Curran

It is "Kamakura" style, which is a school of tsuba that used a sort of design related to Kamakura (wood engraving) style in their design work. The tsuba are therefore called 'Kamakura', but it is not from the Kamakura period. The school went through several revivals over the time (just like birkenstocks and other whatnot of fashion). Nice example, with papers. I believe there was one like this on Aoi Arts at one point. Hope that helps.

Dear Steve, I am afraid I cannot add to your excellent write-up. I enjoyed reading it and it contained about everything I know about Hogen. The prints illustrating the theme were perfect. I have seen a few pieces with his signature and never felt 100% confident on the signatures, leaving me to wonder how much variation his signature involved over his lifetime, or if they were all gimei. I hope someone else can comment on your kozuka.

The tsuba he uses as an avatar belonged to me a few years ago. I think it is the 3rd one in on the show. He purchased it from a dealer and posted it here to the NMB. I corresponded with him briefly, but don't know if he is still around. It was a nice slideshow w/ music. I found it calming during another hell day at work. Thank you. Sure, his collection is a little uneven compared to the advanced aesthetic of some here, but he has a few nice ones in there. The one that formerly belonged to me was an S folded piece with the forging visible and the extremely dense tsuba rang beautifully like a bell. The blossom inlay seemed a later addition. If circumstances were a bit different and I able to keep a larger collection, I wouldn't mind owning that one again. Nice to see an old friend.

Tomoe tsuba: First thoughts- I am mentally searching for the name of the artisan. Andy Quirt's website had a set of menuki by him. Early 20th century work. Often a little flat in appearance, but guy worked with copper and developed what to my eyes is a rather distinct earthen red patina. Probably one of the bigger brains like Ford or Peter Klein will come up with the name.... The menuki seem to have long sold from Andy's site. I suspect your tsuba might be more of his time/place of production. Early 20th century, and relatively sought after by some collectors. These are just my impressions. It kills me I cannot remember the artisan's name, and I don't know if I have him on file. Curran

I think it is a nice selection with aesthetic. I wish I could tell you more about the Tomoe tsuba. It is interesting to me. If you have more photos of it, throw them up.

FYI: Example page of Kunishige work http://www.choshuya.co.jp/tsuba/21_40/30namban.htm See the fuchi/kashira towards the end.

Without even going to the books, I was thinking almost exactly what Lorenzo said. The design reminded me of Hirado Kunishige work. Kuniyoshi a student? Curran

Tanto koshirae. The menuki were signed on the bottom(?) sides and mounted on the same. No wrap. As stated, they were gold with a fairly high profile (thickness) to them. Signature was clearly visible, though small. All the fittings were very good. The menuki were exceptionally good- perhaps "plush" is a better word; but I don't know if I have seen Mitsuoki menuki before. I had no reason to doubt the veracity of the package. Just curious when there are that many signatures.

Ted and Grey, Thanks for the replies. My reason for asking: The menuki were solid gold and signed Mitsuoki (the big guy of the Otsuki school) The fuchi and kojiri were also biggish names. I forget the other signatures. I was studying it at hand with no reference books to verify the signatures. Nice elegant but not overly flashy koshirae. With a pantheon of decent names on it, I wondered if papers where just that it was an original en-suite late edo koshirae or was _verifying_ all those signatures. If so, then the koshirae was worth a fair more than the nice healthy c. 1500 Mino blade. My memory isn't good enough to recall the details of the description on the papers, so I do not recall if it mentioned the Mitsuoki menuki at all. I confess I liked the whole package. I just wish I'd gotten the chance to verify some of the signatures for my own mental satisfaction and WoW!

Two years ago I was looking at a tanto koshirae I found beautiful and in a great state of preservation. It had Tokubetsu Hozon papers. All the pieces were signed, and nice lacquerwork. Question: If all the pieces are signed- the kozuka, kogai, fuchi, kashira, kojiri, etc- yes it was that sort of koshirae... do the papers authenticate all the signatures? If I knew the answer to this, I've forgotten! I'd appreciate help here from those more familiar with NBTHK papering practices. Curran

Chuck, Your questions are much bigger than I can begin to tackle. Higo is so large that call it an umbrella of schools. Books are written on the individual schools within it. Some of the sub-schools are extremely distinct, but something can be Higo without being particularly distinct as belonging to one of the individual schools. To borrow a phrase from a politician used years ago, after a while "(you) know it when you see it". Here is an example in another live thread at the moment: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5578&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15 You recognize the fuchi, kashira, kojiri pattern and iron. Red lacquer saya with a tapering shape to it.

