Early Menuki Study Thread: Ezo vs Ko Mino

[Henry Wilson]

Again this is meant most respectfully. I generally think that Ford has made valid points and I can empathise with his frustration. The dialogue seems to be very closed at the moment and the really frustrating thing for me is the lack of any references that can help me explore the theories that Boris is presenting, which is what a valid closed discussion should have, in my opinion. I have started to look up old Japanese sources to try and flesh out Boris` reasoning. If I come across anything interesting I will share them here. The pic that has been recently attached to the above the post is a good starting point. Thank you Boris for providing it.

 

The email and PM supporters that Boris mentions, I assume that they are reading this thread and if so, it would be very interesting to hear from them directly as they might put another dimension on the subject or a fresh outlook at the very least. At the minute it seems to be Boris fighting his corner with the usual members of the “mutual appreciation society” patting him on the back. I applaud Boris for his intrepidness and I invite other people who support him to speak up and help others understand.

[BMarkhasin]

Henry, Junichi, et al,

 

Here is a rough list of references I have found useful in the past. This is rushed, and I am not getting into specific articles in the journals -- your interests will guide you. The book list contains many currently available titles, and in these, you will source others of interest to you. I have avoided listing foreign sources, private publications etc... This should be sufficient to get you started. This is not in any particular order of importance.

 

EDIT: The books below are for the large part non-nihonto because the usual library we rely-on is largely useless outside of providing photos. You have to know what the photos are telling you, and how they fit into the broader picture. If you try to scour the titles below for any of the concepts I have outlined, you wont find them. These titles will provide a back-drop for further independent study.

 

Henry, I understand you want to convince yourself one way or another, but you wont do it through this thread. It will take you years of study, as it has done for me. A forum is a place where ideas are shared - not a place for a free higher education. I have done about as much as I can to outline the ideas and point people in a direction. Its taken me years, and a lot of sheckles to get here. You can decide you are genuinely interested in this topic and commit to its serious study, and build, change, negate what I have outlined. Or, you can mope around, kicking dirt and complaining that I am not spoon feeding every detail of every one of your cascade of questions and doubts. I don't intend to be harsh or disingenuous, but this is not my job, and this is not the place. This is not an easy area of study, information is sparse, and it requires independent thought, a broad background knowledge base, and exposure. As I said, and I can't get any clearer on this -- if you are not willing to ante-up, you may as well forget it and move on...

 

PS - I'm not nearly so narcissistic that I require a mutual appreciation society. However there are people out there who grasp the above concept (and the potential futility of what I am doing here and now), and prefer a modern ride to a Model T.

 

Books

 

The Culture of Civil War in Kyoto, M.E. Berry. 1997

 

Heian Japan, Centers And Peripheries, M. Adolphson, 2007

 

The Gates of Power: Monks, Courtiers, and Warriors in Premodern Japan, M. Adolphson, 2000

 

State of War: The Violent Order of Fourteenth-Century Japan, T. Conlan, 2004

 

Across the Perilous Sea: Japanese Trade with China and Korea from the Seventh to the Sixteenth Centuries (Cornell East Asia), C vVerschuer. 2006

 

Studies in Asian Geneology, Palmer, Brigham Young University, 1972

 

Ancient Populations of Siberia and its Cultures, A.P. Okladnikov, 1959

 

Northeast Asia in Prehistory, C. Chard, 1974

 

An Early Style of Japanese Sword: A Search for the Origins of the Curve, Sano Art Museum, 2003

 

Hiraizumi: Buddhist Art and Regional Politics in Twelfth-Century Japan, M.H, Yiengpruksawan, 1998

 

Tosogu no Kigen, M. Sasano 1979

 

Nihon no Bijutsu 332, N. Ogasawara, 1994

 

Sacred Texts and Buried Treasures: Issues on the Historical Archaeology of Ancient Japan, W. Farris, 1998

 

The Japanese Sword: Iron Craftsmanship and the Warrior Spirit, TNM. 1997

 

Tokubetsu Ten: Kinko Mino Bori, Gifu City Museum, 1993

 

Warabite-To. M. Ishii, 1966

 

Oyamazumi / Kasuga / Tanzan / Itsukushima / Chusonji Jinja Collections, various

Ban Dainagon Ekotoba details

 

Heiji Monogatari Emaki details

 

Journals / Articles

 

Journal of East Asian Archaeology, various

Monumenta Nipponica, various

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, various

Artibus Asiae, various

Ars Orientais, various

Geological Survey of Japan, various

Techniques of the Japanese Tsuba-Maker. E. Savage & C.S.Smith, Ars Orientalis, Vol. 11, 1979

[Henry Wilson]

Many thanks Boris

 

I have just ordered this:

"Hiraizumi: Buddhist Art and Regional Politics in Twelfth-Century Japan, M.H, Yiengpruksawan, 1998"

 

Cheers

[BMarkhasin]

Henry, that is a great book, and likely the most informative in my list relating directly to what was happening in the Kitakami Basin. I have re-read it several times, and find it useful on many levels. Check out some other titles by this author.

 

Note my edit in the last comment, and again, I say with respect but sense of reality...

 

Best,

Boris.

[Henry Wilson]

Or, you can mope around, kicking dirt and complaining that I am not spoon feeding every detail of every one of your cascade of questions and doubts.

