Michael 101

Agreed The eBay tsuba was very much a copy - and falls far short of main school Jingo work in every way. Probably made by a tsuboi worker, a school which specialised in copying higo works for sale to samurai with not so deep pockets ! Kind regards Michael

Hi guys, Firstly I must say that my initial comments were made after viewing from my ipod whilst on a business trip and now that Ive had a chance to view on a big screen and see your additional pictures I dont think this is Shimizu Jingo - but its very interesting as it certainly has elements that the Jingo school later used in their designs - such as the dragon, the dote mimi, the design on the mimi and the flat round shape. And looking at it the other way the hitsu could certainly be Jingo influenced but as you already comment - probably a later addition - so could well have been copied from Jingo. The tsuba plate would I think show more curvature (thicker at the seppai dia more slender towards the mimi) and be more heavily worked if it were Shimizu Jingo. I wish I could examine the iron in person to be sure but show Curran at Tampa and Im certain he will be able to help you. Kind regards Michael

Hi David, I will not be able to get to my books to confirm this for you until Wednesday - BUT I think you would be better looking towards the Shimizu Jingo school for the maker of your tsuba. The flat round shape - the dote mimi and the hitsu ana shape really do suggest the work of an early Jingo master - I think you may have made a very very good purchase indeed. I now want to see the other tsuba you bought from the sale !! Kind regards Michael Cox

Higo tsuba are widely admired and therefore copied extensively not only now but also in the Edo period. The beautiful Hayashi 1st master tsuba above would have been way out of the reach of all but the most senior of the Samurai rank so copies of popular designs would be comissioned. My guess is that the tsuba from aoi art is a 19thcentury copy by the Kumagai school - this schools work varied from brilliant to awful and I would say out of politeness that this tsuba falls in the middle. Best save for a Hayashi original or as an alternative an Akasaka version. Kind regards Michael

Keeping up the theme I have added a favourite little 4th Shimizu Jingo tsuba with a similar theme to the others shown above. The elongated maru gata shape and the incomplete gin zogan inlay (probably as made by the artisit) really add to the overall impression and impart an austere and simple beauty. The iron quality is superb as per all mainline Shimizu works. Kind regards Michael

This example shows the later charactor used by the NBTHK to identify post 1st / 2nd master Shimizu Jingo masters

With regards to Currans comment on the differing charactors used for Jingo - I will post two examples taken from NBTHK papers from my collection - this example is from a 1st master which is identified by the NBTHK use of the earlier second charactor (next post will show the comparison)

Hi Mike, Just to clarify do you mean nidai as in second Jingo master i.e. third Shimizu. Reason for my question is Ito's books on the subject state that the 2nd Shimizu didnt sign his works. I also note the enlarged round shape to the top of the Nakago ana, would under Ito's view place this as third Shimizu. Sorry to complicate things ! A really lovely tsuba by the way. Kind regards Michael

I agree - it looks to me as if its trying to be a 2nd Master Hayashi (Shigemitsu) but the lack of rust in the sukashi concerns me and it also looks like it has been artificially aged by scatching. A Shigemitsu would tend to be large (circe 8cm high thick 0.55mm ) and made of very dense iron and be about 130g so judging the iron quality may help you. Kind regards Michael

2nd / 3rd Shimizu generations - the difference in generations well thats a really tough question - which to be honest Im not so sure anyone could answer - and certainly not by me. The actual physical dates make it tough to start with: 2nd 1620-1710 and the 3rd 1691-1777 - so by iron age itself is very difficult to tell. Some third generation works have round notches to the top and bottom corners of the nakago ana - but this was also done in the later generations so its little help. Also Shimizu Jingo were very traditional and made copies of the earlier masters work to the best of their ability. There is also much confusion even in Japan to the differing generations - and reading the translations of the key expert in this field Ito Mitsuhira - even he hedges his bets on many of the tsuba published in his book in terms of which generations work they are. Im slowly coming to the conclusion that the 1st generation works can be distiguished (although some may be early 2nd - so its still not clear cut !!) - the others seem to only to group like 2nd/3rd or 4th/5th - and even many of the 5th masters work has been taken for 3rd master - so its a minefield ! Kind regards Michael

Hi Ron, It looks a very nice tsuba indeed. The polished look of the iron and the evidence for yakite treatment (think of it as being placed back into the oven to bake and melt a little) is very pleasing as are the proportions. Design - the outer gold inlay is a pattern described by Ito Mitsuhira as being the Kaminari mon - used more by the 3rd and 4th generation onwards from observations. The silver inlay is in the design of the Chrysanthemum a very popular design used by all generations and many other schools too. I think the silver has at some time been polished and I personally feel would benefit from a natural dulling in time. My own guess without seeing it in hand would be 3rd generation - I base this mainly on the style of the dote mimi, the finish to the iron and the use of the Kaminari design - but it could easily be second as he did do some large works of this design - its just the outer inlay that puts me off this generation (it may I suppose have been added later as a design update but less likely) Kind regards Michael

