Honami Koson

[Adrian S]

G'day to Ford , Eric and all,

 

Ford, I get your point. But I don't agree with your views in this regard. Every generation of sword scholars in the past have done exactly as we are doing today, re-evaluating the knowledge inherited from the previous generation and adding to that knowledge with new research and insight that new material can bring.

 

However, when we claim the right to question the opinions of previous authorities we must ask ourselves by what expertise and understanding do we pose our questions.

 

As I have said previously, new information that has come to light through archeology and science needs to be seriously addressed. Carlo for one is doing a great job and others in Japan are also opening new doors. It is our duty as students of this marvelous hobby to evaluate and contribute openly without prejudice. Maybe the Izakaya is a better forum for these discussions.

 

Speculation is best kept for those times when conversation is lubricated with one's narcotic of choice. Serious scholastic discussion ought to concentrate on that which can be reliably regarded as fact or verifiable.

 

Confining our theories and opinions to the lubricated discussions after hours at sword shows doesn't allow for active research and informed counter arguments. Also confining our opinions only to that which has been verified as reIiable in the eyes of the uninformed is again counterproductive. I understand what you mean that conversing on these subjects with the broader Nihonto community is difficult due to a lack of understanding of the topic at hand. For this reason alone maybe these discussions need to be between those more educated. But, as my wife is Japanese, has some understanding of Nihonto (she doesn't have a choice as I drag her around enough museums and exhibitions ), she is great at research and helpful with translation, I can tell you the topics and views I have put forward on this forum are not new at all. In fact books have been written by eminent scholars on all these topics in Japan. Just because you haven't read them doesn't mean they are invalid or not reliably researched.

 

Chris, you are right, I have a big bag of tricks, full of pertinent questions which I hope to address in print. All of these questions and many more are being asked right now, in Japan by noted scholars. Are we dismissing that just so we don't appear ignorant to those who are in themselves ignorant of the latest research?

 

Ford, with our limited resources available in English we get down to the same old re-hash of the same old information that everyone has read before. Frankly I find that tedious. So maybe I should go back to working on my thesis and my book and let the sleeping dogs lie.

 

A discussion as to the authenticity, by non-Japanese students, of various blades purported to have been made by the the most legionary and revered sword-smith (and by this I refer to the essential illiteracy of non-Japanese students with reference to primary sources) must be seen by serious scholars in Japan as being misguided to say the least.

 

And Einstein was a patent office clerk who had the audacity to question the theories of Issac Newton. If it wasn't for re-evaluation of the known and unknown we would all still think that the ten great students of Masamune were literally all his students. Evaluating the known dates and work styles of these students have proven that to be incorrect. You don't need to be Japanese to be a serious scholar of Nihonto. In fact in some ways it is an advantage to not be Japanese and have to deal with the cultural and politically correct issues.

 

Just because we don't know all the answers doesn't give speculators the right to start simply making stuff up. That way way madness lies.

 

For the record, my opinions on Masamune are only mere reflections of many many others more scholarly than myself who share those same opinions. I didn't make these opinions up, nothing I have mentioned here has not been said before. To father a new well presented opinion is indeed noteworthy, but alas these children are not my own. I will in time happily quote research and references in print, for now you will just have to take my word for that. As for research and knowledge of Masamune and his school, I would not consider myself a lightweight. But, for the sake of not polluting the minds of the innocent or the ignorant, I shall refrain from all contentious opinions on this subject ( for now)

 

I have my own opinions...one is my faith in the judgement of undisputed authorities. One of them on the top of the sword world is Dr. Junji Honma, recognized scholar,

 

Eric, I agree with Adam, no-one is infallible when it comes to sword knowledge and very few are incorruptible. I don't dispute the great service done by Honma in his lifetime and his place in history for his time ( now that is a topic I could discuss over a sherry or two ). But as far as pure faith in his undisputed authority goes, wasn't Honma in charge of the NBTHK when the 1981 scandal broke, am I right?

 

hey Brian, how do I get to be a "Heretic" like Ford? I think I deserve it! :lol:

 

cheers,

[Ford Hallam]

Dear Adrian,

 

my apologies if it seemed I was directing my comments solely at you. I wasn't particularly thinking of your analysis research project. What I was criticising is the general tendency to create possible "answers" for questions based on absolutely no relevant information at all.

