KarlPeterSmith

To Brian post #38 - I'm not 'creating' an argument. I'm just presenting 'primary evidence' (FACTS) (some say 'introducing suspects' but that's what the shinsa panel does - and then they vote on it - ) all suspects should be part of the consideration when the sword is judged... and that is purely why you find it hard to challenge what I'm saying. I'm showing the (percentage of FACTUAL evidence that is is actually 100% correct for what it is. 100% Umetada Myoju. 100% Tadakuni. No shinsa panel necessary) No argument(s) Not from me. I wish that Shinsa voting was always 100%-all-votes-correct if the way-of-working relied on all available evidence - such as facts - truths - and pure primary evidence. I'm not the one saying 95-99% gimei... I'm the one saying LOOK AT pure 'primary' evidence which needs to be considered. What ever happened to the story of Tadayoshi being illiterate and couldn't write for himself - and that he copied down what others wrote down for him? I guess being illiterate and the notion he wrote exactly the same characters down all his life... falls through tightly clenched fingers like water through a sieve. [The only people who would write the same characters down consistently over and over again are those who had 1 primary source - a sword to copy.] I will stay 100% factual - and when I'm wrong I'll be the first to hold my hands up and say so. I will state 100% that every single TADAHIRO signed sword is signed differently. And I will add... that consistent signatures are by his master, friends, sibling and student(s). And if you are removing signatures and judging the blade by it's metal alone - well, you'll will end up with some blades being identified as older works... and incorrectly so... but maybe... you just don't want the truth. I have a HIZEN character which i think is by the real TADAYOSHI. And i will state that 4 swords signed by both Tadayoshi + Munenaga seem to be copies by a later swordsmithing team of greater prowess (who also had a horimono master). And the source of Tadayoshi's Sharpness may not be a family thing as I will state now bigtime. that his family could not replicate it BECAUSE they were never the original source of the 'sharpness' to start with. A team copied his blades and out-did Tadayoshi... even having his swords rank above their own. OMG - I said it. [This is my theory and I have the evidence to prove it. HIZEN-SMITH CODE coming soon.] PS: The fantastic structure and 'sharpness' and 'hamons' belong to the dream team, not - one man.

Evidence swinging the blade in Q back towards the Tadayoshi School camp is TADAKUNI (Hironori) son of Hirosada (Tadayoshi's half-brother)... ...and this student of Tadayoshi also wrote like Umetada Myoju. Just because it is signed Tadahiro does not mean you can totally out-rule Umetada Myojo's hand-writing (school or style)... or you would be classing every student dai-mei as 'gimei'. Tadayoshi/Tadahiro was a life-long student of Umetada's old-school ways. Plus... when emulating the 'older-styles' [call it an older brand] I'm sure they would emulate the shape too... which may make their blade(s) look like they were made elsewhere... if that popular style was only made elsewhere for instance. And that unique 'TADA' boomerang was also incorprorated within the MASA of MASAMUNE which Umetada Jusai oshigata-ed (not sure how to write that term. My error-noted.) PSS: Can I do a shout-out for any HORIKAWA KUNITOMO signatures (I have the usual KUNISADA one) or more for the young KUNIHIRO (Hirosada's 1st son) & Munenaga's son Yoshinaga? Thank you. These are so rare to get hold of.

In response to the in-depth information above... I have uploaded 2 attachments (2 examples of Umetada Myoju's work; a 1620 sword and also a tsuba) which may address both the TADA & KUNI character issues mentioned above... On a positive note... #members above have complimented the blade with... #3 great sugata and #8 very nice blade #12 "The signature" - "is a pattern made by Shodai Tadayoshi when he was in the end of his days and means it's a custom order for the Nabeshima daimyo. It's called kenjo-mei because he left out the Mutsu no Kami in this. The implication is that he is showing some humility in recognizing that this title is honorary only and that the blade is intended to go to someone who is a real lord of a real province." - "Tada is not correct for Shodai" , "not Tadayoshi." ,"TADA character doesn't exist for either first or second generation" Well - if anyone really did go to the Umetada school - then they actually 'may' be chiselling a TADA like that... as that is how UMETADA MYOJU did it himself. ..................on another note. I DO see the Kaku(square) and Maru(circle) argument suck in a lot of experts... and I'm slowly crossing-off these fantastically made Sukehiro reproductions from this infinitely spiralling Tadayoshi circle/square argument. PS. Umetada Myoju - evidence provided.