 

Well, I don't think I have done any of these, but the book list that you offered many posts ago is what I was hoping to receive so I could do some independent study, and have a go at "ante-upping".

 

Anyway, point taken and I will retreat back into my man-cave...at the foot of Mt. Fuji...with Raquel Welch in a tarzan bikini! :D

[Ford Hallam]

Ford, I think Boris was referring to the Star Trek posts and related that strayed from the topic. I don't want to put words in anyone's stead, but, sometimes they can be distracting. Good disagreement and measured responses are all good. John

 

Hi John, ah, so apparently Boris may post humorous interludes of Raquel Welch in a bikini but when anyone else does anything similar it's crap. I get the picture. Semi clad women OK, Sci-Fi films not so.

[ROKUJURO]

.....I will retreat back into my man-cave.....with Raquel Welch in a tarzan bikini! :D

Henry,

 

as she is now or as she was half a lifespan ago?

[Toryu2020]

Before ploughing through this thread I too thought Ezo was a school or at least a place of production, however as suggested I went looking for references and so far find little mention of Ezo among the few kodogu references I have. There is however an entry in Fukunaga Suiken Senseis' Nihonto Daihyakka Jiten if I understand correctly he says;

 

Ezo Koshirae -

From the 14th century there was a thriving trade with the north, one in which all that was old or no longer in fashion was traded to the Ainu. Once into the Tokugawa period there were a number of rebellions and whichever Daimyo was successful in putting down the unrest won the rights to this trade. There was a caveat however imposed by the Bakufu and that was that no "Swords" or other weapons were to be traded. So there developed the practice of selling old koshirae with cracked, chipped, rusted or otherwise useless blades as tsunagi.

 

At the time of the Haitorei many swords were sent north - there was a fad for swords in "silver" koshirae so enterprising sword shops in Edo took old blades and made them up in koshirae wrapped completely in copper sheet which was then "silvered". ( I am sure Ford will know what he means) In the Taisho period many of these were brought back by tourists enjoying tours of the exotic north. Naturally among these travellers were sword enthusiasts and they were shocked to find 1000 year old koshirae hanging untouched on the walls of the Ainu lodges! So there began a re-imporation of sorts with collectors buying old swords and fittings from "Ezo". There were early Mino and Early Goto items found, so much so people even theorized about an "Ezo Goto" school or that Yujo or some of his kin had been exiles. (He implies of course that we now know none of this to be true.)

He describes two kinds of koshirae; one with no tsukaito and no tsuba often with a kodachi similarly outfitted but all looking very much like Kamakura era katana koshirae. The other wrapped all in silver with copper bands but make no mistake he says these were all made on Honshu.

 

He also has an entry on Ezo menuki which is relevant;

磨り剝がした目貫 Surihagashita menuki also known as Shima-menuki. A style of menuki created by the Kyoto Umetada group around Kyoho (1716) - a base of shibuichi is "gilded" (Kinmekki) and then the high-points are sanded down revealing the base metal. As an example a gold mountain rubbed down would reveal a "snow capped" peak. In the Bakumatsu period the Edo Umetada group revived this type of menuki. (He says nothing here about Hokkaido or the Ainu)

 

I also found in Haynes Catalog #3 pgs 13-15 and #9 pgs 168 and 169 several examples and he seems very careful to call these "Ezo" style. One description reads; "The base plate is a form of yamagane with a gun metal color. The gold is the usual heavy sheet both rubbed and carved from the surface. This type is classic for the school..." This describes a pair of menuki which he gives a very early date to, otherwise sounds a lot like what Fukunaga Sensei describes.

 

I wonder if we havent misunderstood the appelation and these are more of a style than of a school or specific region?

 

-t

[BMarkhasin]

Hi Tom,

 

Thanks for posting those excerpts. I had forgotten where I had seen them. Below are pictured some "Ainu" style Ezo koshirae. I will try to get a better scan of the tachi style without tsukaito, and I have a few good images of the silvered type, fully banded in metal. These as you can see are dramatically different workmanship to the old, classic style of Ezo koshirae that are attributed Kamakura through Muromachi dates. The idea is that after the trade and armament restrictions on Ainu populations were imposed by the bakufu (Matsumae clan was charged with enforcement / regulation), functionally the development of northern armaments stalled, and the north became a time-capsule of sorts for this old style of koshirae. The Ainu kept creating weapons in koshirae which resembled the old traditional style, but their iron working and soft metals skills were inferior. It is generally agreed today that all such works are a local northern-most Honshu/Hokkaido products. You can still buy them today, although not cheaply. In terms of metal varieties, the banding on the koshirae range from pure silver, to yamagane and brass. Tin is also used, and gilding is fairly common. The Japanese consider such pieces as little more than mingei... which is too bad, as they are an important end-point in koshirae evolution. Dates are hard to ascribe with any certainty, and they span from Momoyama to Meiji depending on who you ask. In a few pieces I have seen, there seems a blending of old bits like tsuba which seem traditionally made early Edo period items, coupled with these more rudimentary koshirae.

 

The Umetada revival pieces have been brought-up earlier, and a couple of examples of tosogu posted, as well as a reference to a particularly good and well-known tanto koshirae of Momoyama vintage (there are others if you scan the literature). I believe however that the dates attributed to the Umetada revival are a bit earlier, dating from the Momoyama/Keicho. Those dragon menuki came with a Sasano hako gaki as gold gilded shibuichi to Umetada of early Edo if I recall. I have even seen early Edo shippo koshirae in the old Ezo style. Again, I think this is a testament to their importance and favour historically.

