reinhard

Mark, no dissing around here. Nihon-To is no topic for da hood. Quick (and clumsy) reply from my side and hasty answer from yours made a bad start. Let's just forget about it. reinhard

What is it you want and where do you think you are? reinhard

I've seen this little camera before. E-bay, wasn't it? It doesn't belong in this section of the board. reinhard

Thank you all out there. Your input was amazing and far beyond my expectations. You made the best and more out of my non-professional pics. Since I'm not an expert on sukashi tsuba and this is not a kantei with a lecture, I'll just give you my thoughts. John pinned it down at first sight: somewhere between Owari and Akasaka. My compliments. Nevertheless I'd expect (especially early) Owari tsuba to be more static and symmetrical. The steel quality however is equal. Akasaka is a good choice as well, but early Akasaka tsuba are characterized by typical hitsu-ana and seppa-dai shapes. Generally they have an easier appeal than this one. The bold-angled design however is pushing towards Akasaka. Marc eliminated Kanayama with good reasons. Generally they are smaller and steel quality is different. Ono tsuba usually have simpler design, their surfaces appear "molten" at times and granular tekkotsu are very prominent. This tsuba feels somewhat heavy and its massive dotte-mimi and thoroughly worked steel give you a "no-nonsense"-feel. On the other hand, it displays a refined artistic concept within its solid frame, as Ford has pointed out. It is representing to me the borderline between "simple" Muromachi aesthetics and a more sophisticated attitude on the horizon. - However, Shinsa came to conclusion it is a SHOAMI tsuba. Personally, I don't consider this a Shoami tsuba within the pool of vague attributions, but the "real thing" SHOAMI. Thanks to all of you for your investigations. Especially to Martin and Markus on the subject of "eight views" reinhard

Hello Ian, I agree with you. This tsuba was made in the "pine needles on water"-design. It was very popular in Kaga province and should not be confused with Kyo work such as Heian-Jo or Yoshiro. Two Kaga-examples added for comparison. reinhard

For those of you not yet tired of considering, here are some more pictures. They show basically my limited skills of taking pictures with a compact click-o-matic camera. On the rim some granular tekkotsu as well as linear structures are visible. A further hint are these passages from literature related to this school: "it seems most improbable to me that the production of the above mentioned group should have been restricted to one place or even to a single family......the metal is frequently the same or resembles that of the Owari guards. In terms of design and quality the earlier......sukashi can be called equal in the rank with Owari tsuba." "The artistic work of ..... tsuba lies somewhere between Kyo-sukashi and the Owari-schools. .....openwork is bolder than Kyo but more delicate than Owari.....The designs are unique." John narrowed the subject immediately by saying Akasaka and Owari, but maybe this was too tight a border. Bold angles are pointing towards Akasaka work, the steel quality is leaning towards Owari work, but there is still Kyo-work beyond common expectations, creating a triangle of possibilities. The key-word has not been said yet and therefore I don't want to set you free now. And what about the eight views? reinhard

It is of no big importance, but the box was not made for this particular tsuba. The boxes might have been exchanged a long time ago, but calling it "suitable" is somewhat strange (to say the least). As for the tsuba itself: It is a tsuba with Kaga-style inlay. That's about all one can say. Many western museums with collections of Japanese swords and fittings are nowadays confronted with the fact, that their masterpieces, acquired during Meiji- until early Showa-time, won't stand closer examination anymore. This is not a judgement on the tsuba in question. reinhard

Here's another pic of the same tsuba taken by daylight and with less disturbing shadows for those, who try to identify the design. reinhard

Hello, You are doing a great job so far and it is a pleasure learning with and from you. As soon as I have some more time, I will provide you with pics of the edge and subtler details. To get on with it, I give you the description of the Hozon paper. It can be translated approximately like this: "eight views" design sukashi tsuba maru-gata (round shape) tetsu tsuchime ji (hammered surface) ji sukashi (positive silhouette) dotte mimi (added rim) ryo hitsu ana (both hitsu ana, one plugged with shakudo) The dotte-mimi is not a later addition. It was made of exactly the same steel as the tsuba itself and it has the same deep black color and moist lustre. Focussing on hitsu ana is a very good idea when considering early Akasaka work. The steel quality however is similar to Owari tsuba. My next question is: what does "eight views" mean? reinhard

