Is there another Shimazu Masamune?

[MassiveMoonHeh]

Is the sword known as the meibutsu, Shimazu Masamune in the Kyoto National Museum the real Shimazu Masamune?

 

Kyushu Sangyo University professor objects: "It's in Nagoya, not the Kyoto National Museum."

 

This article by Keisuke Wakabayashi appeared yesterday and is causing a bit of a stir in the Japanese Sword Community.

 

The Kyoto National Museum is said to own the meibutsu sword known as the "Shimazu Masamune." This sword is said to have been presented to Emperor Komei by the 14th Shogun Tokugawa Iemochi during the late Edo period.

 

Professor Hiromichi Yoshihara of Kyushu Sangyo University (Japanese medieval history) however disagrees and is raising serious objections, claiming that the sword with this history is a different sword located in Nagoya.

 

Because the whereabouts of the Shimazu Masamune was unknown for a an extended period of time in its history there is considerable uncertainty to its authentisty and as such the progress of this discussion is attracting alot of attention.

 

The Shimazu Masamune is the work of the famous Sōshū swordsmith Masamune, a master craftsman representative of the late Kamakura and Nanboku-cho periods. That both swords are made by Masamune is not in question. Both are of exceptional quality.

 

It is said that this sword was presented to Princess Kazunomiya, Emperor Komei's sister, when she married Iemochi, but its whereabouts were unknown for a long time after the Meiji Restoration.

 

In 2014, the Kyoto National Museum announced that a sword donated to the museum by an Osaka businessman was "highly likely to be the Shimazu Masamune."

 

As evidence, the museum cited that the length of the sword matches that of Shimazu Masamune listed in the "Kyoho Meibutsucho," a list of famous swords compiled by order of the 8th Shogun, Tokugawa Yoshimune, and that the blade pattern closely resembles a reproduction of a drawing in the "Tsuguhira Oshigata," a document compiling famous swords of the Tokugawa family.

 

At the time of the announcement, the Kyoto National Museum stated that "the exact circumstances are unknown," but introduced its history by quoting the writings of Takase Uko, a leading expert on swords from the Meiji and Taisho periods.

 

Professor Yoshihara points out that the Tsugihira oshigata lacks documentary credibility and does not match the characteristics of Shimazu Masamune swords, as described in the Hon'ami family's "Hon'ami Family Records," which are responsible for appraising swords for the Shogunate.

 

He argues that the sword owned by the Token World Foundation (Nagoya City), which operates the Nagoya Sword Museum, is a real Shimazu Masamune sword with ties to Emperor Komei.

 

He cites as evidence that the sword's shape matches the characteristics described in the Hon'ami Family Records, and that the decoration of the sword's mounting (scabbard and other external fittings) matches the characteristics of a "Masamune" sword described by Seta Norimi, a scholar who served Emperor Komei, as a gift presented to Princess Kazunomiya upon her marriage.

 

Akira Ishii, a senior specialist researcher at The Japanese Sword Museum (Tokyo), says, "Logically speaking, Yoshihara's theory is worth considering."  

 

On the other hand, the Kyoto National Museum maintains that "there is still a very high probability that the sword listed as Shimazu Masamune in the Kyoho Meibutsucho (a catalog of famous swords from the Kyoho era) is actually one of our museum's swords."

 

What do you think? What do you trust?

 

The descriptions from the Hon'Ami records or the Kyoho Meibutsu Cho and Tsuguhira Oshigata?

 

There are definitely two different swords in play for the title of Shimazu Masamune in the two sets of records.

 

Professor Yoshihara appears to have done a lot of study into this subject and appears confident in his findings.

 

Gonna be interesting to see where this one lands. The Kyohaku is not going down without a fight.

[Rivkin]

The problem is slightly more general.

Aside from a handful of shrines and alike, there are no records of collections pre 1500-1550 or so.

The named swords in particular often come with a legend or textual description completely disconnected and abstract with respect to any existing objects and on the other hand - specific objects given names with no pre 1500 or even pre 1700 history of them actually being associated with one.

There were many cases when meito until Meiji was shared by 2, 3 even more than 10 blades, and then quietly one was selected by the community as "the one".  And by means of selection it receives pre 1550 history which it might actually never had.

[MassiveMoonHeh]

5 minutes ago, Rivkin said:

there are no records of collections pre 1500-1550 or so.

This lines up with the creation of the Origami papers by the 8th Generation of Hon'ami. Until this point as you mention sword histories were lost due to their "unimportance." Sword smith names appear to also perhaps be less important than they are today.

 

This all changed when the Hon'ami created the idea of Swords being collectables and gave them values.

 

Similar to the current collectables market of today. People spent insane amounts of money on objects that garnered a few coins previous because now it came with a paper that called it an authentic Masamune, Yoshimitsu or Gō Yoshihiro - better yet if it came with a name.

 

The Daimyos and Shoguns suddenly craved these status symbols and begged, borrowed and stole from their enemies and even their own vassals to ensure they landed up with the best of the best in their collections. And yes many swords with "great histories" suddenly appeared in multiple collections.

 

The Hon'ami 8th generation are the reason we are in this game today. The humble Origami paper was literally the game changer.

[eternal_newbie]

Incidentally, there are several meito that share a name, the most famous being the three Hocho Masamunes. There are also at least two Ima Aranami Ichimonji blades, and more Mikazukis than you can shake a stick at.

[Jussi Ekholm]

I am lucky I don't care for Masamune  I have seen the one at Nagoya but not the KNM sword.

 

I made a complilation of the images Tsuguhira Oshigata - KNM - Nagoya

 

 

And while these old oshigata books might not be 100% accurate here is an example of Nobukuni from the same oshigata book that is currently at Tokugawa Art Museum.

 

[Takezo]

Would the Hon’ami have been collectible influencers if they were born into the time of social media? I can only imagine their YouTube channels.

[Rivkin]

9 hours ago, Jussi Ekholm said:

I made a complilation of the images Tsuguhira Oshigata - KNM - Nagoya

 

That seems to go back to the discussion whether oshigata are some copy-rubbing or primarily drawings.

Drawings, and often rather substandard ones.

[MassiveMoonHeh]

10 hours ago, Jussi Ekholm said:

I made a complilation of the images Tsuguhira Oshigata - KNM - Nagoya

Geez, if their defence includes the Tsuguhira Oshigata then the Kyohaku appear to be on a very shaky foundations.