I presented this pic of your 1678 (twin signed) blade yesterday between two examples (from both Smiths) from the same year... and with an extra 2 examples from the following year (1679)... yet today found this information to have been removed. So here it is again. Your blade is real, I said it. Put it in for Shinsa.

UPDATE - 05 Feb, 2016: I have been in deep discussion with the owner of the blade - swapped emails - blade details - and revealed a little more on the 'HIZEN-SMITH CODE' to the owner of this blade (Clang! Dropped that one in) ... and have come up with an ISSUE greater than any passive "it's a gimei" comment could dismiss... and so will not use that term further in this article (as the blade is way-more than that) and I will use the word 'copy' to represent a 'faithful reproduction'. My initial "It's a HIROSADA" comment (was wrong, but right for what i was seeing) it was based on the first character on the blade... call it a 'starting point' to this story... Similar writing on the blade matched up with Hirosada's 2nd son Tadakuni (Hironori) 'bommerang' in the 'Tada', 3-vertical lines in the 'HIRO' (there is normally only 2) which seemed to be a fight between Tadayoshi's real son (Omi/Nidai) and adopted son Masahiro (Yoshinobu's real son)... and that's a lot of similarities for a 'copy'... SOMEONE was making this using a primary resource... call it a real-one, a real-copy (commission). So lets agree it's a 'copy' and continue... An expert (not naming him here) in Canada has faithfully described the blade and a specific period at which it could have been made. 100% 17th century. The 'Hiro' character matches up with a certain SUKEHIRO. And it's nice of SUKE to have a 'Hiro in his name too, much obliged, what a nice gentleman making my research a little easier on the eye. But it's more than that... KUNISUKE SCHOOL writing never leaves a maker's hand. An Osaka KUNISADA 'Musashi Daijo Fujiwara' and now a SUKEHIRO 'Tadahiro' turning up makes for a very busy Osaka workshop of Superior craftsmen. All would be VERY SHARP swords no doubt. "Hey Inoue! Pump those bellows we'll still make a swordsmith out of you yet!" - Shinkai joke. - I have recommended that he put the blade in for SHINSA for it is a SWORD that surpasses the original and needs a NEW term - A 17th century 'faithful emulation' by craftsman that can equal and surpass the original maker. Other TADAHIRO swords match both TSUDA SUKEHIRO periods 'circle' and 'square' & also pupil SUKENAO (even with hamon) match museum TADAHIRO's... omg it's all to come. I'm just updating you. Will these kinda swords be now worth more? Or less??? For the craftsmen were a handful of the BEST to ever live. Sword has been recommended for Shinsa, Falling into-line SIR! Reporting for duty. SMASHED IT !

Funnily enough I was just looking into YOSHINAGA (and his son YOSHIMASA) and I recognised the characters on this blade as the same person who signed for 1st Gen TADAYOSHI on numerous blades. The HIZEN character at the top of this thread is quite famous. The YOSHI character is definitely NOT that signed by YOSHINAGA... but those flashy arrows are part of head of the school YOSHINOBU's handwriting... YOSHINOBU. Yoshinobu seems to be teaching his son Masanaga... who is asking... "Father, how do I write Masa-naga?" The three commas from NAGA do look like the early writing of Mune-naga... and Munenaga teaching Yoshinaga was a possibility; which I ruled out due to the top 4 characters being those used by YOSHINOBU. The experimantal last character looks like an honest exploration of finding one's own name when signing. "Father... Masanaga just looks sillly. Next week I'm signing MASAHIRO." - Masanaga "Shut'up and keep chiselling... we have 10,000 of these to make." - Yoshinobu [Note: A late Masanaga+Yoshimasa (as the 'kuni' is similar) daimei - is ruled out as the HIZEN character shows it to be by the upper generation] "I know nothing" - Karl.

