Henry Wilson

Ford hits a home run once again!

Thanks Guido. That is confusing. I feel a bit like this:

The round variety of daikon is known as Sakurajima daikon from the Kagoshima area: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakurajima_daikon During the Edo Period the area was part of the Satsuma domain, ruled by the Shimazu family. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_ ... Prefecture Daikon, along with a lot of other foodstuffs, were believed to have medicinal properties. Also the round shape looks a bit like a helmet and as you all know the kanji 大根 means large root. Putting these facts together and we have a theme for some kodogu I suppose. I especially like daikon in miso soup.

"Uchigatana Goshirae" by the National Museum Tokyo would be a worthwhile project. I have a copy of the translation myself but there are not many available and count myself very lucky.

Very interesting posts Ford. I especially love the pictures you are using to illustrate points. As a side note, does anyone know the origins of the inome / heart shape sukashi? What is it's significance? It seems to only appear in the kind of tachi style tsuba listed above. Any thoughts would be appreciated if it is not too much of a thread hijack. Thanks everyone.

Or a black and white fish.... :lol:

Thanks again Ford. Junichi, The menuki are of sword-beans (natamame 鉈豆) and are made of pure gold in irebori. I am posting from my iPhone so hope the picture is ok.

Hi Ford Thank you for the very interesting post. The tsuba indeed looks more like dragonflies rather than butterflies, once it has been pointed out. The close-up of the Kasen koshirae is very interesting. I have always wanted to see a picture of such an angle. I never knew the seppadai was larger than the seppa. I always thought the correct and proper way was a well fitting seppa to seppadai. A very interesting exception to that rule of thumb. (I am surprised no-one is saying that it is a mismatched tsuba added later by someone who doesn't know better. ) I wonder is such a seppa to seppadai arrangement the norm for all Kasen style koshirae that came after?

I think it is understandable if an artist becomes over-zealous considering what s/he has invested in the whatever art they pursue. As for the collector, it is a wonder where the passion comes from. To me for this discussion, the intentions of a critic is what nobility is all about. Is the critic trying to explain something for the greater good, or make a point that is self-serving?

Thanks David. Call it a holy slip of the toungue...

Hi Hoanh Interesting tsuba. Some candid thoughts below. I notice a passing similarity to the double ring halo 二重円相光 seen on many Buddhist statues starting from around the end of the Nara period. The double round halo, represents the light emitted by the Buddha, as emphasized by the rays surrounding the lotus cushion on which the head and body rests. This tsuba seems perfectly round and the execution of the beads and the vine style carving brings to mind detail of statues such as the Dainichi Nyorai in Enjo-ji in Nara. Incidently, the halo also reminds me of old mirrors and some Kagamishi tsuba. However the beads on the tsuba are probably rosary beads called nenju　念珠 and are used for Buddhist prayer and invocation. They are usually associated with a chant called 'shoumyou nenbutsu‘ The number and shape of the beads varies in different representations of it and are usually found as attributes to the Thousand-armed Kannon and other Buddhist deities. If we look at the Seated Fukukensaku Kannon in Kofuku-ji in Nara, there is a similarity between the halo and the vine work seen on the other tsuba. Vine work is believed to have arrived in China with Buddhism via the Silk Road and is very commonly seen in Buddhist art work. During the Tang dynasty, floral patterns set on vines quickly became a popular motif and the weaving of the vine represents an unbroken and never-ending wish as well as completeness. Experts differ on the origin of the vine. Some believe it originated from the Greeks, a style developed by their architects and it travelled from the Mediterranean via central Asia. Others believe that a honeysuckle vine pattern entered China via India. It probably entered Japan along with Buddhism and there is also stylistically a similarity to some Ezo fittings which could have originated in the Kyoto (Kinai) area, but that is another story. I hope this information helps and is of interest.

This has gotten weird. I am with Chris Bowen on this one. It might be because of my 15 years or so of living in Japan. This is me on the left: I wonder where it comes from and shake my head in despair.....

Whatever.

Then why did it receive papers?

How would you be so sure that it is authentic? You can't be there at the time the piece was made to verify yourself. You need to compare it with something else that you think is real and how do you know for sure that the test sample is authentic too? You seem very confident of yourself and your grasp of tosogu.