 

Again, it goes to show you how bad this title of "Ezo" is, and how broadly its used. We need finer, more pertinent tosogu terminology defined for this group, but it doesnt look like that will happen any time soon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Best Regards,

Boris.

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Boris

 

I've recently received a copy of the relevant KTK catalogue and have been reading your article with interest.

 

I'm particularly intrigued by the shibuichi analysis'. The percentages of Ag you found indicate a deliberate addition as these levels are not found in native ores. Argentiferous copper in Japan is/was typically under 1%. This raises the question of where the silver came from, it's extraction and refining prior to it's addition to a copper or yamagane base. And of course this is doubly intriguing given the rarity of silver artefacts in the period under discussion.

 

The trace metals may provide some insight into that matter so I wonder if you would be prepared to share the actual SEM analysis printout sheet.

 

 

I do need to say, gold gilding is a tautology In metalwork terms we simply say gilding or describe the article as gilt. For silver coatings it's silvered and tin is simply tinned or the act of tinning. Mercury is the carrier for silver and gold, it would be wrong to describe it as a flux, and there will always be traces of Hg in the base metal of fire gilt items. Arsenic would not be used in fire-gilding, it's presence is accounted for by the base metal not being fully refined. As is inevitably present in impure copper. And mercury is not used in tinning. In this case a flux is used. Typically an animal fat, like tallow, is simply rubbed on the warmed copper and then the tin is wiped directly on. It's a remarkably simple procedure and how copper pots were lined with tin in the past.

 

There are a number of other technical and metallurgical points I'd like to discuss and help clarify but I'd like to ponder your article for a while before I do so.

 

cheers,

 

Ford

[kaigunair]

Ok, so I'm going to rile some feathers now, but since I started the thread and its another late night , I am feeling a little justified in communicating what I have felt has cause lots of undue confusion and where to go from here.

 

Here goes...

 

Having mulled over all the posting over the past week, trying to make sense of all the confusion, I see how detrimental the discussion about outside influences like persian and chinese art have been to this thread topic. I understand and sense how passionate some are in really making a point that the Japanese style isn't devoid of outside influences which permeate all aspects of everything traditionally thought of as Japanese art. I get that, really, I do. But that is a larger issue that would actually cloud all discussions about any tosogu school or style (which it normally doesn't). So it pains me it took such a large and prominent stage in this thread.

 

Such discussions were related to and would have been better handled in the context of a thread on tachi fittings or pre-kamakura period fittings. Many of the pictures showing various comparison of artwork and fittings were actually showing pictures of fittings of pieces from the shoso-in which are not considered "ezo", as used under the traditional definition in Japan (which everyone seems in agreement is incorrect anyway). Its only when I went back to the Sesko koshirae book that I could confirm and state that many of the b&w as well as color pictures of various koshirae shown here were not and are not considered "Ezo" style in any sense. As a neophyte, the terms didn't mean much. These pieces are and have been considered outside influenced works from the Nara and Heian periods, but NOT EZO.

 

If we are discussing such tachi works, it should have been in the context and to the extent that the traditional "ezo" fitting- post Heian and beginning in the Kamakura periods up to the muromachi periods - resemble or mimic tachi fittings, and what implications that might have on the origins of the Ezo style.

 

I freely admit that maybe its because I am trying to formulate a theory that the traditional "Ezo" style is more of an extension of tachi-kanagushi fittings, even to the extent of a lack of any "northern" influence, that such discussions of persian and chinese influence is irrelevant to this discussion. Whether outside art influenced the early yamato court fittings (way before ezo fittings) or the hirazumi northern area (not a major influence on the ezo style): not really relevant.

 

This thread was about trying to understand a specific style of "ezo" menuki. As poor as it is, Ezo is a current designation, and there was an example of juyo menuki which should have been the basis of the following discussions. This is completely lost when trying to make a point about outside influences, influences that is more clearly seen directly affecting a precursor of the ezo style, the tachi kanagushi. Now a debate about whether or not the tachi kanaguchi style was or was not major influence in the "ezo" style and the possible implications on the background and development of the "ezo" style, THAT would have been relevant. But I didn't much (any) of those types of posts here....

 

Anyhow, not sure if I should restart a a cleaner thread in the future to continue the discussion on more relevant topics. If I could, I would move all those posts into a different thread about foreign influence on "early sword fittings" or "tachi-kanagushi" or "akasaka and goto schools". This forum thread would then be much cleaner, with the more important points in contention about "Ezo" fittings made clearer.

 

Where to go from here?:

 

I have learned so much from this thread, and the forum in general, that I feel some obligation to try to "right" this thread at the risk of stepping on some toes, rather than leaving it for dead and staying in the good graces of those I have yet to offend. My hope is that futures others who are interested in "Ezo" info might find this thread still more useful yet.

 

So, I would love to try to refocus the discussion towards "Ezo" fittings, by:

 

First, it would be very helpful to clarify what/which early kamakura pieces and what aspects specifically of these pieces would make them considered "Ezo", in the traditional sense. That is, those early koshirae pieces (which Boris showed back on page 4) that are related (or not) to the menuki at the beginning of this thread. If those are "ezo" in the same way the menuki are "ezo", then we can see a definite lineage and progression of the ezo style.