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” Sun Tzu. I was looking into a HORIKAWA KUNIHIRO student...Kunitake (son is Yoshitake & his tutor Kunimichi) and ended up finding this late 1866 Kunitake. It fits into this thread and I can cross it off what I'm doing. This Kunitake sword is from the previous year (1866) to the one featured above.

Thank you for the multiple angles and queries above... as you are all 'intelligent folk' and you are all QUESTIONING what I am doing which is good. (Ian post#68 is closest to the mark so far, respect to the man.) In regards to the 29 Oshigata... I started to chronologically arrange 1st Gen Tadayoshi signed blades in sequence... using the... i'll call it 'h' bottom right in 'KUNI' which is what is (the only characteristic) so far... that is unique to him... when compared to other students/commissioned blades. It's Munenaga when it doesn't touch the truly central and vertical-stroke down through 'KUNI' ... [i can't say everything out loud] what would be a secret then??? In regards to (SAS< Post#65) I have a title and I use it. Swordsmiths had titles and used them to. Hey, they even put them on their swords...You seem to have a problem with titles that belong to people. It identifies them from the [OXFORD n.'idiots'] who don't have them. Identification is what I am doing. Karl Peter Smith BA. You pay for cerificates... I paid for education. And the SBS has secrets where-as the SAS doesn't anymore, touché. In regards to signatures...Each identified chisel mark & character is like a tiny tributary to the larger signature stream. If you look at Charlie Chaplin's signature you will see how his old-age affects his signature.... how shapes change... devolve. It's dramatic. Enjoy the drama. I am actually now TRYING to disprove my own Munenaga theory but I keep getting caught-up with evidence that says "Ah-h-h... I'm still right". Let me clarify that Munenaga did not make them all... and I really do WANT To tell you the names of the other 4 SWORDMAKERS that did... but I'm sat on my hands with this knowledge... as every bit of detail you give me now allows me to 'dry-run' through my [living-room poster-sized TREE of evidence'. This has to be bullet-proof before I do the big reveal. No drum-roll... just a tumbleweed at the moment. And i'm SHOCKED that even those raising questions in this POST have still not mentioned the most obvious 'NAME' who could have made them. But... they don't know who he is yet SO I laugh when some opinions obviously JUST don't know. Powder remains dry... To HELP the stalwart disbelievers... show me post#71's characters and I'll talk about them using other swords (evidence) to identify them. I don't need a hamon. Let the life-long masters of the waves with their long-boards take to the waves (surfing term) it's their playground, not mine. They can own it. Have it. How am i doing this? Military... Controlled Remote Viewing - Check out 'Ingo Swann'. You may not believe it but it gets answers... secrets. I will add... that the best book THE ARTS OF THE Japanese SWORD by B.W.ROBINSON was where this journey began [FABER and FABER] And I have made numerous edits to this copy. Added characters. Notes in the margin etc. Worth getting still. Read it on the train. Maybe a lovely pic from Rogers own book (attached)... presenting DEI-MEI (signed by the students) and not by the MASTER's hand may open a few stubborn minds to the possibility that the TADAYOSHI SCHOOL is not ALL work by the master.

Here again is the early release of what I am calling the 'Hizen-Smith Code'. OMG it looks so old now. And so much more is now known since I unveiled it. You would NOT believe (and I am saying 'YOU WONT BELIEVE' so I know you wont... so I'm not letting you see it yet) how a swordsmith can write his name... break it up like-a-puzzle... and THEN write another province using the parts TA-DAAAAH! Before TV.... before radio... omg did they like a good puzzle. Well.... don't pay a Shinsa... I'll answer it for you... ...YES they did like a good puzzle.

