docliss

I agree that none of the tsuba on Fred’s page can be labelled as ‘Namban’, and he has clearly got his page mixed up. It is true that some Namban tsuba may have their origin in India, but these are of the auriculate sub-group and, produced by the East India Company, commonly bear the VOC logo. Like Ford, I know of no tsuba that may be confidently labelled as ‘Namban’ that bear a reference to being made of namban tetsu – such tsuba seldom bear any inscription at all. Those tsuba so labelled are commonly ita tsuba of a mokume style. I have attached images of one such example, hoping that its owner does not mind…. John L.

Does one ever see a sanmai tsuba without a fukurin? I would have assumed that the absence of the latter feature excludes such a classification. John L.

Dear Sebastien Haynes lists the artist of your tsuba (H 10002.0) thus: F: Kawaji N: Rokurōemon, Rokurōemonnojō W: Hagi in Nagato Province D: date of 1666, died Feb. 20, 1697 NTS: second son of Tomomichi (H 09961.0). Do not confuse with the later generation of this name, who worked ca. 1800 - 25. Nice to see an early, dated Choshu tsuba - thank you. Regards, John L.

Yes, sorry, it is the SC one that I am going to. Thank you for the useful info. John L.

I am planning a short visit to Charleston NC in a week or so, and should like to know if there are any antique shops selling tsuba. With thanks in advance for any info. John L.

As a follow-up to Clive’s reminiscences of the Newman collection, I was granted access to the Ashmolean ‘vaults’ some years ago, where the said collection remained, sadly neglected and covered in rust. John L.

Yes, Kinkō Mino Chō, a paperback catalogue published in 1993 by the Gifu City Museum of History, of a Special Exhibition held there in 1993. John L.

Johnb, there is really no need for you to be nervous! Your tsuba, with its very good quality undercutting, is an excellent example of C18 Namban work. John L.

Andrey's tsuba is, to my eye, very reminiscent of Umetada Tadatsugu work. John L.

Are these not stylised cloud formations, modified to incorporate the two ryō-hitsu? Such a design feature is commonly found on tsuba of the Shōami group, which this one surely is. John L.

Dear Rob, the date of 1851 that Haynes gives refers to the artist’s working date. That the author has been so exact with this, rather than stating ‘the 1850s’, suggests that there may be an extant tsuba by this artist with that date upon it. John L.

Dear Robert, is not the mei on your tsuba CHOSHU (NO)JU MASAKATA? This may be H04070.0, given a date of 1851 by Haynes. John L.

Andrey 1. The Tadatsugu named on p.302 of Nihon Tō Kōza definitely relates to the artist of that name ‘of the UMETADA Kei’. 2. John’s tsuba is characteristic of the work of Umetada Tadatsugu, and its mei is also that of the Umetada artist, as illustrated on pp.223a and b of Kinkō Meikan. 3. It would indeed be interesting to know what is written on the NBTHK paper but that we can, I am sure, confidently predict…. John L.

John’s tsuba is typical of the work produced by a number of Umetada artists who signed their work with the nijimei Tadatsugu. Some of these may have been of different generations – and some students – of the original artist of this name. Haynes gives the dates of this group of artists as 1675–1725, and I believe that Nihon Tō Kōza is in error on p.302, as is John, when they state that there was a single artist who ‘died in the first month of Enpō (1678)'. John L.

Judging by the kao, this would appear to be a work by H 11423.0, working ca 1900 and listed as Y 105 in Shōsankenshu John L.

Is any kind member able to read the mei on the two latest tsuba that Brian has posted? With thanks in advance, John L.

Ford, youi state that the metal strata in guri-bori work are 'fused together', and I understand that to mean that they are patially melted so that the metals run into oneanother. BUt how on earth is that achieved without distorting the symmetry of the layers? John L.

Ford, thank you for your, as always, interesting post. Correct me if I am in error, but I have always imagined the soldering of matching layers of contrastingly coloured, soft metal alloy as utilised in the creation of true guri-bori – especially when applied to kashira – to be one of the pinnacles of technical achievement by Japanese metalworkers. John L.

