Smiths

[Jean]

Does anyone know for sure (has evidences) if it has existed smiths who did not forge in their life time either tanto or wakizashi or katana?

 

Could a smith have specialized in just one or two types of blades?

[John A Stuart]

Sometimes we read, "There exists no tanto extant by this smith". Does that mean he never made any or none have survived? John

[kusunokimasahige]

In my view these things are not set.

 

When a tanto by a certain smith is non existant, it could well be that the smith at one time made one, but it is not known or did not survive.

 

Not every smith signed all his work. There are enough mumei examples in existence to prove this.

 

What sword types any smith made is not always clear, especially since we do not have contemporary inventory lists

of/by swordsmiths themselves.

 

Smiths also took on apprentices. Who knows what they made.

 

Sometimes smiths made kitchen knives or even axes, gardening tools, shovels, woodworking materials and what have you. They did not sign these. [Addendum]

 

We probably will never know.

 

KM

[Markus]

Sometimes we read, "There exists no tanto extant by this smith". Does that mean he never made any or none have survived? John

 

I always understood this as more like a kind of "warning". I.e. in the sense when all the meikan agree that there are no tanto or whatever blades extant of a smith and you stumble over one, be cautious.

[cabowen]

I agree with Marcus as this has always been the explanation I have received. If you come across a tanto signed by someone with no other known signed examples, even if it matches the work of the smith in every way, you may well not received a kantei sho.

 

It is likely that some smiths working from early Taisho/Showa never made anything but tanto or katana, with no wakizashi. It is likely that we can look at the records kept by the Yasukuni smiths and see that some of them never made anything there but daito. It is not known what they may have made outside the Jinja....

 

It is an interesting question but one we unfortunately we may never be able to answer definitely.

[george trotter]

It is likely that some smiths working from early Taisho/Showa never made anything but tanto or katana, with no wakizashi.

 

Very likely, because none were needed...a good reason to not find them...it is possible that in previous times too, such as Kamakura when the principle weapons were sword, tanto and bow there were smiths who never made a wakizashi. I am no expert, but maybe a smith like Masamune, working within (say) 1250-1330 period, did not make wakizashi because they were little used or not used? I recall seeing pics of his swords and tanto, but don't recall any made as wakizashi. Maybe he is one of these?

(or maybe I am embarrassingly wrong again?)

[cabowen]

That's it exactly George- smiths made what was being used at the time. Until wakizashi became popular, can't imagine much demand for wakizashi!....Once the daisho was outlawed, again, no real demand. There was always a demand for tanto and daito, though in Shinto times, there were fewer tanto made as would be expected. After the Haito-Rei, the few smiths that survived did so by making mostly tanto until the war demand kicked in, then mostly daito were made. Though tanto continued to be made by the better smiths in response to custom orders for mamori-gatana. I have seen a few wakizashi made during the war years by gendai tosho, including Kasama Shigetsugu, Tsukamoto Okimasa, Horii Toshihide and a few others, but these are extremely rare.

[Jean]

Thanks John. From what I have read, I have noticed that Japanese Nihonto scholars never say "never" because there are thousand of exceptions.

 

Anybody else has ever encountered some counter examples?

[cabowen]

Thanks John. From what I have read, I have noticed that Japanese Nihonto scholars never say "never" because there are thousand of exceptions.

 

That's so people who sit and read sword books all day, every day, can't nit pick them to death.

 

What do you mean by "counter example"?

[Jean]

Sorry for my wording, Chris. I meant: does someone has read in a Japanese book (nihonto Koza, any

Meikan) sentence like : this smith has never forged wakizashi or tanto.

 

It is to be noticed that the word "extant" is very used (in Japanese translation) both ways:

 

- extant works exist

- there is no extant work

 

I think that wakizashi are the blades which are the most likely not to have been forged by a given smith.

 

Example: taking into account the number of tanto forged during Muromachi, should a Muromachi smith not have forged tanto, do you think it would be mentionned in Meikan or other books " there is no extant tanto work by this smith"?

[cabowen]

I have never seen this kind of absolute statement concerning a smith- "never made X". How can we really ever know with such certainty? "Nothing extant" to me simply means we know of no known examples at the time of writing. Doesn't mean they weren't made or that something might not turn up at some point...

