading is not mistaken, which it could well be. (35% confidence rating) Anyway, just to get the ball rolling, but expecting to get shot down (pun included) at any moment. As they say: “Nothing ventured, nothing gained.”

Hi Mike, Previous set is NBTHK 67th Juyo..this one is Tokubetsu Hozon with Origami by the 12th gen Goto Mitsumasa.

To be more precise, there are several theories about the Masamune Juttetsu, none of which can be definitively proven or rebutted with the knowledge we currently have: They were all direct students of Masamune, and learned from him in Kamakura (common belief) They were all direct students of Masamune, who taught them outside Kamakura (Yamanaka's theory that you cited) Many of them had no direct contact with Masamune, but instead sent representative smiths to Kamakura to bring back his techniques (e.g. Dr. Honma's research led him to believe that Chogi and Kanemitsu learned Soshu-den techniques from their older brother/senior Nagashige, and likely Hasebe Kunishige did something similar) Many of them were not taught the Soshu-den techniques at all, but came up with good approximations by looking at Soshu-den swords that were in vogue at the time (this is generally thought to be the case for Sekishu Naotsuna, and Rai Kunitsugu's Soshu-influenced style has been found in at least a handful of works by his predecessors, suggesting he learned it from them rather than from Masamune) Disciple in the latter two cases can be considered more of a "follower" or "admirer" than an actual student; whatever their lineage, they were among the greatest smiths of the time who took inspiration from Masamune and showed it in their work. You can think of Masamune Juttetsu as describing artists who worked within a specific emerging movement (Soshu-dominated Nanbokucho works), roughly analogous to painting terms like Impressionists, Cubists and Dadaists. There is also, of course, the theory that Masamune himself did not exist and is merely a marketing concept/brand name invented either contemporaneously or by later collectors and appraisers (the Hon'ami and the Tokugawas are the two most commonly accused of such), and therefore none of the Juttetsu could have learned from "him".

Dear Sebastien. What a nice problem to have. Some questions to ask in your search. Are the HIrata the only people who understood shippo? Clearly not. Does this kozuka fit into the known body of Hirata work? Well most examples of Hirata work do not look like this. In another thread on NMB someone lamented that most of the pieces revealed by a search were attributed by Bonham's, herein lies the problem. Almost everything with shippo is claimed to be Hirata, especially by those selling the piece. Your butterfly appears to have gold cloisonnes and to be finely done. Is this a kozuka by Hirata or one with added decoration by them? A bit of information here, https://www.silk-road.us/hirata.html The tsuba in the link without the shippo would have been suggested to be Ichijo or one of his atelier, was he capable of doing shippo of this standard? Almost certainly so. Was the Hirata school capable of making a plate in this style? Certainly. Whatever you conclude this is a lovely piece to have in your collection. Enjoy as I am sure you will. All the best.

Hello all, I’m pleased to share something that I’ve gave a lot of effort to get. It’s a special order Naokatsu Wakizashi. Although the name is inscribed, I don’t want to give so much information about the person who ordered it as my research is still going on. All fittings are made and signed by 7th gen Goto Seijo, and whole set is original to the blade(possibly sageo as well), bearing the name of the same individual - been preserved in perfect condition for exactly 172 years. I’m not sharing detailed images of the blade yet, as it needs to be photographed in a better setup. And at present, it is not for sale. Hope you enjoy it.