While readily acknowledging Ford’s expertise in matters relating to tosogu, I must admit to my surprise upon reading his appreciative comments regarding Veli’s fuchi-gashira, which I would personally describe as ‘poor man’s guri-bori’. Without the exposed, contrasting strata of soft metal alloy, which is an essential component of such work, this incision of curvilinear patterns – while skilfully done – is, on its own, a sterile exercise. Interestingly, the carving technique of Veli’s tsuba is quite different from that of true guri-bori work. The walls of the former are rounded, while those of the latter are V-shaped in order to display strata of colour of a consistent thickness. Finally, while agreeing with Ford that the mei appears ‘confidently and elegantly cut’, I remain a little unhappy about both it and the kao, and believe that Veli’s tsuba might well get a ‘thumbs down’ if submitted for shinsa. John L.

Andrey, for what it may be worth, in my opinion the work looks looks spot on for that of Umetada Tadatsugu (and the nijimei also looks pretty good to me). So we must assume that Skip made an error re the artist' dates .... John L.

Thank you for posting that - a lovely tsuba. But I would have attributed it to the first master rather than the second. Are there any other thoughts on this? John L.

Although I do not consider Yagami tsuba of the ‘thousand monkeys’ type to qualify for inclusion in the Namban group, Jim’s earlier posting of two such tsuba from the MFA collection appears to make this thread an appropriate place for the inclusion of the attached images. This tate-maru-gata, sentoku guard measures 7.1 cm – 6.7 cm, and depicts the ‘thousand monkeys’ theme in katachi-bori, the animals with tiny, gold inlaid eyes. Many amusing details may be seen on careful examination, the design including the three sambu-naru monkeys that could speak, hear, and see no evil, and a pair playing the game of strength known as kubi-kubi. It is inscribed HISHU YAGAMI (NO)JU MITSUHIRO MOTTE (WO) XXXXXX KANE KORE (WO) SAKU, and is ex the Radford, Peak and Hawkshaw collections. Part of the inscription on the ura surface has been defaced, and comparison with a similar tsuba illustrated on pp.554-5 of Tsuba Daikwan suggests that this may have read ‘Sentoku Kane (wo) Motte Saku Kore (wo)’. Sentoku was a valuable alloy, the use of which was at one time confined to coinage, and this may be the explanation for this defacement. Noda Mitsuhiro I studied in the namban school of Nagasaki before developing his own style, and is probably the originator of the two Yagami Namban tsuba posted by David. N. Mitsuhiro II was the younger brother of the former artist and, like his brother, worked in both iron and brass. N. Mitsuhiro III was the eldest son of the first artist and his works are scarce. His mei differs from that of the first two masters, whose mei are very similar, although I believe that the second and third vertical strokes of the ‘shu’ kanji differ in that those of the second master are vertical while those of the first curve markedly to the left. In Bushido, Vol.3, No 1, pp.18-21, Robert Burawoy makes a distinction between the works of the first two masters, suggesting that the mimi of the second – and more skilled – artist has the animals in a variety of postures, whereas those of the first master are continuous and identical. On the basis of these two facts, I have concluded that this tsuba is by N. Mitsuhiro I. John L.

David, thank you for the fascinating scans of two tsuba by the Noda Mitsuhiro artists. I have never considered that tsuba by the Yagami school, featuring the ‘thousand something or others’, should be considered to be Namban, but these two tsuba certainly qualify for inclusion in that group. They are, of course, somewhat atypical in that one features an original kozuka hitsu, and both have conventionally shaped seppa-dai and bear mei. John L.

Jim, both of your linked tsuba are Yagami tsuba, each made by one of the three masters of the Noda family – Mitsuhiro I (ca 1750-1800), Mitsuhiro II (1748-1823) or Mitsuhiro III (ca 1800-ca 1870) – working at Yagami in the province of Hizen. That such tsuba are sometimes labelled as Namban is due simply – and impractically – to the fact that they demonstrate a foreign influence. But, surely, such a feature should not preclude their correct attribution? John L.

David, please correct me if I am wrong, but I would label Jim’s first linked tsuba as Hirado, while his second might equally easily be labelled Hizen, or even Bushū work. That they both evidence a strong foreign influence we are, of course, in agreement. John L.