My name is Karl Peter Smith BA... I live in the UK (and I have never met JOHN or are associated with anyone called JOHN in Oz... I've never even been to Australia) ...and to reply to the post above by (Brian #54)... a CODE being used by the SMITHS when signing for their master... is the brainy thing to do. I would love to divulge everything before my book comes out... but... defending the odd 'GOOD' blade isn't beyond me. This currently (not know by the masses) knowledge is what my research is based on. It is what I have uncovered/discovered on the blades and have NOT created from thin air. I am NOT a Shinsa panel... guessing/voting using an unsigned blade and using merely opinion. Saying a sword is by a 'School' which is a pretty broad (all encompassing) guess if you ask me. And that mundane fact is not questioned? I mean... WOW. I can tell you WHO it was! Cheque is IN-THE-POST As for my research....My characters are in sequence... 'unlike the dug-up pieces of a dinosaur in a museum'.... mine are all in order... just as the signatory intended. I get to see the actual work as it was made to be seen. I don't create it using a best-guess. My primary material is almost factory mint. A great reference point. Too good? I do like to stick to facts and NOT vague opinion. Those 'not in the know'... keep still... you may fall-off this flat Earth.... Shhh... it's really a Sphere. No-way!? Yes-way.

[At present do not spend any money on a Shinsa. The identification of your sword should not be by democratic vote based on it's hamon... which would say Tadayoshi School full stop. God I hate that hamon. They are currently not using the correct information regarding signatories. Which is why the boat is being rocked with my research.] Factual evidence will disappoint a lot of 'dealers', 'auctioneers' and 'freemasons' who think they have a 1st Gen Tadayoshi when realistically they really don't. And having a piece of paper will make your sword no greater than it really is (listen to post #41 Jussi...) Your sword spoke to you. It has a soul. A truth. It is an honest sword... with honour. They all want their sword to be signed by the 1st Gen... And your sword has been signed within THE FAMILY. And we are not saying it was THE 1st Gen. Tadayoshi himself... but they a fuming that THEY missed a trick here. That bargain got away from them. ON A POSITIVE STROKE ...One THING I HATE about your sword (yes, on a positive stroke) is i really HATE the hamon (it is boring) i.e. IT LOOKS LIKE A TADAYOSHI SCHOOL sword)... call it sugar, call it flat water, call it whatever you want ... the bit i HATE HATE HATE about it is is looks like a generic TADAYOSHI SCHOOL blade haha. I hate that hamon. I really do. I hate it because I know it is a Tadayoshi School blade LOL. My own negativity.... my pet hate is also saying YUP it's a real one... because I just hate that hamon. To Sherlock Holmes (the hater)... If 60 Smiths work for 1st Tadayoshi - then you have 60 suspects when determining who made/signed the swords from the Tadayoshi School. Right? Correct. Argue with Sherlock Holmes will they? They still will. The HIZEN-SMITH CODE identifies not everyone... but just enough to get to the bottom of the usual suspects and even ones that the masses do not even know are on the MAP yet! I would love to blurt out more secrets but I am sitting on my hands with parts of my CODE (swordsmiths and named assistants from Yamashiro and Osaka... that's right Hizen swords signed as such made elsewhere) that will rock most 'professional' collections. I'm not even joking that I expect a Ninja to crawl over my roof within the coming months. I know you'll keep and cherish your sword. I can Skype with you to tell you where your sword fits in the bigger picture. Relax... it's a good one. Oooouu... when I mentioned Hirosada's children Kunihiro & Tadakuni... I invariably disappointed many who thought they had a good-one. Relax - they're good too... in fact some are GREAT! That's why they are in museums with TADAHIRO on them because the master agreed they were good enough to pass off as the master's... and signed as such. Phew.

SOMETIMES... you have to look at what your own children DO... and see what they have picked up from YOU They have to get it from somewhere... I'll guess the blade is 1630 by YOSHIIE (who was previously called HIROSADA and is the half-brother of 1st Gen Tadayoshi... and signed TADAHIRO [as everyone had to... as the 1st Gen was still alive]. Hirosada's 1st son was Kunihiro and his second was Hironori [who later became TADAKUNI - who also signed for 1st+2nd Gen 'Omi'] Not far fetched. Realistic. And the sword speaks for itself. All notes are on the pic.

An old priest... holding a chisel is writing 'grass-script'. Am I one year too late in saying this? Just my opinion... your signature is perfectly-inconsistent. Does that make sense? It shows the signs of old age (from an artist/swordmaker's point of view... one who is still signing his own swords) If i had to be really picky... I would say that I'm not happy with the 'chrysanthemum' not being totally central in regards to either side of the blade... BUT... yet again... this is an age thing and consistent... with old age... Add odd thing to look at would be the signature of Charlie Chaplin... and see how his writing changes as his years role by.

