Akasaka tsuba

[growlingbear]

Hi all,

 

I'm hoping that the expertise of the board will be able to help me out with some more details of this tsuba. I have identified it as Akasaka, but I don't have the books to be able to pin down exactly when or who made it - they are next on my shopping list. I believe it is mid-Edo, but it would be much appreciated if someone can help!

 

Scans to show general design, the colour is relatively accurate, but probably more brown coloured in real light:

 

Picture showing three layer construction:

 

Picture showing "bones":

 

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

James

[hxv]

James,

 

I'm am a beginner with iron tsuba, but your tsuba doesn't look Akasaka. It looks to have some Shoami influence and some Kyo Sukashi influence, and looks older than mid-Edo. I like it - very nice tsuba!

 

Regards,

Hoanh

[growlingbear]

Hoanh,

 

The reason I believe it is Akasaka is both the very sharp cut sukashi and the three layer construction which is clearly visible and I think is a kantei point for Akasaka tsuba. Happy for someone more knowledgeable than me to direct me in a better direction!

 

I forgot to post the dimensions:

Height:72mm

Width:67.5mm

Thickness:5.5mm (seppa dai), 4mm (mimi)

 

Cheers

 

James

[Ford Hallam]

I hate to be the 'bad cop' but I'm not at all comfortable with this tsuba. The welding lines are so distinct as to be actually 'wrong' in a sense. The appearance of the inner walls of the cut outs seem as fresh as yesterday and the overall patina is very weak to my eyes. I just don't 'buy' this as a genuine Edo piece. My gut instinct tells me the level of sophistication of fakes has just been raised... I can't say I'm surprised nor is it particularly difficult but to me it seems obvious. Sorry, just my take on this piece.

[Soshin]

Hi James,

 

I need to agree with Ford H. the quality and consistency of the patina specificly on the open work is poor. I wouldn't expect to see this even in a late Edo Period piece. If it isn't fake then it is an antique that has been way over cleaned by a amateur on the expressway to Hell of good intentions. I can also see this over cleaning on the inside surfaces of the nakago-ana where the layering of the plate construction is visible and the rim.

[Pete Klein]

OK -- I'm good cop today (meh)... I believe this to be original but abused. The patina is what is left 'under' the original patina which has been removed, perhaps after fire damage? The colour is off but looking more closely at the metal it has an Akasaka look to it, a sort of mottling, which I have seen in examples I have held. The seams might have opened from heat but are characteristic from report of earlier Akasaka works, although this is disputed by some. The sekigane look to be original and the shape of the seppa dai persuade me to think upon earlier work, being quite angular at the poles, with the kogai hitsuana reminding me of either second or fourth generation (probably fourth) -- I call that shape the 'Nipple of Venus' after the Italian confection. Whenever I see Akasaka with kuchibene and tagane about the nakagoana I think of Tadashige so that is a possibility, although it lacks thickness which would be more toward his successor (whose name escapes me at the moment). If the tagane were more angular to the vertical I would say Tosa Myochin, but not here. All in all I would not go out of my way for this example as it is in poor condition and probably is not more than a study piece yet interesting for kantei.

[cspage]

Just a couple of thoughts, referring to Ford's comments. I assume fakes are made primarily in order to make money (I may be wrong, fakes might be made just to prove it can be done). It might prove interesting to find out the financial history of this tsuba.

 

Next, if making a fake, why be so obvious as to abuse the patina so much. Would not a more creditable patina reap more lucre on a piece such as this were it a fake?

 

Please note I'm not making any judgements on the tsuba, just asking questions.

 

Colin

[Fred Geyer]

Did you go by the tagane marks to determine Akasaka?? if so the back side would be the same on a 5th gen which this was made to look like by the pattern on top and bottom, but the ana would be off set on his tsuba meaning one lower. His tsuba you have to tilt to have them even. So not Akasaka and the way the tagine are re hit I say tosa moychin tsuba.

 

Fred Geyer

[raiden]

From the pics, the tsuba looks definitely burned badly. The remnants of the patina and the texture of the inner portions show heat damage at quite a high level. Then who ever over cleaned it trying to take off the scale, has left a shadow of the tsubas original self....sanmai style like this is sometimes the 4th maker known as the first Tadatoki, but the kozuka hitsu is so damaged (its shape appears strange) most likely by the heat that it is hard to pick a particular generation.

[Soshin]

Hi James,

 

I have seen this type of heat damage to the plate that Mike Y. is referring caused by the tsuba being in a hot fire. I once had a Umetada tsuba that showed this same effect on the plate. The surface was covered over with fire scale.

[Ford Hallam]

I can entertain the notion that this tsuba may have suffered from fire damage but on balance I remain a little less convinced than others. I'd expect more damage to the very thin sections of the sukashi for starters. The presence of verdigris (if natural and not artificially stimulated) on the copper suggest some time has passed since the apparent fire damage was caused (fire would leave the copper black) but this is at odds with the rather thin patina on the 'restored' surfaces of the steel.

