ko-kagamishi tsuba

[christianmalterre]

Yes-i am very keen in reading what Henry as it´s former proprietor did find out!

 

Equally i would like to know the exact weight in grains please Mariusz...

 

(edit:please excuse this maybe stupid question by an stupid like me -i can´t remember if we had this question already?

-are there any sights of "White Bronze" to be seen in your´s exemplaire?

(still am puzzled with Han influence here-however unlogic as there´s around 1000 Years time-difference...it may but give an hint if it´s inside..)

 

Christian

[Marius]

Sorry, Christian, I don't have a scale :-)

[John A Stuart]

I hope he does remark on it. Not all Chinese guards are oval, there are round ones, even lobed (mokko). John

[Henry Wilson]

I think we all agree that this tsuba is an unusual item and from what I remember when I owned it, does not look like or feel like a tsuba or mirror as we know them.

 

I have been scratching my head wondering what it could be if not a tsuba. Personally, after considering many theories and doing some research into alternatives, I can't help coming back to the fact that the item has a distinct design on both sides which in my opinion suggests that it was meant to be seen in its entirety. In other words, a lid or a mirror or any other item of this nature would only have a design done on one side, as the reverse side does not need a pattern. Considering what kind of items that would be seen in its entirety and applying Occam's razor, leads me back to believe that it was made as a tsuba.

 

Attached are sketches from the 集古十種 (（しゅうこじゅっしゅ or Shyuu Ko Jyu Shyu) which is basically a field survey carried out by a group of Edo period artists / scholars to document items in temples and shrines (and other places including tombs I think). Here is a link and some information on it:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=15197

 

Below is from page 20 of 集古十種 and I think the top right mirror is of interest. The inscription beside roughly says it was excavated from an estate of Ida Castle in the Ina district of Shinano. If you look at the inner band you see a pattern called 百足脚 or 100 legs / centipede pattern. It can be describe as a series of lines coming from the center with a circle that cuts the lines in the middle.

 

The next picture is from p.28 and the mirror in the bottom right is of an old mirror and the pattern can be described as 籠目 or woven bamboo with characteristic cross hatching. This style of repeating pattern seems to originally occur in old Chinese mirrors going back to very early times and continuing to Jin / Song Dynasties (around 960 to 1234 AD)

 

In the Kagamishi the radiating lines with a circle on top of them is a very distinct feature. After some research this specific design seems to be unique and could be idiosyncratic to the maker. However I think the evolution of the pattern can be traced back to old Chinese mirrors which I think is illustrated well below:

 

To my eye, if we combine these mirrors and the characteristics highlighted, we get a very similar composition as seen in the Ko Kagamishi tsuba and this is illustrated in the diagram below:

 

I have been very careful in choosing the Chinese mirrors to compare with as I do not know very much about them and probably would not be able to tell a fake from a real one. All the pictures of Han Dynasty mirrors are taken from the Murakami Collection that was exhibited in the Nezu Museum in Tokyo. The catalog is the 3rd one down at this link:

http://www.nezu-muse.or.jp/en/publications/page02.html

 

Here is one last slide form the 集古十種 comparing the Ko Kagamishi. Considering all the above I am quite sure this tsuba was influenced by old Chinese mirrors.

 

There is another tsuba that is in the Sasano Kagamishi book which has the same type of rim finish similar to the mirror in the 集古十種 page 28 referred to above. I have been wondering why such Kagamishi are so unique, why there are not many other tsuba that share these Chinese design characteristics and, with the lack of seppa dai, why they break from traditional tsuba convention as seen in Japan.

 

The safe explanation is to ignore these points and say that these tsuba were domestically produced in Japan, around the Nanbokuchuo period as the initial seller told me, and the Kinko artist used Chinese designs that he knew and modified them for the Japan market.

 

With Mariusz's Ko Kagamishi, I can't get over the fact that the large rim has been carved into to accommodate a scabbard. This and the lack of seppa dai as usually seen on Japanese tsuba suggest to me that it was not made in Japan as the maker seems to have not been aware or entirely clear on the dimensions and requirements of the kind of sword it would be fitted on.