 

I will remind you of the lengthy and ultimately futile discussion we recently engaged in regarding the use of borax. The whole matter started because someone ( you said you couldn't remember where you read it ) claimed it was introduced by the Portuguese in the mid 16th cent. etc. What followed was a protracted struggle to force this invention to fit what we could uncover. This sort of "cart before the horse" methodology is absolutely the antithesis of scientific and scholarly thinking.

 

Developing working models, or theories, based on the available data is a perfectly respectable and intelligent approach in any field of research and study. Simply making stuff up out of thin air is not.

 

However when you say;

 

the topics and views I have put forward on this forum are not new at all. In fact books have been written by eminent scholars on all these topics in Japan. Just because you haven't read them doesn't mean they are invalid or not reliably researched.

 

I have absolutely no problem with well researched or reasoned theories and you may not be the only non-Japanese to be able to access material from the source. Presenting this material in English is most welcome but it would be respectful, I would suggest, to cites one's sources and to make it absolutely clear what aspects of an argument or hypothesis is drawn from other authorities and which parts are one's own speculations or conclusions. This is simply good academic practice.

[Ford Hallam]

To be absolutely blunt I am immediately very sceptical when anyone claims to have privileged information, from their special relationships in Japan, and where these authorities remain anonymous. This claim is heard far too frequently on this forum and is used inevitably to silence critics and to claim ultimate authority in a debate.

 

If new archaeological and scientific data has come to light and it appears to provide information that calls for a revaluation of existing theories then we should absolutely explore the matter. I'm very intrigued now as to what such new research can add to the Masamune enigma.

 

You claim that in this thread you've only stated opinions that are echoing the views of more eminent Japanese scholars yet on a couple of occasions you preface your comments thus;

CAUTION: HYPOTHETICAL ASSUMPTION APPROACHING!

 

If these thoughts are not your own perhaps it would have been in the interests of clarity to have said so and to quote your sources.

[Ford Hallam]

But you go too far with this underhand implication;

But as far as pure faith in his undisputed authority goes, wasn't Honma in charge of the NBTHK when the 1981 scandal broke, am I right?

 

To try and undermine the man's academic integrity by implying that he was somehow responsible for serious criminal wrongdoing is a pretty dirty trick in my opinion, made worse by the fact that he is not around to defend himself. That's the sort of tactic politicians use and I'm appalled that you'd stoop so low as to try it on here.

[Adrian S]

G'day Ford,

 

I assure you I don't have any imaginary sources in Japan. Currently I have a working thesis concerning the origin and influences of the Soshu school. It's quite complicated and deserves more than passing comments. As you can understand, this research is a mammoth undertaking as my thesis is quite involved. Quite right, most of the information is already being hotly debated in Japan. Actually I was unaware of some of the Japanese scholarship along similar lines until recently ( and delighted ) which has added and subtracted from my original working thesis. In due time I will publish to my website then you can all analyses to your heart's content.

 

Now concerning Junji Honma, I have a lot of respect for Kunzan's research and scholarship, I already stated that, even though you did not quote it. I also have a lot of respect for the work he did in saving the Japanese Sword from oblivion. But, after the war the science of the Japanese sword , its relationship with the Asian sword , the reality of its development, the historic use ( or non-use) of Tamehagane and other known facts of the Japanese Sword were swept under the carpet to create the "Japanese Art Sword Culture" . It was swept under the carpet to convince the American's of the vital and unique cultural significance of the Japanese sword, and Honma was holding the broom. I can understand the motivation back in the 1950's, and I applaud it, but it is 2011 and time to clean house and dust the carpet. Honma can not be cited as the ultimate authority when his public opinions needed to be within the context of the Art Sword Culture creation. Realities should be faced and some old scholarship, myths and distortions will need to be re-written. It's going to happen whether we like it or not. As a friend of mine says "some people just don't want to see the magic go away"

 

Now as far as Kunzan the man is concerned, if the cap fits wear it. He was the captain of the NBTHK ship and it sank with all hands in 1981. The best that can be said is that he was asleep at the rudder. It's a tarnish on Kunzan's career, like it or not. I'm not the one who was stooping low here, what happened happened on Kunzan's watch. It's just more information that many would like to see swept under the carpet...again....and again.

 

As for the Borax debate, the fat lady hasn't sung yet matey! I'll keep you updated, don't you worry!

 

 

cheers,

[Ford Hallam]

Adrian,

 

I didn't say your sources are imaginary. I merely pointed out that if your refer to those sources it doesn't add much to the discussion if you don't identify those sources.