 

Fire causes the build up of a grey oxide layer (fire scale) which then either remains intact over the whole surface (it's actually harder, though very brittle, than the underlying steel) or, more frequently, flakes off in patches. The steel that is then revealed is invariably grainy in appearance because the steel, being inhomogeneous, is converted to iron oxides (fire scale) unevenly. Areas of higher carbon oxidise more rapidly as do the grain boundaries between the particles or layers of the worked tamahagane. None of this necessarily proves my opinion, I mention it merely to provide a clearer picture of what fire does to steel.

 

The open grain and obvious 'san-mai' construction seen inside the nakago ana might point to an early Akasaka manufacture but to my eyes this looks more like a fairly unrefined wrought iron sandwich than the degree of working I'd expect in genuine early Akasaka guards. Later examples are even more refined in that respect.

 

As for seki-gane and kuchibeni marks, these are all fairly straightforward to replicate and don't sway me either way.

 

And Colin, yes, it would make more sense to create a more convincing patina if this was made to deceive but that's not so easily done.

[christianmalterre]

me do completely agree with Ford´s writing here.

Did somehow not dare to give mine thought yesterday evening,when i saw this Tsuba posted(had ben first to comment it- equally did/do not really want to discourage James here)

It but is NOT Akasaka-and it´s NOT an good one.

It strongly reminds me to cast Sentoku(or even lesser quality amalgam) which got however patinated.

Dito i do not agree in anything obviously seen to ben called "cisel marks"

Note Mimi-there´s somehow characteristic reminding me to cast-bubbles here(which can be found on low quality cast)

It´s an cast reproduction-stylism taken from late Tosa Myochin school Aka copies...

An real Fake in mine eyes.

Sorry

 

Christian

[growlingbear]

Thanks everyone for taking the time to comment.

 

Obviously I'm disappointed that this seems to be a fake, but I didn't pay very much for it (picked it up on the spur of the moment at an antiques fair as I was surprised to see a tsuba there).

 

I recognised that it was fairly badly damaged, you can see in the first scan where the thin sukashi have been damaged (at about 2 and 8 o'clock), it looks like the top layer has broken off. This is also the case on the second photo around both kogai and kozuka hitsu ana. The 3 layers are clearly visible in some areas (as shown on the photo), but the layers shown in the picture are accentuated by the angle of light that I used to take the photo. In other places the layers are much less visible. It does look like there is some "scale" on the walls of the sukashi which has flaked off - the layers are more visible in the area where it has flaked away. There is also some corrosion apparent in some areas of the sukashi walls.

 

I guess my one question about the motivation for making this tsuba if it is a fake is that someone has gone to a reasonable amount of trouble to create the 3 layers, but then has caused quite significant damage on the surface (bits broken away) as well as the poorly done patina. I understand the difficulty of making a convincing patina, but I am not sure I see why the surface would have been deliberately damaged. I can't see that there would have been much of a financial gain for the maker given the price I paid for it!

 

Thanks very much for all your help though and if anything it's reinforced the need to buy some more books!

 

James

[christianmalterre]

Dear James

 

i still hope and wish i am wrong here with mine observation!

This-at least-would ben mine personal way to see this piece while presight observating an bunch of Tsuba in auctionhouse Lots...

Me,would not much care about it-certainly not bid on it....

I but still hope,i am wrong here in fact;as i do know how discouraging such "attributions" can be...and it´s like always-we just can judge from pictures here...

seeing and feeling(haptic)in live-Always is essential!

There were schools(Kanayama for example)who produced Tsuba in multiple way!

There may be Sanmai constructions done of course,Sandiron,wrought Iron used,forged Iron used ect...

I but doupt hard that Tosa Myochin(and this is the stylism here)did use or work such...

They had first class iron ores on hand!(see those excellent Tosa Myochin Akasaka,Nobuie "copies" and Yagyu Tsuba they produced)

 

Christian

[growlingbear]

No worries Christian, I didn't think this was a masterpiece but I actually quite like the design.

 

Even if this is a fake, it will still help me learn to avoid these mistakes in future. If not I'll try and identify it when I understand more!

 

James

[Soshin]

Hi James,

 

Please don't give up on tsuba collecting! Everyone has these type of learning experiences it happens to us all. Here is a link to a cast tsuba I purchased for a lot of money that I was able to return and exchange it for another tsuba. It is always good to deal with honest people when you are buying things like these.

http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/viewtopic.php?t=13376

[MauroP]

Hi James,

my non-so-educated opinionion is that your tsuba is a legitimate Edo period Kyō-Sukashi tsuba (symmetry suggest me this attribution rather than Akasaka), probably damaged by fire and badly restored. Try with a magnet to exclude a non-ferrous alloy.

Bye, Mauro

[Pete Klein]

OK -- for whatever it's worth, it's not a fake -- but it's also far from choice due to condition. My two cents.