 

If we accept this and throw caution to the wind, assuming there were other similar ones once made, leads me to think that there is a chance that this kind of tsuba was imported to Japan during the period of tenuous commercial contacts that were maintained with the Southern Song Dynasty and the Kamakura Shogunate at a time around the 1300s.

 

I dare say, Mariusz's Ko Kagamishi, the Sasano tsuba I refer to and the Burawoy tsuba could be regarded as examples of the kind of tsuba that led to the term Kagamishi being used as to me they clearly emulate old Chinese mirror patterns.

 

I personally think these points are possible (as a long shot of course ) and the Ko Kagamishi tsuba in question is clearly very old, and seems to share stylistic elements with Kagamishi work being imported and domestically produced during the period of the late 13th to 14th centuries. Not many of the same sort of heavily inspired Chinese design survive, suggesting to me that only a relative few were made or the majority have been lost over time because of their age.

 

I hope this post was worth waiting for and I would love to hear other people's thoughts on the points raised.

[John A Stuart]

Very good reasoning and illustrations. I recall the a vast majority of bronze was imported from the mainland, mostly ingots, but, some finished work as well. A distinct Chinese influence whether domestically made or imported work. John

[BMarkhasin]

Henry,

 

Good summary and selection of mirrors to illustrate possible influences. I absolutely agree to the continental influence, but disagree that this was an imported item. The main points against it being of continental manufacture is simply that the Chinese nor Koreans were producing tsuba reminiscent of mirrors, or tsuba of this style in the contemporary dynasties. Most the their sword guards in comparison to Japanese guards as fairly rudimentary things, and styles are reasonably well documented through the Song and later dynasties. I dont think you will find a single example resembling the numerous kagamishi-style tsuba documented in Japan by Sasano and others. I have two reasonably concise books dealing with Chinese weaponry, showing dozens of tsuba styles of the Song/Jin/Yuan, as well as photographs of some in exhibition dating to the Song, and none even remotely resemble kagamishi tsuba. Its also worth noting that the dimensions of Chinese contemporary blades was very different from Japanese -- they were taller and thinner in many cases. I would venture than many would not have comfortably fit in the plate, nor through the existing nakago ana.

 

I believe Kagamishi tsuba are of clear Japanese manufacture, but inspired in varying degrees by continental mirrors, which during the 14th c. were coming into Japan in increasing numbers. These mirrors (among other imports) were new, somewhat exotic, and appealed to the superstitious bushi who found meaning/comfort in their often vague devotional / religious symbology. There is not one single mirror of any manufacture that you can point to and call a direct analogy for what remains of the pattern on this tsuba's plate. Imagine the number / types of mirrors entering Japan at that time - archaic and contemporary. They likely were not all directly meaningful to the Japanese, so their designs were augmented, mixed and likely had new elements added that appealed to, and were culturally understandable to the Japanese -- Japanese have historically been adapters, preferring Japanese versions of foreign items. That is what these tsuba were -- Japanese, inspired to some degree by Chinese / Korean. Their feel is very Japanese, the material (yamagane) is far more associated with Japan than China, the lacquer treatment on the entire plate is characteristically Japanese, design on both sides of the tsuba, etc.. all are suggstive of Japanese kokinko manufacture.

 

The divets in the rim above the hamachi of the blade could easily be attributable to a change in koshirae style, and blade resizing. With all the chages in blade styles in the 1300 and early 1400's, this tsuba could have seen action on some widely varying nihonto and koshirae. Kamakura and even Nambokucho koshirae were delicate, elegant things, with thin, elongated oval or slightly trapezoidal profiles. In Kamakura times, the style was to use peaked koiguchi on both the saya and the tsuka adjacent the tsuba (see many hyogo-gusari and kenukigata tachi), if you were to speculate, even these could have resulted in that small divet being cut out on both sides to make room.