1596 is your start date (And I'm only seeing the last character of the 2 year date given in the 2nd pic of the above post #1) which looks like an 'E' above an 'lX') just so you know my starting point. ('Mr hxv' in post#2 states it is 1592 but... that's impossible going on the characters on your blade which would be looking like an '1/X' above a 'TK', and they don't look close to anything like that.) PLUS... you need to add more years... minimum of +2 (Ni) due to the following '=' symbol. Taking it to 1597... hey...the date Tadayoshi and Munenaga were at Umetada Myoju's forge with Kunisada(d.1660)... maybe 1597 And the 'year' symbol resembles that of samurai sword-maker Horikawa KUNIHIRO (d.1615)... who taught KUNISADA before his nephew KUNITOMO (d.1660) took over the tutoring of Kunisada. Will this NEWS cheer you up? I actually haven't learnt (Stems and Signs) [characters beneath the year symbol] ...but the Horse (Midzunoye) character is there.. 9th Month? Or a miswritten Horse character...

Dear GARY WORTHAM In the light of NEW evidence... I was dipping into how unique the YEAR character is written on everyone's sword - a quite 'unique identifier' (as is 'HIZEN') in regards to the maker of swords with another's name on them. (Of course this is juggled in conjunction with ALL other available evidence... as and when it arises... or is rediscovered/made public.) I found myself revisiting your sword... and this may bring a smile... My good friend (no sarcasm, this is a compliment) Roger (Omi)... may like the fact that the 'Fuji' character has 3 lines in it (which is a nod to him being correct with his Masahiro signing for Tadahiro theory) ... and I like his theory... as the 'Hiro' is a comma/moon... ...and not the circle/diamond Sotherby's signed Munenaga/Umetada Jusai TADAHIRO's (but that's another thread). Shhh I'll shut myself up. Take a look...

I'll keep adding things to this thread to keep you all thinking about the available factual evidence... UMETADA MYOJU & Kunihiro student > KUNISADA... making a Musashi Daijo Fujiwara for 1st Gen Tadayoshi? Blasphemy or the truth?

How on Earth was Umetada Jusia Hon-ami (Myoju's younger brother) overlooked as a signatory for 1st Gen TADAYOSHI? He was actually running Myoju's Yamashiro Smith in 1605. Would you Adam'n'Eve that he was commissioned to polished a Masamune in 1609 ! And he had the nod to engrave it too... PLUS he was doing Oshigata for a contemporary researcher... So he WAS officially carving blades to identify them. This evidence.. with EVEN GREATER provenance speaks for itself (It fits 1629 better than Munenaga who some say may not have worked past 1620... and his writing also has an uncanny resemblance.) No matter what I say... take a look at the evidence... [Cue Spandau Ballet's 'GOLD' song]

HIZEN SMITH CODE identified by Karl Peter Smith BA Oct 2015.

Here's the 1st 'HIZEN-SMITH-CODE' character.... ...best to START with Tadayoshi's 1st adopted Father & Master and Sword-Making Priest NORIYOSHI/JO MUNETSUGU. Master UMETADA MYOJU was based in YAMASHIRO and not HIZEN so apologies for NOT having Myoju as the 1st character.... but chronologically Jo Munetsugu would be 1st... so releasing the Jo's character 1st is probably correct. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. My post #95 should be struck-from-the-record 'Your Honour'... if JUDGES can do it.... so can admin. :-) Make it so. Please. I do hate errors flying-around... especially if they are my own... and especially if they have 'subsequently/since' been corrected. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. This is a NEW PIC and amendment - identified by eagle-eyed Markus #101 (He KNOWS his stuff.)