I say an example of a Goto tsuba from when they started to prodcue tsuba (Momyama period?). Golden dragons and shakudo is my reasoning. By the way, Mike thank you very much for your insights in the above posts. I find them very refreshing to read. They make sense and don't make me feel like someone is trying to brainwash me....

What an interesting thread. Even Rich T dropped by. Thank you one and all for your input.

No offense was intended but I knew I was going to get into trouble. What else do you need? It is what it is. What more is required? I never said that there was but they do have access to source material written in their native tongue on a subject that is indigenous. There seems to be not much to discuss at times. Just listen and be told. Maybe because I feel that cups are full.... Anyway, enough from me. Like I said, these are issues that have been annoying me and I wanted to air them. I hope that no love has been lost. I don't want to be spreading any more negativity so if it is better to delete my posts, I have no objection to that.

I find this comment very interesting and this is how I view papers for tosogu. With the Saotome tsuba in mind, I could be wrong but it seems that Steve was expecting a Yamakichibei call, but got something other than that so the conclusion of the kantei team has been dismissed. Well, why not give them the benefit of your doubt, try to see if it is Saotome, meaning try to understand where they are coming from. If after trying your best to understand their rationale and the Saotome call still bugs you, why not resubmit to another shinsa team and see what conclusions they make? Imagine if they called Saotome as well... This might have already been done, but my point is there seems to be a trend with some "advanced" members to dismiss information that does not fit their theories for no other reason than I can see than "Nah.... don't think so, coz I don't think so... " followed by an abrupt "end of story" if pushed on information that they have provided. Going back to my remark about a gap in knowledge. My Nobuie tsuba that received papers last year, the lack of interest that the members who opposed the NTHK (NPO) conclusion showed to this composition, to me, says a lot: For those who don't know, the oshigata on the right is of a Nobuie tsuba from the Ikeda book called "Nobuie Tusba". By publishing it in his book, as far as I can tell, this gentleman thinks that this tsuba and signature are genuine Nobuie. I think it is hard to deny that there are strong similarites between the two signatures which could in turn suggest a lot. This has not been discussed or considered by the NTHK (NPO) critics, and has been dismissed even thought it bears a striking resemblance to my Nobuie signature that has received hozon papers. This to me demonstrates a gap in knowledge, which is no crime because I believe we can't know everything about everything, but the hard part to take is the seeming reluctance to check this blip in people's theories out. I have consulted Japanese collectors here in Tokyo about the tsuba and they agree with the hozon call. Not a very good quality Nobuie, but Nobuie none less. When I mentioned the conclusions made by members here to my Japanese associates, they said something to the effect of "what do they know..." We are all entitled to our opinions, but it seems some are entitled slightly more than others, especially if you have read all the books, been to all the shows, know the collecting crowd and all the faces, seen all the bits of tosogu and so on. As a final thought, it might do some people some good to empty their cup once and a while. Anyway, I don't mean to be annoying. I am just getting a few things that have been bothering me off my chest.

Still can't see the mei. And I am not disputing the design or anything like that either. More your certainty that you are right. Anyway glad we are friends and stop taking yourself so seriously. Priceless!

It does look Yamakichibei, but how can you be so sure it is not Saotome? I can't see any remaining mei by the way. Is it on the back? (Don't tell me I should take your word for it.... ) The provided pictures don't do anything to demonstrate your point because they are chalk and cheese compared to the Saotome one, in my opinion. Sorry if this seems antagonistic but please, to all you Amakudari out there, come off your perches.....

and don't forget the cringe factor as some people demonstrate a possible gap in their knowledge by contradicting one of the main sword groups ...

Even if the tosogu gets papers, it might not be enough for some people. Have a read through this thread to see what I mean: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16279

Well, I don't think I have done any of these, but the book list that you offered many posts ago is what I was hoping to receive so I could do some independent study, and have a go at "ante-upping". Anyway, point taken and I will retreat back into my man-cave...at the foot of Mt. Fuji...with Raquel Welch in a tarzan bikini! :D

Many thanks Boris I have just ordered this: "Hiraizumi: Buddhist Art and Regional Politics in Twelfth-Century Japan, M.H, Yiengpruksawan, 1998" Cheers