 

Anyways, its a great discussion -- thanks Mariusz and Henry for the post and the great insights / analysis.

 

Best Regards,

Boris.

[christianmalterre]

This is very definitely an phantastic threat!

Thank you very much Henry!

I do have read with big enthousiast and keen interest-you made some very good thought here.

 

Me,but,too-do not think these Kagami Tsuba were produced from old/older mirrors...

I handeled several Bronze Mirrors in past-also have to confess that one of them fell me to floor and broke into dozends of parts(several hundred Euro lost within one second careless ..

In profound analysis of all Mirrors i had in hands-and those were dozends from mine own collection,and others collections,all to date timespan Warring States till up to late Tang and even Ming...non of these had ever ben suited for use as an Tsuba-comparing it´s square section,construction and of course their´s material.

2-sided picturesque Mirrors from earlier than Ming are such EXTREMELY seldom-that here,this point and possibility does not play an slightest relevance(in mine eyes)(comparing to the "Mass" of Ko-Kagami Tsuba we already see here in this threat(Mariusz,Robert Burawoy,Boris plus those depicted in various publications...maybe 20 together-if not many more?)

Bronze(whichever),does break very facile...such i definitely doupt in any kind of stress-resistance(suitable to be a Tsuba)...

Mine personal conclusion would still be(and this is what it seems Boris does think,too?)that those were definitely all produced in Japan...

When,why and by whom-is an other topic-as strictly speaking-an Kagami has got nothing to do with Kagami-Tsuba.

In right wording,an Kagami-Tsuba had to ben manufactured of Bronze...non of these are of Bronze...they all are of Yamagane made...

Which again,is one of those various alloys the Japanese did...(maybe deriving from Yellow Bronze?(which is the lowest quality one(in sense of value)-does but accept ruder threatment)

Where i do agree is the very strong influence of Han and(maybe Song)/China and the broad rim-stylism(which is an typic of many Korean Mirrors)

Equally i do think that Mariusz exemplaire is adapted...

Lot of stuff to reflect upon...

Great threat!

Thank you a lot...many input to degist here...

 

Christian

[Marius]

Excellent discussion, many thanks to all who have participated, especially Boris and Henry.

 

To wrap up: a Nambokucho Japanese tsuba styled after Chinese mirrors, made from yamagane (although I think it is rather made of an alloy*) and lacquered, with later alterations.

 

Thanks again.

 

* see that the metal from which this tsuba was made is grey. Thos does not look like yamagane, but it could be nigurome or some other alloy.

[Henry Wilson]

You're welcome Mariusz. I enjoyed writing about the guard.

 

Would anyone like to comment on:

- the significance of mounting a sword with a Kagamishi tsuba.

- what kind of koshirae Kagamishi tsuba would have been mounted with.

 

I think there is a lot more to discuss here.

[BMarkhasin]

Henry,

I dont read any particular significance in mounting a kagamishi tsuba on a sword. Its a case of user preference / availability, style and apprearance in my opinion. If you want to see a Muromachi koshirae mounted with a kagamishi tsuba, take a look at the book Uchigatana Koshirae #12 (pages 44/45). This illustrates a katana sized kuro-urushi uchigatana with a moderately sized rimmed yamagane tsuba with two birds on a sytlized wave? background. Another kagamishi-style tsuba is seen on koshirae #10, pages 40/41, on another Muromachi period uchigatana koshirae. These two are both daito koshirae, but one can imagine numerous styles of wakizashi being fitted with smaller yamagane kagamishi tsuba, for a lovely look and feel. Perhaps, the further you go back in time, and the less perscribed koshirae styles were, you would likely find these tsuba used on field tachi as well. I think the ex-Henry kagamishi tsuba would have looked great on a kuro-urushi field tachi. It would look like the scroll paintings we see of ground troops with large maru-gata tsuba with broad rims... Cooooool!

 

Best,

Boris.