Dear John and Chuck, My reply to Chuck was very quick. He was patient enough to ask his questions twice and had not gotten a response from our motley crue. I decided to step in and 'start the ball rolling' if it would roll. To answer John, I didn't think about it too much. Higo is very mainstream and I think many of us have seen many many variations of this gold vine paulownia fuchi/kashira. I just quickly looked and mentally dropped it where I thought it belonged timewise in the history of Higo and Edo Higo. The iron quality isn't great. It isn't bad. The pattern is applied with a rougher crosshatch, but the gold retention is relatively good and the overall look of the koshirae for a practicioner is quite fair. (gotta go... I'll edit this reply later and finish my train of thought) <<..later..>> I thought about this a bit and how best to explain for Chuck's viewpoint. An analogy might be acceptable: Higo fittings like Tiffany's or Stickley furniture is a long tradition. Much of the early work is very well done and very expensive to collect. The designs enjoyed great popularity and were copied (and mutated) a fair bit over the centuries. What started on one end of Japan and traveled to Edo during the "attendance / hostage program" of the shogunate, caught fad enough that artisans set up shop in Edo making Edo versions of the Higo items. For sake of the analogy- Tiffanys is Tiffanys. People want the early work much more than say the 1980s or 1990s produced stuff that was made more for mass market. Yet the 1980s and 1990s stuff is still quite popular and enjoys a fair bit of resale value. Hence, as Mantis Dude said, your Higo f/k/kojiri are probably going to go for more unassembled rather than as on your assembly. Someone is always trying to get a Higo assembly together. It will be pointed out it is not the earlier better stuff, but it still has a name and look that attracts buyers. Hope that helps.

Dear Chuck, Quick look and reply: Fuchi/Kashira/Kojiri are Higo school. Later period or possibly Edo Higo (Edo made version of Higo design). Fairly nice and sought after. Extra nice to have a kojiri with it. Yours have retained a good bit of the gold. The tsuba matches in design, but probably not school. It works fairly well, though some might want a Higo tsuba on it. "All matching" is more of a western train of thought than historical practice. I might have gone with gold paulownia theme menuki or something more along Higo school lines, but overall looks like it is nice assembly. Are those seppa from Fred?

Yes, I thought of that too. I have found Mr. Earle difficult to reach. Maybe Ed will have better luck. Anyone know if the Boston study group is still active? Ed, you may want to start a separate thread trying to get in touch with the Boston Group. Good luck.

Dear Ed, Nice reply. I am not sure how to concisely or even adequately answer your questions. I trust my opinion on some area. On others, I'd defer to Grey or some of the other veterans of the hobby. I've spent the better part of the last decade focusing increasingly on fittings. Sword knowledge is just so-so. My first though: yes, yes, yes .... leave the patina on tangs and fittings alone until you've been at it a long while. Especially on tangs. I wish Darcy were around to talk on that. He is a much better teacher than I am on that sort of topic. A cared for tang will have gone through controlled oxidation over centuries. Distinctly worlds different looking and feeling on an 800 year old blade than on a 100 year old blade, even if the blade is so out of polish or otherwise gone. Tangs can be doctored to look older than they are.... but that is entirely a different chapter on forensics. Question of sustaining a new polish- geez, that is a devil of a question even for the oldtimers. The construction of the blade can depend on age, school, and subschool. Hizen blades are notoriously thin skinned and even though maybe only 300 years old, be at serious risk of core coming through. On the other hand, some 700 year old Bizen blades seem to take polish after polish until the hamon is very thin. Much of this I think you are going to need talk with people in person. Even then, get 5 or more opinions and try and find your way through. You need to find if there is a Boston area club still active. Otherwise, you may want to try and get involved with the New York club. Most of my hands on knowledge comes from their lectures and years of attending the Tampa / San Fran shows. Post images. I can probably help with fittings. The swords are a bit more difficult to do through online images, and others here are probably going to be wiser than me about them. Curran

I'm trying to research some items that are supposedly shown in the Oeder Catalog. I don't have this one in my little nihonto library collection. Anyone willing to look up one or two things for me and possibly scan in a page? Many many thanks in advance for help.... Curran

Dear Ed, I am afraid that Grey is absolutely right. It is one of the deepest field of studies and takes a long time. This board is an incredible resource. Photos posted here will get you considerable (sometimes conflicting) info. Your best bet is to start taking a few steps: pick up some of the Intro texts available via Amazon, and start posting photos here and asking questions. Wish I lived back up Boston way, but we're in Florida for now. I don't know if there is still an active Boston Nihonto Club. Curran

Forgive the cross thread, as they said, sig reads "Hirotoshi". Not Uchikoshi Hirotoshi: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5562 His signature was popular to try and forge, but yours is so different that I don't think it an attempt at forgery.

