Yamato Daijo Fujiwara Masanori

[J-Dubb627]

I own this beautiful katana from the early Edo period signed by Yamato Daijo Fujiwara Masanori (appraised as Tokobetsu Hozon).  I can’t, however, find much information about him as a swordsmith.  I know he forged for the Matsudaira clan but I would like to know more about him.  Does anyone have any information or references?  Thank you!

[Geraint]

Dear Josh.

 

Welcome to NMB.  Have a look here, particularly the PDF linked in the last post by Markus.

 

 

All the best.

[J-Dubb627]

1 hour ago, Geraint said:

Dear Josh.

 

Welcome to NMB.  Have a look here, particularly the PDF linked in the last post by Markus.

 

 

All the best.

Thanks for sharing this.  It’s hard to find good info about this particular smith, but I’m so intrigued to learn more about him.  I have learned her exclusively forged for the Matsudaira specifically Matsudaira Tadanao.  Wish there was more info about him!

[Ben-W]

Hi, I'm surely one of the least experienced person on this forum in relation to Nihonto. The good news is, recently while travelling in Japan I became a first time custodian of two Nihonto, one of which was signed Yamato Daijo Fujiwara Masanori. Also appraised as Tokobetsu Hozon.

I've spent the past few weeks researching Yamato Daijo Fujiwara Masanori.

I can share my findings.

There were two smiths who signed Yamato Daijo Fujiwara Masanori in Echizen province 1600's.

The first generation Masanori. (referred to as shodai)

And the second generation Masanori. (Second generation referred to Nidai)

In the book named, Japanese Sword Smith directory, Japanese edition (which is in English) by Mishina Kenji, I've found the following information (photos attached. Reference: Ma - 121 rank C)

 

You can also investigate the province Shodai Masanori worked in to find who was the Daimyo of Fukui domain during this period. This timeline is very close to the battle of Sekigahara which marks the beginning of the Tokugawa Shogunate.

Daimyo of Fukui domain in Echizen province 1601/1607 - Yūki Hideyasu
(Seond son of the first Tokugawa Shogun, Tokugawa Ieyasu)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yūki_Hideyasu

Succeeding Yūki Hideyasu was his eldest son, Matsudaira Tadanao.
Daimyo of Fukui domain in Echizen province 1607 - 1622

https://en.m.wikiped...i/Matsudaira_Tadanao


As referenced, Tadanao was banished and replaced by his younger brother and second son of Yūki Hideyasu;

Matsudaira Tadamasa 
Daimyo of Fukui domain in Echizen province 1623 - 1645

https://en.m.wikiped.../Matsudaira_Tadamasa


If your katana is first generation Masanori, The probabilities are it was forged during the reign of one of the above Daimyo.

What historical battles may have Shodai Masanori katana possibly seen?

If it was forged early enough, The siege of Osaka 1614 to 1615.

https://en.m.wikiped.../wiki/Siege_of_Osaka

Samurai of Fukui, Echizen province were sent to Siege of Osaka under the Daimyo Matsudaira Tadanao.

Some additional research can begin from other names referenced in the photos such as;

Sanjo Yoshinori, which Masanori  is referenced as being a descendant (I lack further information for now)

The smith he apprenticed under; Kanenori. I'm guessing, of Fukui, Echizen Domain early 1600s

And other references Ive read saying he was the son of a Norimitsu (again, lack further information)
 

This is all I've found so far. When you come across further information, I would also love to hear.

Cheers,
Ben

[Baba Yaga]

I'm kind of confused, but what else is new.  You both have TH papers on the same smith but the papers vague on the generation of Masanori?

[J-Dubb627]

@Ben-W Thanks for all of the information you shared!  Here is some information (matches alot of what you said) that I have on him.  My blade is from the first generation Masanori and I, too, have wondered if it had any involvement in the Siege of Osaka Castle.   

 

 

This blade was forged by Yamato Daijyo Fijiwara Masanori(大和大掾藤原正則), who was born in Miyatsu city, Tango koku (northern Koyoto prefecture). Based on his remaining work, he was active during the early Edo period (the 13th year of Keisho-the fourth year of Keian:1608-1651).  Masanori is famous for having forged extremely sharp blades and was popular among high-class Samurai. 

 It is said that he was a descendant of Yamashiro koku Sanjyo Yoshinori(山城国三条吉則), one of the most famous swordsmiths during the Muromachi period（Prior to Edo period).After learning the sword-forging technique from his father, Norimitsu(則光) in Miyatsu city, Norimitsu, he moved to Kyoto city. 