John, The tsuba is almost perfectly round, measuring 8.0cm in diameter, horizontally and vertically. Thickness of the rim is 6 mm, thickness of the seppa-dai is: 4 mm. There are faint tekkotsu and multi-layer forging is visible. But before presenting the solution on a silver tablet: What about the design? What does it show and in what way are those topics related? And what about numbers? reinhard

My dear forumites, I would like to show you a tsuba for open discussion. Although it is attributed by NBTHK to ?, it is a mumei tsuba and I would like to know what YOU are seeing in it. Age, design, craftsmanship and so forth. Being more familiar with blades myself, I just wonder what you think. Don't be shy. This is supposed to be a learning experience for all of us. reinhard

There are basically two different views about sword-polishing nowadays. The Hon'ami-based approach is strictly conservative, saying: All that matters is the blade, not the owner. This way of polishing was invented to preserve the blade as long as possible. As a side-effect, subtle details of a blade will be visible only after years or even decades of GENTLE sword-care. - Some people however don't want to wait until then. There are ways to bring out all features immediately, even to the untrained eye, including the use of chemicals lately, but at the expense of a sword's lifetime. This means: Some swords are meant (according to polish and state of preservation) to be GENTLY treated with uchiko once in a while and others are not. reinhard

Thank you Moriyama-San and Markus for your explanations. The reasons why I was looking for another possible translation are the many origami by Hon'ami family, ending with KAN when relating to value (always as a suffix). I was wondering if measurement/currency could be related to "tetsu" in some way. Now I know they can't. Thanks. John, the TOSHIRO/FUJISHIRO translation is solely based on Hawley's compilation. Not my favourite one, but up to now the only source providing any reasonable info concerning this mei. Though it is not fully reliable and I don't feel very comfortable about it, nobody else came up with a better idea yet. reinhard

Hi Moriyama-San and Markus, A simple question about "kantetsu" from someone not perfectly familiar with Nihon-Go: On-reading "KAN" just meaning 8 1/2 pounds, combined with (on-reading) "TETSU" meaning steel, sounds more like a unit of measure than a name to me. The same characters can be read (kun-reading): tsuranu(ku) (i.e. pierce, perforate) and kurogane (i.e.iron). Supposed that on- and kun-reading should not be mixed within one expression: which one of the two translations is the more likely: measurement or "war-name"? reinhard

Maybe Guido can tell us something about Chinese sense of humour. A good laugh it was anyway. reinhard

This particular mei is somewhat tricky indeed. Hawley mentions it one time as FUJISHIRO and and a second time as TOSHIRO (written with the same characters). In both cases, he is said to have signed MASANAGA earlier in his career. Obviously this is the same person and FUJISHIRO/TOSHIRO, although a common name as well, is supposed to be taken for his artist-name. This is in accordance with your sword. The nakago seems to be unshortened. The mei is complete and not part of a longer one cut off since. Unfortunately it seems to be very difficult to find any reference material for comparison. This is neither good nor bad. Maybe someone else comes up with more material on this subject. reinhard

This is kind of strange. Your previous thread about the same issue is still posted and all you have to do is re-uploading your pictures there. As I said: The mei probably reads: Mutsu Aizu TO-SHI-RO If the mei turns out to be genuine, the sword was made during early ShinTo-period in Iwashiro province. reinhard

If I got this right, the "iai-face" is oscillating between being constipated (Ford) and heavenly relaxation afterwards (Guido). Thank you, gentlemen. reinhard

So do I. And I don't want to know what some of these swords look like some years from now. It is bothering me for some years now, to see old and precious heirlooms in the hands of complete ignorants, who don't know how to spend or invest their money anymore. Let's hope they'll disappear untouched in a safe until the oil and gas-barons have all dripped dry. reinhard

Congratulations for doing a great job. reinhard

I've always wondered what "iai-faces" look like. Are there any pictures? reinhard

Where did the pics go? reinhard

Despite of its qualities, this is a typical example of a Hama-mono, made for export during later 19th century. reinhard

This mei might read: Mutsu Aizu TO-SHI-RO (early ShinTo-period in Iwashiro) reinhard

Jean, The blade you are showing was originally made as a naginata. Most of the nakago was cut off and the point-section reshaped. As you probably know, naginata exist in various lengths since very early times. Therefore it is no contradiction to the afore-said statements. reinhard