FlorianB

OK, back to the topic: no Akasaka rim indeed. Edo-Period piece. Any measurements? Florian

I agree with Robert it could be Akasaka style from a later generation. Here’s a picture of an other one with similar design: A closer shot of the rim and/or the inner sides could clarify it. Florian

I was electricified - a juyo for THIS price: Alas, just a mistake by Mr. Tsuruta Florian

#1: Yes, now I've recognized the bird. Chidori and waves as mentioned is a traditional motif. Any signs of layer technique used on this? #3: Here's the Ono-piece for comparision I had in mind: However, gold nunome wasn't used by Ono smiths. Certainly I agree with David that Shoami is an option, too. At least I don't think the inscription is a signature made by the maker (even for stylized chinese letters crudly done) but an aesthetic addition. Florian

Hello Fred, Tsuba #1: later Akasaka Style (sorry, can’t see any birds - maybe waves…?) Tsuba #2: Bushu or Choshu style Tsuba #3: reminds me of an Ono design, maybe gilded later, signature (if it is one) NAO XXX looks strange Just a quick guess, Florian

I do not doubt the reliability of auction houses it in general (OK, here was the art fraud about alleged paintings of the “Collection Jäger” at Lempertz several years ago... ), but no auction house guarantees the correctness of description. Furthermore we’re talking about auctions out of the 60ies when knowledge and textbooks where far more limited. And a additional letter with a statement is IMO also no expertise. Florian

No means to get rude. After all I admitted it’s interesting, so take it for a curiosity and enjoy it further. Florian

Well, “...of Japanese origin and Edo period...” is just supposition, not evidence. Even if I have no idea this item was used for, but I stick to it it’s not Japanese. If You search for knowledge - and that’s why this forum exists - please accept truth although sometimes painful. It is an interesting piece, however, but try to research in other directions. Florian

IMHO I don't think it's Japanese at all, maybe chinese origin? Looks like a paper knife to me... Florian

Ford, thank You for clearing up, there’s a lot to think about. Alas It seems to late to delete my comment so next iime I’ll be more cautious in spreading my “knowledge”. Florian

Chris , please refer to a textbook or the web but I try to explain it quickly: We know that raw material for Tsuba (iron/steel) consists of inhomogeneous carbon content. Tekkotsu (“iron bones”) is iron with higher carbon content and thus harder. While hammering the Tsuba, those higher carbon particles (the harder particles) are pressed towards the outer rim. That's why tekkotsu could be found always there or at least near the rim. The appearance proof that the Tsuba was thoroughly forged. Some schools appreciated tekkotsu as an aesthetic part of the tsuba (often found on pre-Edo pieces i.e. Ko-Shoami, Owari, Kanayama), others (most schools working throughout the Edo period) saw in tekkotsu obviously a disruption and grinded it down. In how far tekkotsu was artifically produced I can’t tell but it seems possible especially in the revival pieces of the late Edo period. Florian

Chris, Several pictures above (including mine) show distinct tekkotsu, but there are also Tsuba with a more restraint tekkotsu which could be recognized only by a closer look. Often tekkotsu has been abraded to get a smooth rim. What I tried to express was that traces of corrosion could be mistaken for tekkotsu so in this cases a detailed examination is necessary. Tekkotsu is first of all a result of production and could hint to certain schools/styles. It is also appreciated as an aesthetic trait. Black rust (patina) on the other hand is part of certain aesthetic ideals i. e. wabi-sabi, too. But don’t mix up rusted tsuba with aesthetics generally - sometimes they are simply junk. Florian

Sometimes on corroded pieces it becomes difficult to distinguish in between tekkotsu and coincidental structures produced by rusting. Florian

Bad shots, but sufficient: In this case very prominent tekkotsu. Florian

The combination of different styles (Ko-Katchushi, Shimizu/Jingo and maybe one or two more) clearly hint to the revival pieces in late Edo-Period. The details just reveal the effort which was made to gain an old look so it’s far above average. It would have been a wonderful example in the wabi-sabi discussion on this board some time ago: http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/26501-which-of-your-tsubas-best-embodies-the-wabi-sabi-aesthetic/?hl=%2Bwabi+%2Bsabi Florian

Very interesting! Especially the “simple display base” I haven’t seen before. An early kind of Ikebana? At least the mutual interaction could be seen here - the same design was reproduced by different schools. Florian

I found another example of missing zogan (in my opinion): This picture is a part of a shot, so quality isn’t good, but You can see clearly that in this case the inner area of the circular form has been bevelled probably to receive a better hold to the zogan. Florian

Manuel, I agree, like everywhere division of labour was (and is) efficient to accomodate demand. Florian

@ Steve: I’m afraid corrosion wouldn’t have erased all traces of carving while the circular cut is still clearly to be seen. Maybe it was intentioned to carve it but regarding the other side it’s more likely zogan should have been applied (or was applied and fell off). @ Manuel: It is interesting that in Your piece the blossom shows large petals, but the area beneath it is rounded whithout indentations in the iron. So IMHO this proofs a teamwork, a basic form was produced and others made a decoration in zogan. These Tsuba are definitively not Heianjo although the technique is similar. Besides other features Heijanjo-Tsuba should have decorated rims. Florian

I bought a similar one, but without zogan, years ago claimed as Ko-Hagi. I stumbled also about the zogan pieces and in my opinion the zogan was added later to enhance or just to vary the stereotyped design. On Steve’s (?) Tsuba the blossom is missing on the front side. Obviously only the outline was worked in iron and hint to some kind of industrial production. This particular motiv can be seen very often so it must have been popular maybe as a souvenir. Florian

Grev, obviously a terrific job - well done! By now I recognized that the “Choshu-Tsuba” in the book and the “Ko-Shoami-Tsuba” on the museum’s site must be the same according to the accession number. Florian

Interesting offer! Meanwhile I’ve had a look at the museum’s website and found this one: http://www.bmagic.org.uk/objects/1930M893 Claimed as Ko-Shoami. Because of the use of gold in mine not KO but KYO-Shoami would have been my next choice. However, Choshu schools are offsprings of Shoami so it’ the same periphery. Florian

Thank You for Your comments. @ John You're right, it's an iron Tsuba. I don't know the book. Is there a shot of the mentioned piece? By the way, I considered Choshu, too, but as You said it's a little bit vague. Florian

Hello all, I would like to show You a Tsuba I own (sorry for the mediocre pictures): It is exactly marugata (7,78 x 7,78 cm) and 0,45 mm thick. There is no niku and the rim is kaku-mimi. The kiri are executed in flat relief and accentuated with gold nunome. I’m fond of the very thinly executed lattice. The irregularities inside the lattice are rust particles, not looking good, but certainly not to remove. Although I have some ideas by myself I like to ask for Your opinions concerning school and age. Thank You, Florian

I stick to my impression that this is the original shape. The mentioned variations in shape are foremost result of the maker’s creativity and only sometimes a practical use could be determined. There are examples of Tsuba with flattend rims to avoid a rolling away if the Sword lies on the ground. Maybe this could a reason here, too, if You look for some... I agree wilh Steven that this Tsuba is not a formal one at all. Formal tsuba should show the kamon of the owner. Florian