neo1022

Excellent suggestions. Do you know if Bill Miller is active here? Thanks!

Yes, I’ve been able to track down the original Japanese source for this claim, as well as an interesting genealogy for the Ijichi family line (I.e., the Masayoshi line) which, while not shedding light on swordsmithing, does establish them as key Shimazu retainers since the 1300s, as well as hinting at their deeper roots. Will share more once I’ve assimilated the info. Thanks!

Well, this is not what I hoped for with this thread…

While looking further into the question I posted above, I came across an Izumi City historical leaflet that describes the training of Uehara Masayoshi (shodai "Satsuma Masayoshi") as follows: “At first he studied swordsmithing in the Takada tradition (Ōita City). Next, he learned the Naminohira tradition (Kagoshima City) under either Yamato no Kami Yasuyuki or Yasuchika. Furthermore, in the first year of Kyōhō (1716), he 'entered the gate' of the famous Sōshū tradition swordsmith of Satsuma, Maruta Masafusa. He made all three traditions entirely his own.” 「はじめ高田伝（大分市）について刀鍛冶を習い、ついで波平伝（鹿児島市）を大和守安行または安周から学び、さらに享保元年（1716）には、薩摩の相州伝名刀匠丸田正房の門に入り、三伝ことごとく自分のものとした。」 This passage describes a three-stage apprenticeship beginning in the Takada-den of Bungo (Mino-influenced Kyūshū style), progressing to the Naminohira-den (Yamato-derived Satsuma style), and culminating with Satsuma Sōshū training under Maruta Masafusa (so, here's the synthesis of Mino, Yamato, and Sōshū influences!). The reference to early Takada-den training—which I haven’t seen anywhere else—suggests that the Bungo Takada school provided the shodai Masayoshi’s technical foundation prior to the Naminohira and Sōshū training that directly shaped his line’s late-Edo Satsuma work. On the Naminohira side, the sequence Maruta Izu no Kami Masafusa, 2nd gen ->Yamato no Kami Yasuyuki -> Yasukuni -> Yasuchika is standard; given Yasuchika’s period of activity (1704–1741), he looks to be the likelier Naminohira teacher for the shodai (the leaflet’s “Yasuyuki or Yasuchika” probably reflects chronology confusion). As for “entering the gate” of Maruta Masafusa, that can only refer to the 3rd-gen Maruta Sōzaemon Masafusa (1681–1716), not the Izu no Kami Masafusa (presumably 2nd-gen, 1658–1681) suggested in Sesko’s genealogy. I suspect common claim that ”Masayoshi” trained with Masachika applies to the nidai or perhaps sandai generations. The pathway appears to be from Maruta Sōzaemon Masafusa (1681–1716) -> Mondo no Shō Masakiyo (1664–1730) -> Masachika (dated blades 1735, 1743). I wonder if there’s any primary documentation supporting this link, which represents a second Masayoshi line connection to Maruta Sōzaemon Masafusa via Mondo no Shō Masakiyo and his son… This does seem to reconcile the confusing data I presented in my original post. I feel like I’ve either figured something out or fabricated a complete fiction. Problem is, I can’t tell which… Any insights, thoughts, or comments are welcome...

Good suggestion to contact Marcus directly. But I'm also an optimist -- perhaps a Satsuma guru is lurking on here...

Hi all, I’m trying to clarify the training of the shodai Masayoshi (正良)—founder of what Sesko refers to as the "Satsuma Masayoshi school." I’m interested in understanding how these lineage-specific influences shaped what we think of as the late-Edo Satsuma style as exemplified in the work of sandai Masayoshi/Masayuki and related smiths. Sesko’s genealogy lists the shodai Masayoshi as trained under Naminohira Yasuchika and Izu no Kami Masafusa. That pairing would explain a blend of local Naminohira / Yamato-leaning traits with the Mino / Sōshū infusion tracing to Masafusa and his father, Ujifusa. The Masafusa link seems very well supported, but I’m not able to find any non-Sesko support for the Yasuchika connection. If anyone has additional information on this, I’d appreciate it… I have also found many online sources that claim "[Satsuma] Masayoshi" was trained by Masachika (which I suppose would then also trace Satsuma’s Sōshū-leaning tendencies to Mondo no Shō Masakiyo). There is no way they’re referring to the sandai Masayoshi, since he would have been quite young (~8 yrs old) when Masakiyo died. Since Masachika is roughly contemporaneous with the both the shodai and nidai Masayoshi, might this be a later-generation apprenticeship (i.e., shodai Masayoshi trained under Naminohira Yasuchika and/or Izu no Kami Masafusa while nidai apprenticed under Masachika as well as his father)? In other words, an original lineage substrate of Naminohira / Yamato + Mino / Sōshū training, with subsequent Sōshū-den reinforcement via Masachika. I’m sure I’m missing something basic here, but I don’t have enough sources to sort this out (assuming they even exist…). Can anyone help clarify these questions for me, or suggest a solid reference? Many thanks!

Is machiokuri generally a deal-breaker for Juyo? Any sense of whether suriage or machiokuri is weighed more heavily (i.e., is an ubu with machiokuri more likely to pass than a suriage blade)? It seems some level of re-machi is necessary on most swords with anything but the most minor of suriage, but minor machiokuri can occur as a result of a changed tsuba, new tsuka, etc. Is that right? I've always associated the two quite closely, assuming suriage meant re-machi, but not vice versa.

Is Mike V still working in Pasadena? If so, could someone DM me his contact info? Much appreciated!

Guido, Thanks for the quick reply! Good to know that the nakago has indeed been cut down. Any other thoughts on the blade? Does it look consistent with the mei and the era (Kanbun)? And from your comments, it sounds like you think the tsuka and saya may not be an original pairing--could you say more about that? Thanks, Kevin Groark

Hi All, I'm new to the forum, and am considering the purchase of a largish wakizashi (NBTHK Hozon Kanteisho; Mei: Chikugo no kami Fujiwara Kane(nori), Shinto circa Kanbun 1661-1673). One concern I have is that the saya is significantly longer than the blade (by about 7 inches)--but the tsuka and saya are both said to fit the blade perfectly. The nagasa is about 21 inches, but the saya is almost 30 inches. Looks like a nice uchigatana koshirae that was later paired with a wakizashi. The blade does not appear to have been cut down. Any opinion on this? Were waks ever mounted in katana koshirae? I've read about this, but the likelihood of this being an example of such a practice (rather than a later matchup) seems slim. Does this affect the value? Any thoughts on the blade and koshirae in general would be much appreciated. I'm especially interested in getting a translation for the sayagaki... Asking ~2600 - fair value? Follow the links to see the images: Pics of the koshirae http://www.ethnografica.com/pics/1.JPG Pics of the blade http://www.ethnografica.com/pics/2.JPG Pics of the blade and koshirae together http://www.ethnografica.com/pics/3.JPG Thanks!