 

Second, a good point of contention to address which seems pretty important and possibly very relevant is whether or not early "Ezo" menuki were made of shibuishi or yamagane. Here, discussion about tachi fittings, and whether shibuishi was used by tachi-kanagushi or ancient metalworkers like the persians or chinese would be relevant. I'll save my thoughts (and cage rattling) on that topic for a *slightly* later date, while I steel myself for the possible retaliatory responses.

 

[kaigunair]

I've recently received a copy of the relevant KTK catalogue and have been reading your article with interest.

 

 

There are a number of other technical and metallurgical points I'd like to discuss and help clarify but I'd like to ponder your article for a while before I do so.

 

cheers,

 

Ford

YES, YES YES thread NOT dead!!!!!!

[ROKUJURO]

Gentlemen,

 

just for a decorative high-light I would like to show again a set of MENUKI which I had put on display a while ago and which has been classified by many here as 'EZO style'.

 

As I have learned later, they are very likely from the late MOMOYAMA period or from early EDO, as they are signed NARA.

 

To contribute to this discussion I ask if it would be correct to say that EZO was a style or design elements historically based in earlier periods like KAMAKURA, but obviously used by later artists as well?

[Ford Hallam]

Jean,

 

we can clearly see at least 3 different styles of these sorts of 'so called' Ezo menuki and I think it fair to say that, yes, they owe something of their style to earlier fashions.

 

What has not been established is when exactly these types were made.

Boris Markhasin has gone further and sorted these types into early, middle and late periods. Although on what evidence other than his own subjective feelings remains unclear.

 

What does appear to be clear is that the various koshirae extant that have been described as being Ezo are made from a base metal of impure copper or yamagane. And yet, unaccountably, the Ezo menuki Boris has analysed appear to be made from shibuichi.

 

It seem far more probable to me that, rather than this demonstrating that shibuichi was developed much earlier than previously thought it suggests these pieces are of an early Edo date of manufacture. This might also account for the clear distance in design terms from the early koshirae that are supposed to have influenced their development.

 

As I've previously described, using shibuichi to make menuki in the uchidashi technique is problematic, it's actually the least ductile or malleable of the non-ferrous alloys used by Japanese craftsmen. Why use the alloy unless its just to mimic the genuine earlier yamagane pieces? Not to mention the wastefulness of using 20 odd percent silver in a base metal that will be gilded.

[BMarkhasin]

Gentlemen,

 

A lot going on in this thread at this point, so I concur with Junichi about a possible separation into a couple of related threads.

 

Ford, I have a lot of metallurgical raw data and photo-micrographs at this point on a wide range of Ezo, Ko kinko, ko Mino pieces, old Heian tachi bits, as well as 'calibration' runs on archaic chinese bronzes - I have tested virtually every piece that has gone through my collection since 2006. I am not prepared to open the kimono and release all raw data because it represents a large personal financial and time investment. At some point, I still hope to be able to publish the results in an organized manner, hopefully with professional guidance and in a journal. However, in the interest of sharing relevant data and education, I will post an example of one SEM/EDS test result on an early piece of tosogu in the coming days which shows the metal is a shibuichi.

 

As for the contention that the old Ezo pieces are actually Edo??? I'm not going to bother even going down that path. Any contention that shibuichi is somehow fixed to a later time is incorrect. The use of shibuichi (compositional attribution) is documented outside of Japan, and from significantly earlier examples. It is also documented by SEM analysis used in lacquer from Shosoin collection items dating to the 8th c.. As a craftsman, I leave speculation on production techniques to you. I'm interested in the historical context of the tosogu, not so much the mechanics of production. But again, I point to the notion that to opine on production, you need to have had the pieces in hand and have studied them. It is possible/likely that since Ezo represents a large time-span and geography, production techniques varied.

 

Best,

Boris.

[Ford Hallam]

Boris,

 

you seem not to recognise that you may be in danger of putting the horse before the cart. All the analyses' in the world prove nothing with regard to placement in time. And if you say the analysis shows it to be shibuichi I must take your word for it, however, this doesn't prove when they were made at all. Even if there is an 8th cent. sample of shibuichi in the Shosoin it does nothing to support Ezo manufacture, materials or chronology.

 

And why not bother to explore the idea that they may actually be early Edo? Seems to me no-one has actually definitively placed the Ezo pieces in time or location yet. It's all just guesswork so far so excluding any possibilities would be cherry picking to support your preconceived ideas. I'm merely being the devil's advocate and asking the obvious questions.

 

If we look at the matter dispassionately all we have are mainly menuki and the odd kogai... maybe, no other associated tosogu, why no tsuba? If we're going to speculate I'd like to posit that what we call Ezo fittings are actually early Edo revival pieces intended to evoke the glory of earlier days and a suitable accompaniment for a good 'wabi/sabi' iron guard. Copper production being very efficient by then the makers had to resort to making a simulation of yamagane by adding silver and other trace elements to the clean copper.

 

But there are other, more problematic issues I have with your metallurgical and technique descriptions as you wrote in your article. I'm working through them this evening and will try to post my comments shortly.

[BMarkhasin]

Ford,

Not saying that time-frame is tied to metallurgy at all - shibuichi has been known in Japan from the earliest times, and is not exclusively an Edo product. The pieces I have tested are largely shibuichi. They are defined in the context of numerous other examples and literature into a general and supportable chronology. If you disagree with that chronology, well..... there is probably no cure. To suggest that the pieces I have shown are Edo suggests a pedestrian understanding of pre-Edo fittings, and disregard for literature. Myopic philosophizing.