[John A Stuart]

Now that I would like to see. I confess I have not yet seen a koshirae, probably for obvious reasons, fitted with tsuba of this type dating to Kamakura or Nambokucho periods. I will of course look back through some books and investigate. I do like the look these would have, liking copper and bronze tsuba. John

[BMarkhasin]

Here are the images I was referring to in my earlier post. Both koshirae are Muromachi (likely late Muromachi). Tsuba of course could be older than the koshirae, but both would be considered kagamishi tsuba by most, although not as old as Henry's.

 

 

 

 

 

Best,

Boris.

[John A Stuart]

Thanks, Boris. I have been pounding the books looking for tsuba mounted earlier. To no avail so far. Actually in an earlier period have found medallions of the type on armour, but, they must be one faced. John

[Marius]

BTW, the pictures Boris has posted are from "Uchigatana Koshirae" by the Tokyo National Museum, 1987. A great book with mostly Muromachi koshirae. If you can get a copy, buy it :-)

[John A Stuart]

I am sorry, but, I can't let this topic go. As I still can't find examples of pre-Muromachi koshirae bearing Kagamishi tsuba, I present these for comment. In the example like the one first posted that resembles kagami, you will note that it too has a nakagoana that impinges on the design elements, in fact showing no precast thought of the seppadai. This still leads me to the adaptation theory. Note also that the other example showing obverse and reverse makes such allowance for the seppadai and is indeed a domestic object made as a tsuba. Here the design is kept away from this area. I include an example of a Tachikanagushi tsuba also mid Muromachi that bears a striking resemblance to Kagamishi tsuba cast of yamagane, although with a bronze fukurin. There are plenty of examples of Kagamishi tsuba as well that have no resemblance to mirrors, also Muromachi period, and the design in those cases make allowance for the nakagoana and seppadai. I must at this point still, and I'm not being contentious, consider Kagamishi tsuba as not appearing before the Muromachi period and the ones labeled so, but, with the nakagoana cut into the design as being adaptations. John

[BMarkhasin]

John,

 

It seems you are distinguishing kagamishi style tsuba that look like mirrors from those which do not, and purely based on this single visual aspect suggesting one was not a tsuba to start with because there is often not much room in the central field area for conventional seppadai for a well-positioned nakago-ana. ie. it looks/feels too cramped to have started out as a tsuba. The first example you cite is very similar to the Burawoy tsuba, obviously a mirror-inspired example, and you are bothered by the obviously late additions of the hitsu-ana and largish (resized) nakago which seems pushes the limits of central field. Again, consider it in ubu condition - likely lots more room. Not all early koshirae were equiped with seppa as well, so its possible that the koiguchi abutted directly against the tsuba, and considering the often thin cross-section of Muromachi koshirae, there would not be much lost of the central design. Also, when these were cast, it was likely done with a 'starter' aperature for the nakago ana -- ie. a small unfinished nakago that could safely be sized-up for whatever blade it would serve. It would be up to the tsubako to cleanly and proportionately orient the nakago-ana and pair it with an appropriately sized blade.

 

The next two examples are of a very common style in the mid-late Muromachi - the wormed wood ground. Often you see elements reflective of brass inlay tsuba which were contemporary and very popular. Kagamishi-esque, but really more of kokinko work. They are all yamagane, so cast works. I would really prefer not to call them kagamishi, but its too late as precedent has been set. If they were in my collection, I would call them kokinko. There is no defined central area in these tsuba, and that seems to make you more comfortable as nothing feels cramped and from a tsuba layout perspective, there is sufficient room -- thus a proper tsuba. In both cases, I suggest the hitsuana were done roughly at the time of manufacture or shortly thereafter based on the shape and orientation.

 

The final example is a standard kokinko tsuba with an Odawara fukurin -- a fairly short-lived design. Virtually all of these fukurin were made of thin silver as it was easy to work in repousse, not bronze (not sure thats the correct description). This is not a kagamishi tsuba at all, and a latest Muromachi example (I would say Azuchi Momoyama actually).

