Mushin

Not on Facebook, but I am in.

Thanks to all who came to the Orlando Sword Show this year! It was a great show, full of warmth and fun. Exhibition was terrific and the attendees were wonderful got to meet Sam and a few other people I only know by their names and posts here! So nice! Hope to see more of you next year!!!

Amazing achievement. Congrats

I have a very good friend and serious collector who shall remain nameless. He loves attending the various shinsa in Chicago, Tampa, Orlando and San Francisco. His favorite spot was outside the shinsa room where he would wait for the inevitable angry, disappointed collectors emerging with pink slips or attributions they didn't like. He would commiserate with them over the results, sympathize with their frustration, and then, more often than not, buy their swords and fittings from them for peanuts since they couldn't wait to be rid of their "failures." They walked away happy that they bumped into a "sucker" stupid enough to buy their "garbage." At least three Jūyō swords my friend owns today came from those very rejects. Other pieces received attributions to major names after a good polish. It just goes to show that not all shinsa are created equal, that a mei rejection is not necessarily the end of the story, and that one person's disappointment can become another person's opportunity—especially when that person knows what he is looking at. Knowledge truly is power. It also illustrates nicely the point I was making earlier: the blade itself did not change. Nothing about the workmanship, condition, or history was altered by the result. What changed was the owner's perception of the blade once it failed shinsa. For some, that shift in perception can be powerful enough to sever the emotional connection they once had with the piece. For others, it just creates the opportunity to acquire something exceptional at a fraction of its true value.

Rohan, I agree with you, but only up to a point. While papers or designations don't change the steel or workmanship of a sword, what they can—and often do—change is our perception of the blade. When a sword that you hope will receive higher papers does, you are elated, feel proud or vindicated, and often develop a deeper connection to it, even though nothing has really changed about the piece other than the certificate that accompanies it. And when it doesn't happen, that emotional connection can be affected, sometimes profoundly. Darcy once told me that people would often get rid of blades after a failed Jūyō submission because, in the owner's mind, somehow the sword was no longer worthy of the same love, admiration, or ownership. I used to say that the only reason to pursue higher papers was to make a future sale or trade easier, or to leave your family something concrete and understandable when you eventually pop your clogs. But the truth is that collectors often behave exactly as Darcy described. And I get it. Collecting—and perhaps hoarding as well—are deeply human traits. Humans crave certainty. We want our choices validated. We want our judgment recognized and rewarded. When that happens, it strengthens our attachment to the object. When it doesn't, it can alter our relationship with it, even when logic tells us nothing has changed. I think the Buddha spent a great deal of time teaching that suffering is rooted in attachment and expectation. That may not make rational sense in the context of a sword that remains exactly the same before and after the shinsa results arrive, but it is what it is. We become attached not only to the object itself, but also to the story we tell ourselves about it and the hope that others will validate that story. Human nature being what it is, that attachment can be every bit as powerful as the sword itself.

Jussi, while I don't know the story about Katsumitsu fleeing the village, what is clear is that by 1560, the situation in Osafune had changed considerably. The glory days of the Katsumitsu line were already in the past. The atelier appears to have been much smaller than it had been during the time of Ukyo no Suke Katsumitsu and Sakyo no Shin Munemitsu, and it was operating alongside a number of related Osafune branches, particularly the descendants of Jirobei Harumitsu, the second son of Jirozaemon no Jō Katsumitsu. The Harumitsu branch seems to have specialized in higher-quality and often more individual commissions, producing many tantō and the occasional longer uchigatana. Also, by the Eiroku era, the economics of sword production had shifted dramatically. Demand generated by the Sengoku wars encouraged the large-scale manufacture of kazuuchimono, and the principal beneficiaries of that market were the Kiyomitsu and Sukesada groups. These two houses grew into the dominant producers in Osafune, overshadowing many of the older family lines in both size and output. At the same time, Bizen's political landscape was also changing. Since the death of Akamatsu Masanori, the province had been dominated by the Uragami clan, who were also big patrons of the Katsumitsu. But by the mid-sixteenth century the Uragami were weakened by internal divisions and increasingly dependent upon their powerful retainer, Ukita Naoie. During the 1560s, Naoie expanded his influence while maintaining a nominal loyalty to his lords, eventually emerging as the effective ruler of Bizen. Such political and economic upheavals almost certainly affected the fortunes of the Katsumitsu line, as they did many other Osafune families. Against that backdrop, the placement of Kiyomitsu's name before Katsumitsu's becomes easier to understand. Whether the order reflects seniority, prestige, commercial influence, or simply the circumstances of the commission cannot be known with certainty. However, by the Eiroku period the Kiyomitsu workshops were among the most prominent and productive in Osafune, while the Katsumitsu line no longer occupied the commanding position it had enjoyed a century earlier. On the issue of Katsumits fleeing the village, I have not seen and can't find anything to support this, but I guess it's possible. The documentary record for many late-Bizen smiths is fragmentary and not all of it is available online. What is striking,though, is that when the Yoshii River flood of 1590 devastated Osafune and effectively brought the great Bizen tradition to an end, the powerful Kiyomitsu line disappeared from history. Among the few branches that survived were members of the Sukesada line and descendants of the Harumitsu branch. In that sense, although the Katsumitsu family had long since lost its former prominence, its bloodline appears to have been among the last remnants of the classical Osafune tradition.