 

Sorry (moderators) to sound harsh.

 

Best,

Boris.

[Ford Hallam]

Boris,

 

At present, as I've suggested, no-one has yet demonstrated this " general and supportable chronology" you claim reference to.

My, perhaps facetious, suggestion of an early Edo date was merely intended to illustrate the seemingly arbitrary dating you, and others, have claimed.

 

In your article you present a neat bar chart purporting to show the gradual decline of silver content in the sample group you analysed. Yet you don't indicate what these specific pieces are, nor do you demonstrate how you dated them. This can't pass for usable material in a supposedly scholarly publication. There are just too many unanswered questions which you seem content to overlook or ignore.

 

And yet again you resort to suggesting that anyone who disagrees with you is simply ignorant of the facts as you know them.

 

What really bothers me, Boris, is your insistence that only you have the experience to understand these pieces (your mantra that you have to study them in hand...as though no-one else ever has) and that we ought simply to take on faith (your words) your thesis and trust that you've been careful and diligent.

 

In the one area I will claim a modicum of understanding, metallurgy and technique, you demonstrate a staggeringly inaccurate and confused grasp of the subject. And this despite the fact you and I had discussions on these specifics more than 5 years ago (on Rich's old forum) you insist on clinging to these erroneous notions with regards to the technologies and the conclusions you draw from them. You didn't have to take my word for it either. A bit of research would have set the record straight and clarified your understanding. But you chose instead to ignore any input that contradicted your pet theory and carry on regardless.

 

If this is indicative (and sadly, I have little else to go on) of your general thoroughness and research methodology I have to say I'm disappointed.

 

And you are rude enough to suggest I'm the one for whom there's no cure.

 

I'll post my critique of the metallurgy and technique section of your article as soon as I can make sense of it. Much is a bit of a word salad.

 

And I don't mean to sound harsh I'm merely stating the obvious.

[Ford Hallam]

With reference to Boris Markashin’s article as published in the KTK catalogue I’d like to add the following observations and comments on the section “Metallurgy and Technique”

 

“Ezo shibuichi is very dense while retaining some malleability and can thus be crafted into extremely thin-walled but resilient forms. Analysis reveals that in some cases the gilding material is enriched with arsenic or mercury. The presence of arsenic or mercury in the gilding relative to the substrate is indicative of a volitized flux being used to aid bonding”

 

How exactly is the relative denseness of a metal measured in this instance and how does the author know it's retained some malleability...has he worked the the actual Ezo alloy? I don't think so. This are simply meaningless adjectives, possibly intended to suggest a deeper insight into the material.

Gilding enriched by arsenic and mercury? That actually baffles me. Gold is applied to the base alloy by means of a mercury and gold amalgam. There are always traces of mercury on fire gilt (kin-keshi) items. Any arsenic detected didn’t come from the gilding process. It’s a typical trace element in imperfectly refined copper. Fire gilding, mercuric gilding or kin-keshi (it’s all the same process) was practiced as early as the Kofun period, 6th century.

 

 

 

“The common form of Ezo fittings are menuki…. Most are crafted using a repousse technique in which the general topography of a piece is established through punching the back side of a very thin plate, with the finer details added to the front side through chasing and gilding.”

The description of repousse and chasing is accurate however the Japanese metal workers didn’t use that approach. Uchi-dashi is not analogous to the European technique. In the Japanese approach the work is carried out entirely from the front.

 

“Generally speaking, the base metal or ‘substrate’ of many Ezo tosogu is a soft metal alloy called shibuichi with the common consistency of roughly 24% silver, 76% copper, as well as a variety of minor trace elements. At this high concentration, the silver component tends to separate irregularly in the molten phase relative to the copper. The resulting metal may then look like a dark brown to black yamagane but display an irregular silvery sheen which can be visually striking.”

This misapprehension is quite difficult to correct. Firstly, shibuichi is a solid state solution in that the silver never completely dissolves. The silver particles are always discrete molecules. The most prized aspect of shibuichi in classical terms is in fact this visible separation of silver particles. This is called nashiji-ji , after the pear of the same name. Retaining this grain actually requires precise timing because if the silver is allowed to mix too evenly with the copper matrix it becomes less visible to the naked eye. It’s still evident in picto-micrographs though. An overly dark shibuichi alloy that contained 24% silver would suggest not an incomplete melt but the opposite and one where the alloy was kept at liquidus for long enough to thoroughly distribute the silver so much so that it is invisible to the naked eye.

The idea that the silvery sheen is somehow due to the silver content is therefore also inaccurate. I will go furher and point out that it’s the silver content in shibuichi that is effected by sulphides (not sulpates as the article notes elsewhere) and corrodes away. This is a significant issue with antique metalwork so the absence of the characteristic frosted surface, where silver particles have reduced to silver sulphide, on these shibuichi menuki is puzzling.

 

“The differentiation of silver across the surfaces of Ezo pieces was a function not of intended aesthetic, but rather of the inefficiency of early Japanese kilns which likely did not produce high enough, or sustained enough temperatures to ensure a homogenous alloy. As kiln technology improved over the centuries so did the ability to sustain high temperatures.