Well it looks highly likely to be a Ko Aksaka tsuba - made by any of the first three masters of the school. The iron looks to be the correct age and the seppa dai shape is a good fit also - a very nice tsuba indeed. Worth sending to get papered as I think it would do well. Kind regards Michael

Hi David, Well this is interesting – I was actually just behind you in placing my order for this very same tsuba. My own take on it was that it is a Kamiyoshi version of the original Hayashi design. My reasons for this are the way the sukashi cut marks show (I agree it’s not a cast) and the apparent younger age of the iron and also the shape of the hitsu ana which are very Kamiyoshi (note the difference to the Hayashi one pictured) I think it’s a shame about the later punch marks around the Nakago ana as I think these cover up the chisel marks that would have confirmed 2nd or 3rd Kamiyoshi – are any traces seen at the base where the punch hasn’t reached ? Could also I suppose be a Akasaka copy of Higo but I think less likely due to the finish of the iron being more Kamiyoshi. I think it was a good buy. Kind regards Michael

The dragon tsuba is typical for the Higo based kumagai school work who specialised in copying Higo school tsuba in the late Edo period. This is their version of a Shimizu Jingo tsuba which would have been made for buyer who couldnt afford the "Jingo" brand. It would be a very good buy at the price range you mention. Kind regards Michael

Tough one - not a design that I am familiar with. From the information provided I would think Ono School from the 18th cent. Kind regards Michael

I am also convinced its Akasaka school for all the reasons already stated plus the iron colour. From the punch marks visible at the top of the nakago ana and the inward sloping seppa dai towards the ana - I would say possibly the work of the 4th master. Would be interested to see the mimi - I would expect linear tokotsu and also for it to be fairly robust in terms of thickness maybe 6 - 7mm Very Nice tsuba. Thanks for showing. Kind regards Michael

The feature at 10am is I think most likely to be a broken fan. Agree with other comments ref bridge and flower blosom All the best Michael

Hi Mikolaj, Thanks for posting the additional pictures. This design of tsuba was as Richard commented used mainly by the Higo schools, with high quality examples made by the Hayashi and Kamiyoshi masters, such as the one already linked above. I am sorry that I cannot comment if your tsuba is cast or carved without seeing it in the hand but I can confirm that it is not the high quality work of the leading Higo masters as I assume you already understand from comparison with the Link. If carved this tsuba may well have been produced by one of the Tsuboi workers who basically made a living in the late Edo period by copying well known and expensive designs and selling at a reasonable price to Samurai who couldnt afford the original thing. So if not cast and modern then its still an interesting example - but unfortunately not the value of a main school masterpiece. Hope that adds an further area for your research. Kind regards Michael

Please check out my ebay listings for some very good quality iron Sukashi tsuba from the Akasaka and Higo schools:- http://shop.ebay.co.uk/mc114/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg= Kind regards Michael

Hi Marius, A great shame about the condition. I would say these are Higo in style but not made by the any of the main line schools. The fuchi has a indent for the kozuka - which higo versions do not. The tsuba design is higo but the size of the seppa dai area is too large for Higo main schools. Higo tsuba were very fashionable (and still are !) and therefore like all things in fashion they were much copied. Hope the tsuba cleans up OK. regards Michael

Hi John (Docliss) its believed that only the earlier Kinai masters signed on the omote, although some later masters switched between so its not a set fast rule. The example picture I loaded (ura view) is attributed to the last (7th) generation of the Takahashi family and was an exceptionally skilled carver. Kind regards Michael

Very nice example of the School. Hitsu ana were not always used by the school but I agree its a little less common not to see them. Gold aplication is far more common on the later 19th century work - although this example looks more 18th century and the inlay maybe Umetada influenced. The quality looks very good and I like the shakudo shim fitted which is a nice attention to detail and points to it being held in high regard by its orginal owner. I have attached another example without hitsu. Kind regards Michael

Agreed this one is a later Nobuiye but I am not convinced that its the 'Echizen' maker. The jigane doesnt look up to his level of skill and raised mimi work falls far short of the skilled work shown in the published example above and against other examples I have seen. My feeling on this one is that it dates much later than the Echizen worker and would consider it more likely a 1st quarter 19th century revival work when many artists were producing this style. Regards Michael

Hi Henry, Beautiful tsuba you have, completing a very impressive koshirae. The seppa dia shape and thickness (or rather thiness) make me think 2nd generation work. However their is a lot of kabori work for the early school which is fairly rare so it could be a 5th gen work going back to an earlier design. Which ever - its in top condition with very fine jigane and really rather special. Thanks for sharing Seasonal regards to all Michael

I dont think you are going to get much further information to what you have already worked out for this tsuba. I also think later Higo would be a good call, perhaps more 1800's than any earlier. Its doesnt appear to be any particular mainline school like Shimizu etc and the theme was common across all Higo works so no help here either. Looks a nice tsuba. Kind regards Michael