 

Whether or not Dr Honma's scholarly work is correct or not is irrelevant. My objection was to the way you didn't bother to provide any specific criticisms, backed up with your own research. You resorted to calling his academic work into question by referring to an entirely different matter. By all means critique his work but don't lower the debate by attacking the man's integrity. You weaken your own credibility by resorting to that sort of tactic.

 

By your own admission you're evidently "no lightweight" in respect of researching Masamune so I'm certain you'll be able to demonstrate convincingly where Dr Honma went wrong.

[paulb]

Dear Ford and Adrian,

I have avoided joining in this debate for some time but have finally given in to temptation. I lack both the academic qualification or the eloquent argumentative ability of either of you but would make the following points:

Ford,

You have the incredible ability to raise the temperature in any discussion to the point where every post becomes confrontational. I think there is no doubt at all about your talent, your knowledge or your ability to think through a subject. What I fail to understand is why you need to be so confrontational in your approach.

Adrian,

Likewise I applaud your research and academic approach to some very complex issues. I think the trigger to the disagreement is not suggesting that previous academics may have been in error on occassion, that is almost certainly tue, they are after all human. The issue is when those errors are used to attack the integrity of the individuals concerned. Whether meant or not your comment might be (and was by Ford) seen that way.

Recently we saw the retirement of Tanobe san from the NBTHK. He is a man who devoted a major part of his life to studying this subject and on a personal level I have found him helpful beyond measure. Yet within a few months of his leaving there were mutterings about his work, his integrity and honesty.

Should we question earleir theories? yes absolutely and with developments in technology and communication I have no doubt theories will be updated

This does not give us the right to make accusations or comments on the integrity of earlier scholars unless we have solid evidence to back up what is being said.

 

This post has contained a great deal of fascinating material and I have no doubt there will be a lot more to come and it will have value. Please can you take care in making comments about individuals, particularly those who are not able to respond, and avoid the degeneration in to confrontational point scoring that seems to plague this type of discussion.

Regards

Paul

[Adrian S]

G'day Ford,

 

Ok, let's leave Honma alone, old news anyway, my apologies to anyone with a sensitive nature. The point of my research is not to take Honma apart anyway.

 

cheers,

[Ford Hallam]

Paul,

 

you may see it as confrontational but I merely see my approach in these sorts of discussion as being perfectly in line with normal debating procedure.

 

If someone voices an opinion that I disagree with surely I'm entitled to engage with that view and to challenge it? I can assure you my temperature remains quite balmy but if others are offended when their opinions are challenged I'd rather suggest that that remains their problem...don't you think?

 

Anyway, you're probably right. I prefer to keep my thinking on these matters critical and rigorous so I'll keep them to myself in future.

 

regards,

 

Ford

[paulb]

Ford,

I think you opinions are valuable and would regret it if you kept them to yourself, that gains nothing. I think the problem is the medium used for such discussions. I have noticed with my team of people that they take more risks and degenerate in to argument more rapidly in email than they do when talking to each other. I think distance and invisibilty allows us, albeit subconsciously to take greater risks in the way we communicate.

We all do it, it is just that some do it with greater vigour than others.

My intention in posting this was not to stop debate but to ask that people put just a little more thought in to what they are saying before committing to the written word.

Regards

Paul

[IanB]

Gentlemen, I make no pretence of knowing whether Masamune existed or not, nor have I any valid opinion as to whether this expert or that was correct in his attributions, but there is a parallel that might throw a tiny glimmer of light on this subject. It certainly seems as if the great and the good of the Edo period were completely taken in by the sales patter of the Myochin armourers. The latter quite blatantly created a genealogy that included many names of armourers who we know were totally fictitious (and here I include the famous Nobuie), yet daimyo and other powerful people paid handsomely for these fakes and had armour made that incorporated them. Like the Hon'ami the Myochin also issued certificates for pieces of armour, giving their age and values, the daimyo paying handsomely for the service. Were the greats of the Edo period equally gullible when it came to what they were told about swords?

Ian Bottomley

[cabowen]

Were the greats of the Edo period equally gullible when it came to what they were told about swords?

Ian Bottomley

 

Unquestioning respect for authority is a trait long ingrained in the Japanese. As is the desire to maintain appearances and harmony. Let's add the national pastime of making lists of the "top 100" this or that, the worship of brand names, and the tradition of gift giving and you have all the ingredients necessary for a thriving market for fake big name everything....