This older Ezo pieces generally exhibit a less homogenous alloy and consequently a more pronounced silvery sheen. Thus it was technological advancement that precipitated the disappearance of the Ezo shibuichi, not a loss of technique through time. Japanese kiln technology simply improved past the point which permitted the conditions whereby this type metal finish could have been produced. By the Momoyama period, the Umetada artists, despite working with exactly the same alloy on a weigh-percent basis, could not achieve the aesthetic effect without chemical alteration in the solid state. “

 

This passage on kilns (the word is the wrong term, copper was melted in simple charcoal forge type pit.) and temperatures is complete fantasy.

 

A brief survey of early metalworking technology in Japan will reveal that native artisans able to melt native copper from as early as the 8th century, in fact even earlier. It ought to be of concern that this part of the thesis is simply an invention that contradicts the well-established facts to posit a nonsense scenario.

 

In addition, it’s a curious fact that when silver is alloyed with copper the resulting melting point is lower than either of the components. Copper melts at 1083 degrees C, silver at 961.8 degrees C but as shibuichi (of a 24% Ag content) the melting point is around 750 degrees C. This is what we call an eutectic alloy and the reduction in melting temperature begins the moment silver begins to melt on the copper.

The suggestion that older pieces have “a less homogenous alloy” due to this supposed inability to melt copper properly is therefore demonstrated to be inaccurate. And consider how swords were made if Japanese artisans were incapable of getting a fire hot enough to melt copper.

 

I’m also a little puzzled by the focus on the appearance of the shibuichi alloy and how the Umetada couldn't recreate it. This suggests the belief that these pieces were made with the gilding worn away when new. I don’t know that we can actually know this, unless, of course, these pieces were mimicking archaic pieces.

 

The last line: "could not achieve the aesthetic effect without chemical alteration in the solid state." is confusing to me. It suggests that the coloring (patination) of the alloy could only be produced by the Umetada craftsmen with chemicals and once the metal had solidified. I will assume worked into the finished menuki form also. Is this meant to imply that the Ezo pieces were somehow patinated while not 'in a solid state' ? or merely that the patina wasn't artificially developed and that it occurred naturally? Whichever is meant this is simply more wild guesswork. We simply don't know what processes either group used in that respect.

 

Perhaps there will be some who will dismiss my criticisms as being pedantic but I would counter that if you are going to build far ranging theories at least get the fundamentals you refer to accurate. That so much of this section of the article is so poorly thought through and demonstrably inaccurate casts serious doubt, in my mind, on the rest of the thesis.

[BMarkhasin]

Ford,

 

In 2008, we had only hard results, and not yet the time to fully make sense of them. The ideas presented on metallurgy were only a segment of the article, and represented early musings of the engineers / metallurgists who were involved in the testing. The results clearly indicate metal to be shibuichi. This is exactly why above I said that I prefer to wait for professional guidance (engineers, metallurgists) before future publication on the topic. I am certain I will look back and say some earlier thoughts were unsophisticated and need either modification or perhaps even negation based on new data or a comprehensive interpretation. I prefer to let the professionals take lead in metallurgical interpretation of the analyses.

 

I wont deny that some of your comments may have merit, but beyond standing behind the raw data and dating of these pieces, I will refrain from senslessly opining.

 

I will stay rivetted to the computer to hear your interpretation as a craftsman, despite not having access to the SEM raw data and the pieces themselves.

 

I hope you have the courtesy to start a new thread, so this one can attempt to stay on topic in regards to the tosogu.

Best,

Boris

[Ford Hallam]

Boris

 

If, as you say, those points I critiqued "represented early musings of the engineers / metallurgists who were involved in the testing." I'd seriously suggest getting better help. Whoever opined those ideas clearly has no idea at all about basic non-ferrous metallurgy.

 

And don't you think it would have been fair to make mention of this fact in the article? Unfortunately this 'oversight' is now being used by students of the subject as some sort of reliable research. You presented these thoughts/musings as objective facts and as you continue to insist we ought to trust you as a matter of faith this presents a real problem for those unable to asses the validity of what you claim. Any newcomer to the subject of Japanese alloys and melting technologies will come away dumber for reading it.

 

And I don't need the SEM results nor the pieces in hand to make the comments I did. I merely pointed out where your notions regarding metallurgy and 'kiln' technology are ill informed.

 

Boris, I really don't want to get into a bun fight with you and have no personal animosity toward you. If you want to develop a grand scheme of Ezo fittings I can have no objection to your project. However, if you then begin to publish these ideas and indeed use this theory to 'educate' others in public fora like this then you will be expected to present evidence and clear reasoning to your peers.

 

If, as you claim, you don't have easy access to pictorial evidence and want to withhold supporting analysis work for later publication that's absolutely your right. But, and it's a big BUT, out of respect to the membership and collecting community in general you might be well advised to keep you speculative ideas under wraps until such time you are able to present them in a coherent and supportable form.

 

And attacking me personally by insinuating that my views are only those of a craftsman, as though my having that advantage somehow precludes me also having the sort of understanding every other long term collector claims is dishonest. My understanding of this subject starts at the same place as everyone else here BUT it's additionally and critically informed by 30 years of actual practice and personal research also. You're not the only one who has SEM results, Boris I probably have the largest database of Japanese alloy analysis' you'll find anywhere, and I've replicated the alloys.

