Why do smiths not sign blades

[bullpuppy]

I sure there are many reasons. But when an unsigned blade is attributed to a well acknowledged smith via Shinsa and the smith signs other blades why didn't he sign all.

 

Some reasons that I made up:

 

1) The finished blade did not meet his standards

2) Perhaps he didn't want the blade traced to him. (maybe tax evasion)

3) The blade has been cut down and signature was lost.

4) Perhaps he exceeded his allowable quota

5) Superstition

6) a student made it with out the teachers knowledge but duplicated the style.

7) He needed to keep his identity hidden, perhaps making blades for the enemy.

[David Flynn]

He's that good you should be able to tell who it is

David

[Henry Wilson]

Also I think in the days gone by a smith signing a sword would suggest that the sword belonged to him where in fact he was probably a subject of a lord or monastery so him not signing the bladed was resepectful if that makes sense....

 

I think that this is very much true for early Yamato blades where the early swordsmith schools were branches of monasteries.

[kusunokimasahige]

Or they simply had to make so many blades (sengoku jidai) that they couldnt be bothered anymore with signing them, unless it was an especially commissioned item.

 

KM

[Ichi]

and I heard this other scenario from a Kyoto sword dealer ....... when a swordsmith gets chumon uchi (custom order) from high ranking offical, he usually produce two or three blades and present to his client. Client picks one and the swordsmith will engrave his signature while the remaining rejects are sold thru local sword dealers for extra bucks and the ended up as mumei.

[Stephen]

is on point with this...i have heard the same story.

[Rich T]

  Henry Wilson said:

I think that this is very much true for early Yamato blades where the early swordsmith schools were branches of monasteries.

 

I believe with Yamato baldes, many were favoured by the Warrior Monks and the Yamato smiths would not sign their works so their lords did not know who made them.

 

Rich

[nagamaki - Franco]

  Ichi said:

Client picks one and the swordsmith will engrave his signature while the remaining rejects are sold thru local sword dealers for extra bucks and the ended up as mumei.

 

Rejects , interesting term for say an unsigned Kunihiro or Shinkai.

 

fd

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

  Ichi said:

and I heard this other scenario from a Kyoto sword dealer ....... when a swordsmith gets chumon uchi (custom order) from high ranking offical, he usually produce two or three blades and present to his client. Client picks one and the swordsmith will engrave his signature while the remaining rejects are sold thru local sword dealers for extra bucks and the ended up as mumei.

 

Might be in the past, but I'm not sure it works this way today.

AFAIK good smiths refused "shadow blades" are... broken !

[mike yeon]

Many early koto blades are unsigned as the practice was not "en-vogue." (I believe it was thought of as a little arrogant to sign one's work.)

 

You start seeing many signatures towards mid/end of kamakura on as the practice caught on. The sengoku period brought signing into fill swing as constant wars = demand for swords = smiths/schools putting a calling card on their blades. For example, there are many signed sukesada blades but that just meant it was made by a smith in the sukesada mon.

 

Another reason can be the smith is apprenticed to another smith. Good example would be gassan sadakatsu. He produced swords for years but did not sign them with his name until his father (sadakazu) died in 1918.

 

These are some reasons along with what's already been mentioned. Mumei does not necessarily mean low quality. In fact many masamune blades are unsigned as are blades by dozens of masters.