Awataguchi Kunimitsu Vs Shintogo Kunimitsu

[Caleb Mok]

Before I begin,

 

I am a complete noob; this topic has probably been discussed before.  I did search "awataguchi shintogo kunimitsu", but not only did that not produce any IMHO satisfying results, i would like to ask some more-current perspective on the subjects.  Again, i am complete noob: everything i naively presume about these two/one smith is based ENTIRELY on a very, very ~casual~ reading of Darcy's wonderful contribution on his website--and i cannot thank him enough. (And i say casual as in, i did not read it whilst eating ramen noodles; i mean casual as in, if you are serious i.e. the opposite of casual, you should read a book not a website)

 

Okay, my question:

 

Can somebody tell me WHY someone would think they are two or one smith?  If the work style is so similar, does it really ~matter~ if they are different people?  If we are interested in the formation of let's say, the Rai school or Soshu, is it not enough to say, "Okay, so here is Awataguchi Kunimitsu and his stuff looks like....this (pointing to Darcy's website)...And here is a Rai Kuniyuki and his stuff looks like...this (pointing to Darcy's website).......And here is a Takagi Sadamune that, although may be Nidai, ~probably~ looks like shodai enough and it looks like...this." In order to make a very casual, noob-generalization as "So this ~could be~ from what Rai and Soshu departed from, and the result of the departures are what ~could be~ these"

 

So, how would an experienced Nihonto scholar ~generally~ describe the "biggest" difference between early Soshu from early Rai (apart from the Bizen influence? Sounds kinda theoretical to a noob like me, can you explain in shapes/colors/etc?).  I lost my copy of The Connoisseurs'...

 

Thanks,

Caleb

[paulb]

Caleb

Your question opens a vast subject which sword scholars have debated more or less since the study of swords began. Firstly you must remember that the idea of 5 traditions, The Gokaden, is a relatively new concept aimed at putting order in to research and study.

A simplistic overview

1. Early manufacture was carried out in Yamato (mainly for temples) Yamashiro (for Nobility) and Bizen for everyone. The emperor Gotoba brought together those considered the best to help him learn about sword making in the 13th century. Two of those smiths, one from Yamashiro Awataguchi and one from Bizen were then ordered to Kamakura by the incumbent Shogun and formed the beginnings of Soshu work. Later a Yamato Tegai Smith Kaneuji studied in Sagami (Soshu) and then went off to form the Mino school.

2. Movement of smiths was very frequent and between traditions (which did not formerly exist) so you see many different influences coming together in different schools

3. More specifically in answer to your question. For a long time and maybe it still is there has been a debate as to whether Awataguchi Kunimitsu and Shintogo Kunimitsu were one or two smiths. Awataguchi Kunimitsu was the son of Norikuni and either father or brother of perhaps the greatest maker of tanto Awataguchi Yoshimitsu. Shintogo Kunimitsu was contemporary to Yoshimitsu and his work has a great deal of Awataguchi influence. Compared to later Soshu work it is very subtle and quiet and the quality of the jigane is superb. If it is the same man then it meant he moved from Kyoto to kamaukura fairly late in life and had a very long working life. He also changed his work style late in life. More likely he was another perosn (possibly related) whose work was founded in the Awataguchi tradition.

4. Does it matter? well from a quality point of view not much, the work of both smiths is about as good as you can get. Where it is interesting is when trying to understand the development and changes within manufacture during this formative period.

 

In the early days of Soshu there was a lot of similarity between their work and Awataguchi (not Rai) As the school developed the hada became more prominent, losing the very tight ko-itame and becoming a combination of itame and nagare. In addition forging at higher temperatures created larger and more prolific nie. The work became altogether more exuberant.

If you look at very early work from Kyushu from Yamashiro (Munchika) and ko-Bizen (Tomonari) ko-Senjuin etc you will see very little difference in shape structure and hamon, there are differences but they are more to do with colur of steel than forging features. characterisitc features developed as schools matured.

[Caleb Mok]

Wow i am thoroughly greatly-satisfied and blown away with your comprehensive i.e. touching-all-relevant works yet jaw-droppingly clear explanation to my question.  Thank you!  Goes to show for me that, yet again like so many times, Nihonto is so, so satisfying to learn.  I like them glittery nie and colors  ...but more and more now i am absolutely addicted to reading words...of not even glittery nie and colors, but "merely" of things that ~happened~, dates, places, history