 

If you want to take issue with my criticisms please do so in a reasoned way and we can perhaps clarify issues to the edification of all interested parties. Simply trying to dismiss my objections without addressing them suggests an arrogance unworthy of serious scholarly research or an informal forum discussion. If you feel this is not the place for such in-depth discussions why do you insist on contributing your unproven ideas?

 

Anyway, that's probably enough for our fellow members to digest for now. I'll leave it to others to interpret what I've presented and to consider your subsequent responses.

 

Respectfully,

 

Ford

[BMarkhasin]

Junichi,

 

I will attempt to get back on the intended track and avoid future pointless dust-ups. You had two questions in your last post. Let me answer each as best I as I can. I will post 2 replies.

 

First is the question of how/why we call the early examples of disarticulated menuki as Ezo? Here, admittedly we face a problem. There are to my knowledge no extant (published) Ezo style uchigatana or koshigatana from this early period to use large menuki. This was a turbulent period and understandably the record is sketchy. The term Ezo is applied most to Muromachi period fittings. This designation is extended back in time to include disarticulated kodogu and koshirae which resemble the Muromachi examples but are considered older. We are in essence tracing back a possible lineage based on more modern examples. There are no set guidelines, and designation is based on analogy of style, while age is ascribed based on analogy to items with more established chronologies like armor, as well as a sense of relative position based on artistic attributes. Clearly there is room for debate, but there is a general consensus. I have taken liberty of summarizing some kantei points to consider.

 

Kantei points for the early disarticulated examples (Kamakura/Nambokucho):

 

1. The best examples have a relatively heavy-walled construction and an ‘ordered’ proportional appearance, often in a lozenge shape

2. Floral motifs are most common, although shishi’s and other critters with mythologic attributes are possible

3. Numerous unique sukashi elements (often with irregular edges), with sets never being mirror images;

4. Larger size is common, but not a necessity (see tachi koshirae with series of small tsuka-ai);

5. Often with significant depth, with ‘tiered’ levels –ie. central elements such as peonies will stand above the underlying karakusa vines/leaves to even heights

6. Central elements may be in sets of 3 or 5 (ie. like early mitsu-mon or go-mon kogai/kozuka)

7. Backs may or may not have posts

8. Gilding is relatively thin and extensive, with worn areas from use, not as in later Muromachi examples by mimicking ko-kinko/Goto techniques.

9. Koshirae are rare and varied. Kairagi-zame (coarse same) on the saya is common, tsuka is typically banded in metal, but can be exotic hardwood. Metal banding with high amounts of sukashi, often resembling armor is recognized. Banding can be backed by gilded metal, or placed over black lacquered wood. Metal banding from koiguchi to past the kurigata or kaeritsuno is common, and many are of nomiguchi style. Often with a high profile and narrow oval cross-section. Inlayed saya (mother of pearl) are known, not dissimilar to some tachi of the time. Kojiri varies from narrow to more cap-like, and there may or may not be a kashira, leaving the butt of the tsuka exposed. Koshigatana predominate but tachi are known.

 

Kantei points for disarticulated Muromachi examples:

 

1. Best examples retain the traditional heavy walled construction, but many are thinning

2. Resemblance with ko-Mino – more dynamic florals, insects, critters of all types

3. Sukashi is common, but subgroups appear with virtually no sukashi (may not be intended as tosogu originally)

4. Designs are less tiered, more fluid / organic, with nearly 3-D representations possible (see kirin/dragon examples on page 2)

5. Gilding is still relatively thin, but starts to resemble period kokinko kogai, looking purposely removed in areas

6. Shibuichi is most common, but yamagane begins to increase to end of the period

7. Koshirae can utilize large amounts of kairagi-zame, banding from koiguchi to past the kurigata or kaeritsuno and on the tsuka is common. Many koshirae accommodate both kozuka and kogai. Fully metal examples are known, and some continue in nomiguchi style. Sukashi banding is backed with gilded metal or over lacquered wood. Exotic woods for the tsuka can be used, as well as mineral/stones/glass. Kojiri tend to be large, extending up the saya like on tachi of the period. Koshigatana predominate but tachi are known, and cross-section can be high narrow oval to more standard Muromachi forms.

 

Kantei for later examples / revivals

 

1. Virtually any subject is possible, from insects to people, boats, various animals, plums and sakura are common as single blossoms on a twig

2. Fuchi kashira / kojiri in proper Momoyama/Edo style are common

3. Gilding starts to look forced, with areas clearly being removed for effect

4. Height and depth of execution is lost, with designs being very low relief

5. Usually have retention pegs on the backs

6. Generally smaller size (standard Edo sizes)

7. Shibuichi is common in the early period, but is quickly supplanted by copper

8. Full koshirae are encountered from the Momoyama/Keicho and are generally shorter koshigatana, trending to tanto. Typical Edo cross-sections. Not to be confused with rustic northern examples attributed to Ainu (shown elsewhere in this thread).

 

Hope this helps frame the styles. Variations exist beyond what is listed above, and as always, common sense prevails.

 

Best Regards,

Boris.

[BMarkhasin]

Junichi,

 

The second question you had was regarding metallurgy. I will not engage in further dust-ups with Ford on this topic, so take what I post below as uninterpreted fact. Again, refer to the 2008 article for a perhaps premature interpretation, but I think one that still likely contains some good ideas perhaps in need of adjustment.

