FlorianB

Hello, I’m convinced You did a careful job and certainly I don’t blame You of any fire-treatment. But I repeat: the inner sides must not been cleaned! The shot I’ve made isn’t best quality but I hope You get the point. Note the contrast of the polished plate as well as the rim and the unpolished (though slightly rusty) inner sides. Especially on filigree motifs the rust can be very deep, so if You rub off the rust eagerly holes could appear and even the delicate bars simply could crumble to nothing. FlorianB

Hello, it seems, that the inner sides have been elaboratly cleaned, too. This should never be done! However, several spots with a dull appearance and the crusty patch on the seppa dai hint to damage by fire - so it’s not a great loss. FlorianB

Hi Evan, the shot was taken from Masayuki Sasano’s “Early Japanese Sword Guards - Sukashi Tsuba” published 1974. I remembered this peculiar tsuba because of the rather unusual design that seems not typical for Owari. Furthermore it is the only one with Musashino motif in my books and picture collection with pierced dewdrops. Florian

Evan, indeed a gorgeous tsuba! Judging by the pictures alone and without knowledge of the dimensions the steel surface and the seppa-dai (as mentioned above) could hint to Kyo, because of the sturdy execution it shows otherwise Owari traits. But that's only speculation. It was a very popular subject so I think, also other schools can be considered. I'm not sure, but are there horizontal layers visible in nakago-ana and the hitsu-ana, too? I found a similar Owari-tsuba in Sasano's book, classified as late Muromachi. Yours must be later, IMHO about early Edo - Genroku. Florian

Jean, at first I thought so too, but the linear traces appear only partial on the rim and they aren't easily visible so I was lucky to catch them in the shot. Florian

Certainly I know about the general function of these protrusions but I’m eager to know what the artist depicts in them. So I risk to annoy - or bore - You all. Concerning the function of an artist I have been misunderstood. I meant that we can’t compare a traditional metalworker with a contemporary artist producing - for example - abstract pictures or objects and interpret these however he likes. So the design of the menuki could’nt be abstract but was derived from anything of Japanese origin. The suggestion it could be a drum is very helpful. Thanks Markus! Indeed I forgot that tomoe are a common decoration on drumheads and I will research into this subject. Florian

Guido, I get Your point, but the presented extensions depict pincers, bars, ken and even the rhombic design in Ray’s menuki can be easily identified as matsukawabishi. I‘m afraid to become a nuisance, but taking into consideration that the metalwork artists get their motifes out of everyday life, nature, history, religion and so on I can’t imagine that the design shown in this peculiar menuki should mean nothing. It is too exceptional and elaborate executed to be a result at the whim of an artist. However, be it as it may - perhaps future will bring an answer. Florian

Tomoe-mon are often depicted on roof tiles as protective charms. I wonder if the upper half depicts a simplyfied roof which is mirrored to get a balanced design. Florian

Hello, I saw this pair of menuki offered on the Aoi-Art-page : https://www.aoijapan.com/menuki-mumei-tomoe I wonder, what is shown here? There’s no need to talk about the tomoe-mon, but I have no idea what the strange form in the background should be. Is it some kind of implement? Maybe You could clearify it. Best, Florian

Tosho tsuba have been made until late Edo and some of the later ones are so cunningly made they look older as they are. Thus it is sometimes difficult to determine the actual age. Your Tsuba seems to be an old one. However, from my point of view the nakago-ana appears newer. Note the sharp-angeled edges - in comparision to the smooth edges of the sukashi - and the notches left for sekigane. This don’t fit to Ko-Tosho. At least it is not in the original form but has been modified later. FlorianB

Thank to Markus - the correct name is very helpful! Also thanks to John for his further particulars! Best, FlorianB

Gentlemen, in Mr. Hawley’s book about “mon” is mentioned in connection with the “myoga-mon” on page 33 a deity named MANDARASHIN (or Madarashin as it is written there, too). Alas, I can’t find anything about this god although he seemed to have been very popular in the Muromachi period. The only hits in the internet are sides repeating Mr. Hawley’s lines. Because of private research I would be glad if anybody could tell me more about this god. FlorianB

Again thanks for Your opinions. In case of Japanese blades it is in most cases a downgrade when the style is not typical for a smith or school (kawari-deki). In how far this applies to tsuba as well I don’t know. Recently I’ve heard by an expert that even the traditional classification of tsuba-”schools” has to be reviewed because many producers worked in different styles either because they where inspired by other works or to satisfy customers wishes. My tsuba maybe seems to support this assumption. Florian

Hello, thanks for Your answers - and the enlightment. Of course I’m fully aware that You can not take ONE detail into consideration and ignore the rest. However, I just wanted another opinion to what I’ve heard about these tagane. At least I’m not wondering any more that the paper accompanying this particular tsuba claims it to be made around Genroku. This “discrepancy” would have been my next question - no need any more. Sincerly, FlorianB