 Masanori eventually was noticed and supported by Matsudaira Hideyasu, the third son of Tokugawa Ieyasu, the founder of the Edo government. Hideysu was the feudal lord of Echizen province during the early Edo period. He then moved to Echizen province to serve the Matsudaira clan. He became an Okakaekaji for Matsudaira Tadanao(松平忠直), who was the first son of Matsudaira Hideyasu. An Okakaekaji means those who exclusively forged swords for specific Samurai or clan. It was honorable for any makers to serve this position back then. He also received an official title of Yamato Daijyo from the emperor for his excellent craftsmanship.

[J-Dubb627]

On 10/28/2023 at 9:17 AM, Baba Yaga said:

I'm kind of confused, but what else is new.  You both have TH papers on the same smith but the papers vague on the generation of Masanori?

No, mine is first gen Masanori

[Ben-W]

On 10/29/2023 at 1:17 AM, Baba Yaga said:

I'm kind of confused, but what else is new.  You both have TH papers on the same smith but the papers vague on the generation of Masanori?

 

 

Hi,

The Masanori I took ownership of was still in transit when you first posted, I was awaiting arrival before replying. I would say my certificate is a bit vague but, then again, I'm new.

 

The shop in Japan I purchased from stated it was first gen Masanori.

http://sanmei.com/co...nts/en-us/p2392.html

I myself am unable to read Japanese, and all I have received is the NBTHK certificate, no further documentation. (Although it did have the original papers from 1960.)

Using Google to translate the Tokubetsu Hozon certificate, It appears to restate what is signed on the nakago and no further information. I will post a photo.

 

 

 

When it comes to the NBTHK providing certificates for blades from known smiths which do have signatures but, have multiple generations of smiths signing the same name, does the NBTHK usually assign to which generation it belongs?

 

Many thanks,

Ben 

[Shugyosha]

Hi Ben,

The NBTHK does sometimes assign a blade to a particular generation of smith but often not, and not on the paper above. As you say, it just confirms the smith's signature and so it's a case of looking at the work and signatures of each generation to try to attribute it to one or the other. There's some information below on the two generations of smith with examples of the signatures of both (in the link of the final post).

 

For me, the overall shape of your blade looks more like that prevalent in the Kanbun (straightish, chu kissaki) era rather than the Keicho era (extended chu kissaki), so 2nd generation, though the citation from Markus Sesko's book suggests that the signatures of both are similarly "spiderish" and different to that on the papered 2nd generation blade pictured by the OP. That said, my opinion isn't worth that much and you may get better ones shortly.

 

 

 

[J-Dubb627]

@Ben-W the picture of the sword you posted looks beautiful.  While no two swords are exactly alike, yours does appear to look slightly different than mine. Just based on the photo, it looks like your blade width is wider and the curvature to your blade is straighter than mine, although that does not rule out that our swords were made by the same Smith.  The place in Tokyo where I purchased my sword said that the certificates don’t always state what generation when there are Smiths with the same name. They did, however, say that if it is a later generation then the certificate sometimes would be marked with Kodai (meaning late generation).

[Ben-W]

Thanks Shugyosha and Geraint for supplying reference to Markus's book.

I also appreciate you clarifying my question about the certificates.

Analyzing the reference provided from Markus, I've noticed similarities between the blade in question and the 2nd Gen Masanori.

(1)
2nd Gen Masanori: Markus reference
Nagasa: 61.5cm
Sori: 0.9cm

This Masanori
Nagasa: 61.5cm
Sori: 1.0cm

(2)
In relation to the signature, with characters 1# Yama,  3# Dai
The top stroke runs much higher on the 1st gen compared to the 2nd gen.

 

(1st Gen Masanori: Markus Reference below)


The kanji in location 1# and 3# on this blade looks uniquely similar to the 2nd Gen.

(2nd Gen Masanori: Markus Reference below)

(This Masanori below)

 

(3)
For this blade, the end of the nakago has a very sharp angle, it's almost a point. This also appears more prominently on the 2nd gen referenced by Markus.

In relation to characteristics of forging and the hamon, that's still beyond my ability to comment.

In addition Shugyosha, you noted by the shape it's more likely from the kanbun period 1661-1673, which I believe aligns closer with the window of 2nd Gen Masanori.

Based on those observations I would more lean towards this blade being 2nd generation if I was making an estimate.

Welcoming any further input

 

 

 

[Ben-W]

On 11/11/2023 at 2:17 AM, J-Dubb627 said:

@Ben-W the picture of the sword you posted looks beautiful.  While no two swords are exactly alike, yours does appear to look slightly different than mine. Just based on the photo, it looks like your blade width is wider and the curvature to your blade is straighter than mine, although that does not rule out that our swords were made by the same Smith.  The place in Tokyo where I purchased my sword said that the certificates don’t always state what generation when there are Smiths with the same name. They did, however, say that if it is a later generation then the certificate sometimes would be marked with Kodai (meaning late generation).

Thanks Josh, I have a few more screenshots I can share about 1st Gen Masanori from an older document. I'll get those up for you soon.