 

When researching things Japanese, I don't think one will ever get to the kernel at the center without understanding the workings and interplay of the cultural and social spheres and the vital role they play in creating the reality in which these artifacts existed. You simply can not take Japanese swords and look at them as if they existed in a vacuum, or worse yet, a Western ordered reality, if you wish to reach any sort of meaningful conclusions on their place in Japanese history and culture.

 

This also applies to people. Applying Western standards doesn't always fit in the native culture and it would seem rather unfair to make judgments out of the cultural context in which actions were made....

[runagmc]

Ford, I hope you keep posting, cause like you pointed out, most of us need you to relieve us from our ignorance on metalworking. You should document more of your projects and post them here, to help educate us.

 

And I will say this, at least your posts are never boring... :D

[Eric H]

Many Masamune swords have an established history and interesting stories about them.

 

More recent articles from the NBTHK journals:

 

Masamune suriage - 70.3 cm - Kinzogan mei Honami Kao (Koshitsu)

owned by Okura Shukokan

Token Bijutsu No. 620 - 2008

 

...In the book „Koto-meizukushi Taizen“ which was published at the end of the Edo period, it was said that Masamune died in Koei 2 (1343) at the age of 81, and although this is uncertain, we are guessing that he was active at the end of the Kamakura period to the Nanbokucho period.

...and among his tachi, there is one signed Kinoshita Masamune (classified as Juyo Bijutsuhin), and another sword is a ko-tachi with an ubu-nakago (in the 4th issue of this magazine which is classified as Tokubetsu Juyo Bijutsu-

hin. This blade was signed by Mitsutsune in red ink, and these are the only swords on which we have seen this signature. The sword was published by Honami Koshitsu (10th generation), and he decided it was a Masamune sword, and he signed his name in kinzogan style (gold inlay signature). The shape of the mihaba and kissaki is similar to the Meibutsu swords Joizumi and Ishida, and style of this gentle hamon is similar to the Meibutsu Suruga Masamune, and the sharp boshi is similar to the Meibutsu Kanze Masamune...

 

Masamune - 63.9 cm - (Meibutsu Oogaki Masamune) Tokubetsu Juyo Token

Token Bijutsu October 2009

 

...According to the books „Kanchinihon Meizukushi“ and „Noamihon“, Masamune was a student of...

 

...and there is no question that he is a smith who helped established the Japanese sword as an art object. In the Nanbokucho era book „Shinsatsuoorai“, he was listed as a master smith at that time. Today, most of Masamune‘s swords are osuriage, but there are ubu kotachi which have shumei. These swords include a blade owned by the Kisho Tokugawa family in the past, and which received a Tokubetsu Juyo Token classification at the fourth shinsa...

 

Mumei Den Masamune - 74 cm - (Meibutsu Musashi Masamune)

Owned by: NBTHK (gift from Fujisawa Genyu and Fujisawa Kazuyuki)

 

...has a somewhat large kissaki. This katana is listed as the „Musashi Masamune" in an Edo period sword book the "Kyoho Meibutsu cho".

...but Masamune has a very few blades with a wide mihaba and a long kissaki, so in light of this fact, we need more investigations and studies of this katana in the future...

 

To be correct in another recent publication in the NBTHK Journal, October 2009...but Sadamune has no ubu long sword in existence today, so some people doubt the existence of Sadamune, just as for Masamune.

 

As long as „some people“ believe to be well hidden in the anonymity, it is better to ignore such statements...they only cause disturbance.

 

What do YOU believe...has Masamune existed regarding all the many old documents...or do you deny these evidences as chimeras by invention of, let us say "some people"?

 

Eric

[DirkO]

Some extra text from the same journal (issue 633, October 2009):

 

... same people doubt the existence of Sadamune, just as for Masamune. But in the Shinsatu Oorai, a book from the Nanbokucho period (the writer was suppose to be Sogan-hoshi, and hoshi means a priest) it is stated that recently working master sword smiths were Rai Kunitoshi, Kuniyuki, Shintogo (Kunimitsu), Tosaburou (Yukimitsu), Goronyudo(Masamune), and Masamune’s son Hikoshirou (Sadamune). In an early Muromachi book the Shakuso Oorai, the same comment is present. Also the book Sogo Daisoshi, written in Taiei 8 ( 1528), which was supposedly written by Ise Sadayori Sogo, Masamune and Sadamune’s names are listed, and later the book Tensho-hon and many other sword books listed these names.