It's looking promising! Fingers crossed!!!!

Kosho (1455-57)! That would mean that Munemitsu, if born in 1436/37, was somewhere between 18 to 21 when this was made. It's not impossible, but more likely this is by the 4th generation whose working period is listed as 1444-1449. Markus' A-Z of Japanese Sword smiths says the earliest known signature for Sakyo no Shin is 1469, but we are constantly seeing pieces coming out of the woodwork that are upending those dates. The work looks nice as and you can see the transition moving to Sue Bizen. I like it! What are the dimensions of the blade?

Thank you again for all the great feedback. And absolutely, Lewis, the practice was not uncommon heading into the Muromachi to inscribe more information on nakago, including patrons, places and even prayers. Here's an example of the later (again by Ukyo no Suke Katsumitsu) on the mune of a tanto: https://sanmei.com/contents/media/T2174_T5010_PUP_E.html Also interesting is the practice of gassaku with other Bizen smiths outside their immediate circle seemed to be a thing for a while around the late Meio and Eisho eras. There is one on the market now between Tadamitsu and Muneumitsu: https://sanmei.com/contents/media/T2174_T5010_PUP_E.html. But there are even earlier ones with Norimitsu. Then of course, there is the famous Tokubestu Juyo nagainata jointly made by Jirozaemon no Jo Katsumitsu and the Shodai Yosozaemon Sukesada below. Interesting work in Bizen between Bunmei and Daei in particular but it carried forward by others like Kiyomitsu as you pointed out.

Thanks for all the kind words. I really enjoyed this project and I am glad you are as well. Thanks!

From signatures, it looks like they took turns, and at other times made use of specialized assistants who signed for them. Remember they marched into Kyoto with a 60 assistants! They had a real studio. Not sure who they took with them when they were on the run but it's interesting. My gassaku, for instance, looks to have been inscribed by Munemitsu. Almost always Katsumtisu's name was first, But after Ukyo no Suke died and Munemitsu started working with his nephew Jirozaemon, Munemitsu's name was first. Seniority is what I assume.

Just a design feature...

Here is the PDF version Smiths_Soldiers_Diplomats_Block_Sesko-FINAL.pdf

Please feel free Brian. The idea is to share. Thanks!!

Smiths_Soldiers_Diplomats_Block_Sesko-FINAL.pSmiths_Soldiers_Diplomats_Block_Sesko-FINAL.pdf Markus Sesko and I used to talk about how much we knew about Horikawa Kunihiro's life and travels compared to virtually every other smith before 1600. Then I came across Koyama Kanami's 1977 study of Akamatsu Masanori and his associates Katsumitsu and Munemitsu, I realized Kunihiro wasn't the only pre-Edo smith hiding in plain sight in the historical record. Markus and I began talking about a deep dive, and the result is the attached paper, which I hope stands out in a field where we know far more about the metallurgical features of great swordsmiths than about the men themselves. I am sharing it here with you guys first. It could not have been written without Markus's translations, discussions, and editorial judgment, which are evident on every page. I Hope you enjoy Smiths_Soldiers_Diplomats_Block_Sesko-FINAL.pdf