Gentlemen, in the picture below You can see yose-tagane above and below the nakago-ana (on the right side highlighted). I was told, that this special kind of tagane were in use during Muromachi-period to fit the tsuba to the tang. Later on (as You are no doubt aware) soft metals have been used for this purpose. So, is it a rule that the age of a tsuba can be pinned down to Muromachi by the appearance of these yose-tagane? Sincerly, FlorianB

Meanwhile I’m wondering, too, about the request. Do You want to get in contact with collectors of this special topic to exchange experience and knowledge? Sincerly, Florian

Shoami, yes, this COULD BE the ultimate answer, but not a satisfying one, I’m afraid. Nice try, Mauro. Mikolaj, a gorgeous collection, I’m deeply impressed! Arnold, I agree with you that the curvature in the upper part of the seppa dai differs on each side. This was a helpful advice! In future I will pay more attention to a carefully examination of seppa-dai. Finally, what do You think about the tekkotsu? Does it go with Kyo? I remember a similar discussion in which the apperance of tekkotsu was the decisive clue for an Owari-attribution. Sincerly, Florian

Thanks for Your replies. Concerning the quality: IMHO it is a very good tsuba and this is the opinion of our leading german expert, too. Although I must admit the difficulty to assess the tsuba by my moderate pictures. I understand that the pictures by Mikolay show all the same tsuba, on one hand offered as Kyo-Sukashi - and as an example for Owari on the other hand. Well, You see my problem... However, it is interesting to compare both pieces. The shape of the kiri on the tsuba in Mikolaj's post appear in my eyes more like Kyo, but the seppa-dai and the ryo-hitsu hint to Owari. Furthermore the herein mentioned time offers a wider range. I think, if it is Owari it can't be older than early Edo, if it is Kyo it could be earlier, around Momoyama. Thanks thus far, Florian

Gentlemen, I want to show You a Tsuba. The size is 81 x 82 mm / 3,18” x 3,22”, the thickness 4,8 mm / 0,18”. There is no niku and the surface has a moist look (uruoi). My first impression was Kyo-Sukashi because of the thin plate, the small, rounded rim and the sumptuous composition. The hitsu-ana, too, appear a little bit squeezed. However, the design lacks the elegance and airiness of Kyo. The kiri look more like those I’ve seen in Owari-works. Furthemore, twisted-looking linear tekkotsu partially are seen in the rim. After all - Owari? I’m puzzled... I would be grateful to get Your opinions. Sincerly, Florian

Hi Florian, I think, there’s no need to change signature. Latetly I’m not very active at the NMB and if we are mixed up - so what? If You like to exchange thoughts feel free to send me a mail. FlorianB

Dear Eric, dear Florian, I have to admit that I am the guy who wrote the lines about the “Aesthetics in Japanese Sword” and I’m honoured to read that You appreciate my thoughts. Maybe You know that since the 1980s a lot of papers had been issued in the NBTHK-EB by several members. However, nearly all those articles deal with the technical aspects of Nihonto and as long as I am interested in the Japanese Sword I struggled with its artistic value. At least I tried to put my own ideas in the paper mentioned above and published it several years ago for both the members of the NBTHK-EB and the Nihonto Club. Later I also enclosed it slightly modified in the german edition of the first NC cataloge. Your comments suggest that my lines are of a certain use. Finally, it is interesting to have a namesake in this message board who starts his own efforts to gain knowledge in Nihonto. FlorianB

Thank You all for Your opinions. At least I’m not disappointed because as I mentioned before this tsuba is just of secondary interest for me. It is part of a koshirae stored away for about ten years and was „rediscovered“ recently while searching for a carving work. Just because of the extensive signature and my uncertainty of the quality I thought it could be an interesting piece for discussion. Now I’m wiser - and that’s what I gained for! Greetings, Florian

I’m sorry that I’m still harping on the quality. Could there be any details specified which prove the quality or is it necessary to compare this piece with other ones to get an impression? Yours, Florian

Hi Guys, thanks for Your responses. At first I want to point out that I’m not fishing for compliments - thanks anyhow . Secondly, two additional photos: To specify my problem, I learned that the more detailed, precise and deep a carving is the better is the workmanship and thus the quality. In this tsuba I see a discrepancy between the shaping of the dragon and the mould of the waves. IMO due to the plain rim the tsuba appears to be incomplete, too. Did the maker lost his interest or did a student collaborate? Or are there practical or aesthetic reasons (i.e. an intentional contrast)? Greetings, Florian

Hello everybody, I want to show You a tsuba I own, probably from the late Edo period. The measures are 7,3 x 6,7 cm (about 2,88 x 2,64 inch) , thickness of the seppa-dai is 0,75 cm (0,295 inch). It is signed „Shigejuro“ or „Mojuro“ (thanks, Markus, for translation help!) with Kakihan, „Tachibana uji“ and on the reverse „Sesshu ju“. Because Tsuba are an ancillary interest of mine I have only a few reference books and I wonder if anybody can give me some facts about this man? My second question concerns the quality of this piece. On the one hand the body of the dragon is precisely cut and shaped, on the other hand the modeling of the waves appears to be flat in spite of the thickness. Furthermore, the design runs vividly through both ana, the rim, however, is plain. I would be grateful to hear Your opinions. Florian