[runagmc]

Guys, I don't think any of us presume to be able to give any SOLID EVIDENCE of Masamunes existence or

non-existence... at least I don't. That's my whole point. The stories are INCONSISTENT, and impossible to draw SOLID CONCLUSIONS from, as far as I can tell. More importantly, just because a book or a person says something is FACT does not make it FACT unless there is INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE to back it up. And this goes for ALL history, not just Masamune.

[Adrian S]

G'day to all,

 

4th issue of this magazine which is classified as Tokubetsu Juyo Bijutsuhin.

 

Never heard of "Tokubetsu" Juyo Bijutsuhin before, am I missing something? I wonder if it is the same kodachi as the Sano "Masamune" exhibition sword #20 which doesn't list a designation. The Sano exhibit kodachi has been passed down in the Kii Tokugawa family. I have an old book at home that shows a very small photo of another Masamune kodachi but scant information.

 

I have an oshigata of the Musashi Masamune, I thought it looked closer to Sadamune in sugata, but can't tell much else without seeing it.

 

 

cheers,

[Eric H]

I have an oshigata of the Musashi Masamune, I thought it looked closer to Sadamune in sugata, but can't tell much else without seeing it.

 

I mentioned the interesting stories in relation to important swords. I add what is known about the „Musashi Masamune“.

 

There are many references to old sword directories. The fact that the Japanese have registered their swords and even more thousands of smiths with their names and signatures and life dates is, I think, unique in the world.

Thanks to Willis M. Hawley for his books.

 

Adrian, could you please show a pic of the oshigata.

 

The Musashi Masamune

 

Eric

[reinhard]

Leave your armchairs and check reality.

 

reinhard

[Adrian S]

G'day to all,

 

Here is a scan of number "#4 Hocho Masamune" from Tsuguhira's oshigatas. Has anybody got any more info on this one, anything will help.

 

Eric, nice recent info on the Musashi Masamune, looks like I'm not the only one who thought it looked later :D . I'll scan Tsuguhira's oshigata tonight, did that NBTHK article come with an oshigata? Does anyone have it?

 

Reinhard, can you clarify that comment please?

 

cheers,

[Wah]

G'day to all,

 

Here is a scan of number "#4 Hocho Masamune" from Tsuguhira's oshigatas. Has anybody got any more info on this one, anything will help.

 

Eric, nice recent info on the Musashi Masamune, looks like I'm not the only one who thought it looked later :D . I'll scan Tsuguhira's oshigata tonight, did that NBTHK article come with an oshigata? Does anyone have it?

 

Reinhard, can you clarify that comment please?

 

cheers,

Taking into account the method in which Tsuguhira made his oshigata of Meito, it is my opinion this is his translation of how he saw the Sukashi Hocho Masamune.

The hamon in the tip seems to match.

Stephen T

[Adrian S]

G'day Stephen and all,

 

There is no doubt that the Sukashi Hocho Masamune is very similar to this one from Tsuguhira's oshigata. But it is definately not the same sword. This sword has Bonji and what looks to be a Kinpun mei, the Sukashi Masamune does not. Tsuguhira's oshigata are actually very accurate. Stephen, I know you have this book, look at the Sadamune on page 135, I have seen this sword recently and it is shown in the Sano Museum catalouge "MEIBUTSU - treasured Japanese swords ". Tsuguhira's oshigata is identical and perfect in every small detail. Tsuguhira was a swordsmith and the clarity of the lines on his oshigata show me he had an eye for detail as all good swordsmiths have. Over the holidays I will been spend some time studying Tsuguhira's oshigata and comparing them the surviving swords, so far I've found him accurate, but will give you a full report later.

 

STOP THE PRESSES!!

 

Looking at some more of the known swords, some are indeed different in some details, others like Fudo for example are perfect! Looking at Kogarasumaru in Tsuguhira shows a mei, with a date! The question is why? The easy answer is that some of the swords Tsuguhira had in his hands, first hand, others may well be re-drawn from older book. This is a possibility, I do remember saying that the Kamakura Showa date for Masamune could be in doubt as we only have an old oshigata to verify it. On the flip side, the insidious answer is, someone switched the blades! Thinking about War era Japan, that may not be as absurd as it sounds, like hidding the family jewels.

 

cheers for now,