[w.y.chan]

I've seen a couple of WW2 wakizashi by top gendai tosho both were special order commemorative, seems like they were never made for practical purposes but as gifts.

[Jean]

Thanks Chris, it is exactly the conclusion I have reached :D

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Jean, je sais à qui tu fais allusion, si tu nous donnais le nom de ce fameux forgeron...

[Jean]

I did not think to a smith in particular Jacques but I have noticed that Nihonto Japanese experts did often use the word "extant" in both ways and I expect to find this fact mentioned for Shinto smiths concerning wakizashi as well as sue Koto smiths concerning tanto/Katana as it is noticeable in a given period taking into account Nihonto environment.

 

It is exceptional as to be noticed and mentionned by expert that a smith has no extant existing category of blade at a period when thousand were forged, BUT in any case I have never seen a Japanese sword scholar saying/writting that such smith has never forged any katana, it is even truer concerning tanto as naturally a beginner smith will begin by forging tanto before tackling katana.

 

This has also its limit as I don't know in fact if some Shinto smiths are mentionned as having no extant existing tanto.

 

In fact, if no Japanese Nihonto expert can and wants to affirm that a smith has never produce a kind of sword, it means nobody can and henceforth the conclusion is that's a given smith is supposed to have had the opportunity of forging all kind of blades.

 

There are still unknown fields in Nihonto. I had a few years ago a signed niji mei Mino tachi - Kaneyoshi- suguba (15th century) submitted to NBTHK shinsa which came back unpapered (not rejected), just stating that the smith was unknown.

 

It is probable that in the same way that mumei blades or o suriage ones have been attributed to other smith.

 

If we take into account the number of swords still being registered nowadays (torokusho), I am sure there will be surprises in the future. Nothing is impossible taking into account there are hundred thousand swords still existing and probably hundred thousand swords not registered.

 

That is the reason why the word "extant" is used by Japanese Nihonto experts. None of them wants to affirm something about a smith knowing they have not seen all existing blades. I have also noticed that when they always mention "upto now" or when they give an opinion it is always in reference to what they have seen. There are a lot of examples in the Nihonto Koza.

 

Now Jacques if you have examples of smiths never having produced any category of swords, please, feel free to mention it and to some "extant" quote your sources.

 

Concerning nengo absence on naga mei Oei Bizen blades, I did some research and as I know a few NMB members, one was kind enough to show me an Oei Juyo blade with nagamei but without nenki. If you search Nihonto Zufu, year 1961 or 1963, you will find a Juyo Oei Bizen signed "Bishu osafune Yasumitsu" without nenki, BTW, this one is known by several NMB members. :D

 

The Yasumitsu can be found on page 66 of the JSSUS publication Art & the Sword Volume 1.

 

In the Nihonto Koza, the author states that "concerning Oei Bizen blades with a naga mei, there is always a nenki". He is wrong, which shows:

 

- what was true yesterday can be wrong today.

 

I shall post some documentation tomorrow, my friend gave me the greenlight to do it. Btw, the nagasa of this baby is around 90cm.

[Surfson]

I have encountered many well made swords that are signed and for which there is no listing in the Nihonto Meikan or Hawley's. My belief in these cases is that none of the sword scholars and documentarians has ever encountered a sword made by those particular smiths.

 

I believe that the sword study world has done a good, but not a perfect, job in documenting the sword makers that have worked over the last eight or nine centuries. But there is still much that has not been accounted for.

 

Most descendants of samurai, like the samurai themselves, probably paid little attention to the students of the history of swordmaking. I'm sure that if the NBTHK had every sword on the planet in a large warehouse that they would find all sorts of things that were never known.

 

Getting to the original point, even saying "none extant" is presumptuous that we know of the history of all swords out there. "No tanto are known to have been made by this smith" would be the most scientifically appropriate statement I would think. Having read the thread again, it seems that most of us agree that we really don't know the answer to this question with any authority at all!

[Jean]

Here they are as they were sent to me, a big big thank to the owner. For people wanting more information, feel free to find the book. Sorry I was not able to crop the files because I don't know how to use this Windows 8

JeanYasumitsuFile1.pdf

JeanYasumitsuFile2 (1).pdf

JeanYasumitsuFile3.pdf