Japanese Old Sword Database

[Tcat]

Incredible...and thanks very much.

[Toryu2020]

Terrific work - thank you

[O koumori]

Thank you for this amazing contribution Jussi!

[MJS]

This is utterly amazing! Just the other day I spent hours trying to find examples from a particular smith, currently published on web sites of museums, dealers, or NMB. But aside from the investment of time (googling and writing smart AI prompts), this was still limited to current listings. In your database I found several examples I had not found, and it took all of 5 seconds. 

 

I have not checked everything in my very small collection but there is at least one that I think I can contribute.

 

Jessi, would it be useful for you if we submit candidates for your database in a particular format, e.g. XLS or CSV with the column headings of the file you shared?

 

[Rawa]

Bump for peps who dont get it yet.

[Rawa]

@Brian boss could you pin this thread?

[Brian]

Download is in the downloads section, so it is always available

[Rawa]

Oh ok. But I thought that if someone would like to get his sword listed it is a place to make a statement here.

[klee]

Hi @Jussi Ekholm this is a pretty amazing and insane piece of work you have here and I cant believe im just coming around to reading it.

 

I wanted to make sure im reading this correctly. I own the sword circled in red and based on the document, this is the ONLY signed katana by Moritaka pre 1450 that you ve come across ??? Seemed kind of insane and cool to me if that is the case 

 

Thank you as always 

- Kevin

[Jussi Ekholm]

That is correct or how I think currently. I feel the Kongōbyōe school is bit problematic as there are extremely few signed old items and dated old items are like unicorns. 

 

There are the Moritaka tantō that is Jūyō 23 and it is In my opinion most likely dated either 1359 or 1369 but one crucial character is missing, and there is the 1370 dated Reisen Sadamori tantō that is Jūyō Bijutsuhin.

 

I know there can be different opinions about the origins and timelines etc. However for me Ko-Kongōbyōe = Nanbokuchō as that is where I see the school starting, and Kongōbyōe = Muromachi. So far in my search I have not been able to find a signed tachi by Kongōbyōe smith that would be Nanbokuchō period. NBTHK does not often specify the generations of Moritaka smiths in the appraisal paper, to me that is huge bummer... I do feel this particular Moritaka could be an Early Muromachi one possibly from Ōei. I might have been too critical for many of the signed Moritaka katana I have seen online as to me they have seemed like later Muromachi work, so I haven't included them. Of course I am no authority at all but I needed to draw a line somewhere when I gather items, as there are lots of lineages that continue during Muromachi period. I would have to include so many more items by those smiths. And as NBTHK or other organizations might not identify the generations on appraisals it does not make it any easier.

 

Sometimes it is problematic for schools or lineages that used same signatures over a long period of time. One of my personal favorites 宝寿 (Hōju) gets very often described as late Heian period by sword dealers. However in my opinion there are only very few Early Kamakura period items by the school and majority of old works are from late Kamakura - Nanbokuchō periods. Now as the school continued into Muromachi period using the same 2 characters it can be tricky to identify the age. So I mostly just refer to expert opinions.

[klee]

Thank again @Jussi Ekholm 🙏🙏🙏

 

And yes @flemming dated this sword to the 1409 Moritaka so you are probably correct on your assumption.

 

I almost passed on this sword bc I was looking for an Ubu katana with the sotoba gata but the inclusion of the school name in the mei felt very unusual so I went for it. I had no idea how rare it was among Kongo Hyoe swords