Do you have a full length perspective image of this sword?

Mr. Reinhard said, "What I meant was: Depicting objects upside down on tsuba is a no-go before and after namban(-style) tsuba." It is interesting that you raise this idea. Maybe I have never thought about this simple fact before! I think you are right in 99.5% of the non namban tsuba. We sometimes see inverted (upside down) birds in some sukashi tsuba designs, but rarely do we see any animal or beast head inverted / up-side down. One counterproof tsuba came to mind very fast: Ginza-Choshuya Mag #3 of 2008. #5 is a very distinct (and expensive) Yasuchika tsuba. I would not say it is 'auriculated', though some might view it that way. The dragon heads on bottom are inverted and maybe this is some Namban influence, but otherwise a very beautiful Japanese tsuba. Wish I could afford it, but $30,000 is champagne and caviar taste for my current frugal budget.

Shigeta, Yoshimura. Namban Tsuba: Akogane no Desain, Tokyo, 1998. Good book. I agree with Dr. L's statement, "Yoshimura Shigeta illustrates five such tsuba of the auriculate type on pp. 63-67 of his book, and upon every one of these this is a constantly recurring feature." I've been glad to own a very good example illustrated on page 64. Mr. Reinhart may raise the issue of whether or not these were made in Japan. I believe a fair number are, though the design may have originated elsewhere along the trade routes. Just as Plataresque architecture made it from Spain to Macau church (existing still) and into Japan (destroyed long ago). The Macau one contrasts from spanish examples in that it shows considerable chinese influence. I've seen several examples of the auriculated tsuba on page 64. They've ranged from crude ones that seem chinese manufactured, to some rather fine ones with considerable more detail. Iron differs from example to example. Someone gave mine a rather fine lobed shakudo mimi. As an aside, the Shigeta Namban book also touches on "Christian/Kuristian" tsuba from pages 69-76. Curran

Dear Ford, Right. To clarify, is there a photo of the full face of the side signed with the mei? The photos on your blog gave me some confusion as to the bamboo part of the design relative to the signature and the rendering of the backside of the "cat (out of the bag)" and its claws. Just curiosity. I've either seen this tsuba once before or its twin a while back. Unfortunately I didn't save a picture to file. Basically I've stuffed up my Haynes Index with reference images of signed examples from artists. Given that I don't have an image for this artisan, the tsuba I saw before probably wasn't signed. Not sure about that. If you have a full image with signature, intention is to print out small image of front and back and place it in my Haynes Index. Not exactly the best note system, but works for me.

Dear Ford, Forgive my confusion: --I read your blog entry. Do you have a full photo of the signed side of the tsuba?

Ford, Time to share a photo? C'mon. Lest we die from the boredom in our own lives.

Dear Ford, Markus, Brian, Dr. L, and Nobody-san, There was a point in life a few years ago when work was easier and I had the opportunity to spend a period helping with the cataloging of an old collection. It was fairly large with many kinko, and had many gimei pieces in it. I think that period was a significant leap forward for me in experience with tosogu. In that collection were two pieces that bedeviled me. They had complex signatures that were close to the books but I ultimately felt were 'not right'. The workmanship on these two was fantastic. One of them truly pained me to call 'gimei'. I was offered the chance to buy it at a very fair price and did not because I was not confident enough in myself to appreciate it for the skill regardless of whether or not it would NBTHK / NTHK paper. Many years later, it still bugs me that I didn't buy it. That has happened 5 times now for me: 4 where kinko tsubas, and 1 was iron- all from the 1830-1880 period where the smith had a relatively long life. Three of the five have gone on to paper or be deemed authentic. The other two: I have no idea who owns them now. I'm going to always wonder about that one tsuba and I hope to see it in the possession of another collector some day. I have my doubts about the signature on Ford's, but when these late kinko with a nice signature come up....I've been wrong on these 'near misses' to error on the side of caution more than I have been right. ...just a journeyman and not a native Japanese reader. *sigh* Brian hit it on the head talking about how "fluidly, confidently" the mei is done. I look forward to the day that I get a better handle on that aspect of a slightly irregular signature on an exceptional workmanship.