 

Mauro -- Kyo Sukashi tend toward having 'koban' shaped seppa dai:

As you will see in the example under discussion the seppa dai is tapered at the twelve and six o'clock positions which is a characteristic of most Akasaka tsuba (and some Tosa Myochin). Kyo Sukashi works also tend to have ovoid hitsu ana which this example (right - kogai hitsu) does not. The half pipe mimi is also a charastic of Akasaka but can be found in other schools as well. Sometimes it's just a matter of putting together the overall characteristics of the piece and balancing the attributes to kantei it.

 

BTW: for those who are not familiar with Fred Geyer he is the go-to guy here in the USA on Akasaka, having researched hundreds (at least) of pieces for his own collection and writing on the subject also. He has a definite depth of knowledge on the subject.

[Ford Hallam]

I think it worth pointing out the very obvious point that if a particular shape is taken to indicate a specific school or period it can equally be copied by a modern maker to deceive one into thinking that the item in question is of that age or group.

[Brian]

I want to thank Pete and Fred for their expertise and info. Fred is indeed the go-to guy for Akasaka, and Pete is no novice either when it comes to fittings. It's a pity that education like this comes at the expense of someone purchasing something that turns out to be a disappointment. If it's any consolation, the rest of us have benefitted in knowledge from it. I think the reasoning shown so far indicates this isn't a fake, so although anything can be faked, the logic is that this one is fire damaged. Of course certainty can only come from in-hand inspection but I would tend to agree with the opinions expressed for the reasons given.

Ford, it is logical that any kantei trait can be faked, but when it comes with other reasoning such as given here, then logic dictates that the simplest explanation is the prevailing one, no? No-one can guarantee that it isn't a fake..but not all fakers have the skill to pull this off, and as you said yourself.."My gut instinct tells me the level of sophistication of fakes has just been raised" which is always possible, but unlikely given the explanations expressed by advanced collectors for the unconvincing aspects.

 

Brian

[Ford Hallam]

Brian,

 

...it is logical that any kantei trait can be faked, but when it comes with other reasoning such as given here, then logic dictates that the simplest explanation is the prevailing one, no?

 

I suppose that on balance I'd have to agree, but I think it important to keep in mind that fakers are definitely getting more sophisticated and it's a truism in the art and antiquities collecting world that smart fakers will give you what you expect to see.

 

We've been relatively lucky so far in that fake tsuba have been quite crude. But, with the availability of easy resources on the net, like this forum for example , clever fakers will learn quickly what it is we rely on to form our judgements. If nothing else I hope the doubts I've expressed here highlight the risk in relying on obvious check points.

 

Personally speaking I've never felt that a check list of, so called, kantei points was all that relevant in terms of assessing authenticity and quality. I feel that a reliance on a limited set of features is short sighted and artificial. The appreciation of any art form is about so much more than categorisation and labelling.

 

Generally speaking, in the field of tsuba collecting and especially early ferrous guards, we tend to look at a given piece and say; "well it looks 'such and such an age and group'....so therefore it is. But this is merely an agreed convention we've all learned. We don't actually have any independent evidence for these judgements, do we? Now obviously some pieces will be of the age and group we asses them to be but there will always be some blurred distinctions.

 

To better illustrate my point consider the famous namako tsuba that is often attributed to Miyamoto Musashi. Up until very recently there wasn't any particular version that we could point to with confidence as being by Musashi's hand. In fact, among the fairly large number of such tsuba attributed to him no two seem to exhibit any strong similarities at all, other than the basic shape. And then last year the NBTHK issued a Hozon paper to a shakudo version attributing it to Musashi. Guido Schiller reported this here on the NMB. One has to ask at this point, though, what body of metalwork known to be by Musashi was used to make this assessment? And more to the point, will this single papered tsuba, allegedly by Musashi, now provide a reference point for further attributions?

 

Ultimately I think it's all a semantic game and in some cases a semantic sleight of hand that misses the real value of these artefacts. The only thing we can really deal with is their own objective qualities. We can better learn to understand and appreciate the objects themselves, either as craft or as fine art. A great piece of work remains so regardless of any labels.

 

The greatest safeguard against fakes is learning to appreciate fine quality.

 

Anyway, that's just my take on the subject, others will have different views. Some people even think tsuba are supposed to be functional (however that's defined ) , for goodness sake

[Brian]

So what you are saying is you agree this one is fire damaged and genuine?

 

Yes...agreed on all the points, and the fact that we have to be wary since fakery is advancing. However, since we are dealing with this one example for now, I don't want the excellent assistance from these advanced collectors to be diluted by generalizations that would make a better topic on their own.

 

Brian

[Ford Hallam]

Brian,

 

I'm being diplomatic and letting it go as it's not worth arguing over. But it did raise some important points that were well worth articulating

 

But if you re-read my comments you may conclude I don't think is is fire damaged per se

 

all good though,

 

[Gunome]

Hello,

 

Just a question : Did this tsuba could have been made by a student tsubako that didn't yet masterised all the techniques ?

If so, that could explain why this piece doesn't meet the Akasaka standard awaiting ?!

[Brian]

Why look for further explanations when the ones posted are perfectly valid?

This topic has done enough damage already.

 

Brian