 

As for a lack of pre- late Muromachi koshirae bearing kagamishi tsuba, well I cant help you there. The unmolested ones from the late Muromachi Sengoku period are rare enough that the TNM felt it worthy to make an exhibition of them (all but 3 koshirae in the Uchigatana Koshirae book are from museums and jinjas to my understanding). Go back even to the late 1400's and the number of ubu uchigatana or field tachi koshirae is dramatically cut, let alone to the Nambokucho/Kamakura. Thats almost akin to seeking unicorns (or kokuho as the case may be). The koshirae elements are all disassociated at this point, and we usually only run into the tsuba.

 

I think I understand the foundation of your apprehension, but not everything is so cut-and-dry. It makes a lot more sense based on the entire body of evidence, micro- and macro- to consider kagamishi tsuba as Japanese products, for Japanese blades. If it were up to me, ONLY the examples with clear resemblance to mirrors would be called kagamishi(-style) -- and this is a misnomer as they were produced by kokinko tsubako. All other styles, kokinko. Reign-in these broad groups and dont try to look for further 'speciation' where it likely does not exist. Anyhooooo, thats my 2 Yen (and that aint worth much!).

 

Best,

Boris.

[John A Stuart]

Thank you Boris, You have read my misapprehensions perfectly. I agree koKinko maybe a better appellation, that is why I suggested Irushi. Hens teeth is right. I looked through a lot of books including Oyamazumijinja books and my limited personal vocabulary and zilch. Perhaps considering the actual mirror-like tsuba should be done as a stand alone type. As to the Tachikanagushi tsuba, yes written as a brass fukurin, however, it is not a yellow brass and why I said bronze. Good thoughts. John

[Pete Klein]

I say without hesitation Boris is the go to guy on Muromachi Jidai and earlier kodogu and toso, bar none.

[Marius]

I present these for comment.

 

John, thanks for posing those great pictures

What book are they from? If it has more of these great examples, I need to have it!

 

Attached is a picture of a similar tsuba. Enjoy :-)

 

Boris, many thanks for your last post. I am saving this thread as valuable source of information concerning the so called kagamishi tsuba. I think that we should agree with your point that "kagamishi" tsuba are actually the work of ko-kinko. The materials (yamagane) and the techniques that they have used are not what mirror makers would be accustomed to.

 

Excellent discussion, I have enjoyed it thoroughly.

 

Thank you, gentlemen!

 

PS: May I add, that Boris is having a special sale of some tsuba, kodogu and ancient nihonto and original koshirae? I would strongly encourage you to at least have a look. For me as a tsuba guy, most of the guards there are something that one sees once in a lifetime. I am not exaggerating, most of the tsuba will easily go Juyo (not that I am in any way attached to this paper, but some people are).

 

http://yamabushiantiques.com/YBA2_BM_COLLECTION2.htm

 

I am in no way associated with Boris and the yamabushiantiques.com site (otherwise that I had bought tsuba from Boris and was always more than happy). Neither have I financial interest. It is just that the quality strikes me as unsurpassed.

[BMarkhasin]

Gentlemen,

 

Thanks for the super thread and lively discussions - its a pleasure to see a long thread stay on track with focused contributions!

 

Pete, I'm not worthy! Thank you very much for the kind comment, its greatly appreciated coming from you, as I know your high standards! Mariusz, same goes to you, thanks for the plug. Most collectors are not exposed to the older high quality bits, so without a solid basis for comparison, there is unfortunately too little appreciation and understanding when they do occasionally surface.

 

Best Regards,

Boris.

[John A Stuart]

Hi Mariusz, Tsuba Kanshoki. John

[Marius]

Thanks John,

 

How stupid of me, I should have checked

 

Seems like I need to look through this excellent book again. Haven't done that in a long time.

[Henry Wilson]

Many thanks Boris for more enlightening information. I have dug out descriptions from a translation of Uchigatana Goshirae of the two koshirae that you have posted for reference.

 

 

Also here is a tsuba from the Sasano Kagamishi book. I have done a rough translation on the description that Sasano includes.