You're totally right Markus and that sole character is incorrect... I'll take that Koyama Munetsuga character out. (I was cutting and pasting from a Munetsugu file)... good shout-out :-). I'll edit and re-post. OR maybe I'll emphasize and point-out what you've pointed-out and add that the Munetsugu were still writing like this in 1845... showing uniformity and that not a lot has changed. [After looking at it again. You're right... I've totally deleted that incorrect ref signature.] What was I thinking? I should not really show any of this for 'another year' until the visuals of the journey are water-tight... BUT hey... there are books in print that everyone is referring to at the moment that are totally wrong and no-one is saying anything about them and are using them like an unquestionable oracle. Amendments on this thread are ok. The CODE is still tight. It's not like I've submitted it to Nielson book data yet. Cheers Markus. I take my hat off to you for spotting that... even before the dry run. I may run each character past you as I put the info together. I'm enjoying the journey and it still continues...

HIRONORI (TADAKUNI WRITING).jpg This file is named correctly. Thank you.

TADAKUNI Once you have seen one... you'll wish to see another... and this example of the 'HIZEN-SMITH-CODE' is very impressive... I would LOVE to hear your thoughts on the CODE... now you have had a taster. FOOTNOTE: I do not know how to delete pictures in this thread... (can the admin please delete the picture in this post and I will upload one correctly into the next box below, (i spotted a clerical error) thank you. I will rename this Tadakuni information as a correctly named .jpeg as the one I have shown here states Hizen Ju Tadayoshi. This information had not yet been changed since uploading the Jo Munetsugu above.) Thank you. I have to be precise with all of this.

Here's the 1st 'HIZEN-SMITH-CODE' character.... ...best to START with Tadayoshi's 1st adopted Father & Master and Sword-Making Priest NORIYOSHI/JO MUNETSUGU. Master UMETADA MYOJU was based in YAMASHIRO and not HIZEN so apologies for NOT having Myoju as the 1st character.... but chronologically Jo Munetsugu would be 1st... so releasing the Jo's character 1st is probably correct. I'll wait to see the community reponse... before releasing the OTHER characters - i.e. all others present within the Tadayoshi-School.

UPDATE: Using the NEW 'code'... the sword signed soley with the title 'Musashi Daijo Fujiwara' (in the possession of Colin Stewart) is signed by Noriyoshi (temporary father of Tadayoshi before he was sent to Master Myoju's forge) ...and who later became Jo Munetsugu (Head of all Hizen Smiths 1608) whose station was above that of Tadayoshi (his gifted adopted son). Another sword signed 'Hizen ju Tadayoshi' with 'HIZEN' written in Jo Munetsugu's Handwriting matches the file directions and overall style and feel of the one in Colins possession... he said it 'actually-looks-like-his-sword'. Jo's CODE is what looks like a letter 'P' in the top right of HIZEN... and a very SHARP and HARD chisel mark... if you look at how Jo Munetsugu wrote his 'own-name' you 'll see that the P in Hizen is his name. It's that obvious.... and it's that clever. On Colin's blade... the 'jo' character... the 2nd character of Dai-jo (which can be spelt a few different ways)... has an extra line in it... The JO literally was the Jou Tsuka-no-Kashira... the person in charge of all of the Hizen smiths. Jo Munetsugu.

All 'sold' swords are being attributed to the signed name. And are being certified this way yes? If you study enough 'sword signatures' on swords solely made by a single signer... when the 'maker' signs for the 'Tadayoshi School'... you can see it is their work... and is even still in their hand-writing... even though the factory name at the lower end of the tang says 'Tadayoshi'... and is especially evident if the signature says 'Tadahiro'. All 'unsigned' swords are being 'attributed' on file-marks and a plethora of the most available data (number of swords available for study). If more available swords look a-certain-way ...and are signed-the-same-way then this most common opinion is made out to be the truth... rather than REALLY looking at the writing. Some may muddy the truth - and could say... "It's the difference between 300-years-from-now identifying a real Andy Warhol 'print' from one of the more widely available 1000's of Factory prints"... but it it isn't... IF Zandra Rhodes (clothes and close-friend designer from another factory) signed a Warhol print... you can see it's a Rhodes signature with Zandra flare. Same ball-park... just applied to sword-making. In response to who made the sword ('Alex A'...) The experts who are attributing and certifying ALL unsigned swords have 'years' of democratic voting behind them... so... they can take a re-vote and update all resubmitted certified blades... OR...based on all NEW available evidence.... (certificates in the database) ... Send them a courteous updated certificate.