 

Wave and circle pattern tsuba. No.8

It is a cast tsuba that has Odawara Hikozou ornamental style rim with stars.

The overall design has a feeling of antiquity. The wave and concentric ring pattern is soft but powerful and gives a feeling of the Kamakura period.

Overall the tsuba has a feeling of largeness and based on this I think the tsuba is from the Nanbokucho period.

[BMarkhasin]

Henry,

Thanks for the translations, most useful. The Sasano description is harder to accept. I have often felt he was too aggressive with his dating of Kagamishi tsuba, and I personally feel he got the one you posted wrong. The odawara fukurin is generally considered to be a late Muromachi - Momoyama (possibly mid- at the earliest) feature, yet Sasano correctly identifies its representation on the kagamishi tsuba and calls it Nambokucho. I suppose that style of fukurin could have predated the 15th c, but I think a search for such early tsuba with fukurin would prove fruitless. I would have called this tsuba late Muromachi to be on the safe side. I guess it just goes to reinforce the paucity of supporting hard data when trying to establish ages on some of these older, enigmatic pieces. Maybe Sasano had the fortune of seeing some old pieces in unpublished Japanese collections, with older fukurin of this type... it's not beyond the realm of possibility.

 

Best Regards,

Boris.

[Marius]

I have found one intteresting tsuba in Tsuba Shusei. Please look - it is pretty obvious that never had seppa-dai. Both sides, each side is different. Very interesting piece, IMHO...

[BMarkhasin]

Mariusz,

Thats a great image, and not one I have seen before so thanks for posting it. Wow.... this is an oddball. I like it, but this thing is a Frankenstein among kagamishi tsuba. When you look at the motifs, you get a sense that the maker must have had access to a range of mirrors for design inspiration. The design is a melange of actual mirror motifs from varying ages, rather crude and somewhat random scrolled and linear motifs, as well as typical Japanese buddhist symbols and reversed swastikas as we saw in the Burawoy piece. In terms of obvious Chinese influence, I see an attempt at Han TLV, possible petal and triangle motifs. Then we have unattributable random areas of chevrons mixed with scrolled figure 8's (see first image, 4-o'clock and 7-o'clock). Weird.

 

Both sides of the mirror are different in composition and orientation of design, as well as the number of bands. Note that there was no central boss on this example, indicating that it was never a mirror -- plus it is obviously double sided. There are way too many concentric bands on one side, and they essentially completely fill the plate to the center. To me this is an interesting piece, but un-unified and crude -- experimental perhaps. Its like the tsubako just vomited all the designs he could think of into this one composition. That said, it is ubu and thus very rare and important as a study piece.

 

Best,

B

[Marius]

Yes, it is interesting, isn't it. :-)

 

BTW, I have noticed that all tsuba of this "mirror-inspired type" tend to be crude when compared to mirrors. When writing this I am looking at a Western Han TLV mirror (no, I haven't bought this online, heaven forbid ) and apart from the metal, which is exquisite, smooth bronze with awesome patina colours, the design is so detailed and precise that a Japanese "kagamishi" tsuba looks positively primitive in comparison.

 

Having said that, in many examples of "kagamishi" tsuba this crudeness contributes to a feeling of strength and antiquity. Or at least that is what I think Sasano would say

[BMarkhasin]

Mariusz,

I think you hit on a key kantei point regarding comparison to actual mirrors, I agree fully. I think Sasano was correct (if not a touch dramatic) in his descriptions / assertions... but I have been accused of the same :D Its not so bad...

 

Best,

B

[myochin]

As a small side note, I fell upon an article by Robert Burawoy on Tsuba in Arts of Asia (March-April 1985) where the 2nd tsuba picture at the very start of this thread is illustrated. He states that "the design is symmetrical on both sides".

 

Paul.

[BMarkhasin]

Hi Paul,

That is correct, but important to differentiate that it is symmetrical (as mirrors often are), but not identical (a kantei point of many higher quality 'kagamishi' tsuba).

 

Best,

Boris