 

Some literary sources have noted that the use of shibuichi in Kamakura – mid-Muromachi tosogu. Heckmann described an SEM analysis on an Ezo menuki as shibuichi. I have tested numerous examples, with all but one (the kogai pictured on page 2 of the thread), testing as essentially shibuichi. Below is are examples (raw data summary) of the base metals of the Muromachi tiger menuki and the Nambokucho Akebi menuki, both on page 2 of this thread. Note that in all my tests, a common procedure was used, where a surface test was taken, a tiny (microscopic) scratch was made and tested to get past the surface gunk/patina, and a test was made in a window within the gilding at the intersection of the substrate (base metal) and the gilded metal. This provided a thorough range of results for each piece. Also, multiple points were taken on each piece, so for instance, 7 spots were tested on the Akebi for base metal, and 2 in gilding windows. You need to look at the Wt% (weight %) column for the compositional breakdown - this is tied to the elemental display below.

 

 

 

While this is indicative of other results, there is range of composition on the Cu (Copper)/Ag (silver) spectrum – its not uniformely ~75% copper, 25% silver. Call it shibuichi, a species of shibuichi or the shibuichi family - whatever, its essentially shibuichi. Minor amounts of elements such as gold are occasionally observed (as in the Akebi example - Au=gold). Gilding tests indicate not-insignificant amounts of Hg (mercury) in some examples. Other metals are used on these pieces, and koshirae, including tin, gold and silver. The kozuka I illustrated tested with the central field being silver, gilded with gold, while the housing a shibuichi. Yamagane must also have been used, but again, it is I think relevant that only one example I tested was gilded yamagane.

 

The above is based on real SEM data, no interpretation, and should be treated as factual evidence. I am not going to debate production methodology, as this is not in my range of expertise or necessarily interest, but in my opinion, there is a gap in understanding which needs to be assessed. My early mistake (perhaps) was that in 2008 I tried to address a complex issue, too early in the game. The speculations were rooted in observance, and musings of the technical people, but required additional pursuit. Unfortunately, I was told that to really understand the metal, I would have to conduct destructive tests. I was not prepared at that time to sacrifice any pieces. However, I now have several early bits which are badly damaged, and candidates for such testing. This is a future project.

 

When you begin scanning literature, if a base metal is mentioned in connection with Ezo, it will usually be yamagane. I believe this is a common mistake, and the fall-back metal for pre-Muromachi tosogu. Essentially if its pre-Goto, clearly not bronze, it is by default labeled Yamagane. To my knowledge, there have been no efforts (published) to test metallurgy even among the Kokuho examples. This is an unfortunate truth, and contributes to the misunderstanding of this group of fittings. This perception is now beginning to change among private collectors, and I hope will eventually infiltrate the museums and jinjas. As an anecdote, the TNM once displayed and published a piece in my collection as iron, when it was clearly a black-lacquered soft metal. It’s a lot easier to mistake shibuichi for yamagane and vs.

 

I hope this helps further clarify things. I think now, most topics of relevance pertaining to Ezo have been covered in this thread (among the annoying dust-ups - sorry for my part). As I mentioned earlier, I will avoid engaging in speculation and interpretation of the metallurgy until I can engage a qualified professional to review the data in context with the physical pieces, and possibly add the destructive testing.

 

I will be offline more often than not for the next several weeks. I can only imagine what wonderous threads I will find waiting for me when I return, and the joy it will bring me!

 

I personally would like to learn something about Ko Mino works – as the second part in Junichi’s initial posting.

 

Best,

Boris.

[kaigunair]

I just wanted to thank both Ford and Boris for the recent posts, which are full of thought provoking info. While its quite evident that there are very strongly held opinions and beliefs, I really appreciate how both have really taken the time to explain their positions and the problems they see with the opposing view point. I know many would not take the time to do so, especially when it gets heated. But it really is helping to enlighten the subject for someone like myself. While maybe all the parties who have contributed so far might not feel the same way, I only wish I could be having this conversation over drinks and in person (my treat of course), because I truly feel this is a case of "iron sharpening iron"....perhaps at some future token kai event...

 

I haven't fully processed all of the newest posts, but I did want to throw out some of the ideas that have been bouncing around my head. Hopefully this might encourage others who have researched this area to add their thoughts....

 

1) The period dating of "Ezo" menuki - I appreciate Ford's comments regarding the difficulty of dating such pieces, and take the Edo period comment as a somewhat exaggerated example. Shibuishi alone does not equal early date, but I don't believe the BB theory has ever solely relied on that. I fully believe that its here a comparison of ko-mino and other early tosogu works would help to buttress or refute the earlier dating (i.e. pre-edo period) of some types of ezo works. Unless there's also some sort of controversy or need to push up the dates of ko-mino tosogu, the similarity of construction methods (sans base metal) should compliment the pre-edo dating of certain shibuishi ezo pieces. So:

A) What's the support for the early dating of ko-mino pieces? (possibly better documented koshirae?)

B) How similar is the construction of certain shibuishi ezo pieces to ko-mino, or a subset of ko-mino pieces?

C) How similar is the construction of certain early shibuishi ezo pieces to various early/middle/late Edo-period works?

 

2) I appreciate the details provided by Ford that outline how difficult it is to work with Shibuishi vs yamagane. But working on the underlying assumptions that the Ezo menuki are a)made of shibuishi and b) as early or earlier than ko-mino pieces, wouldn't an equally valid conclusion be that the fact that they were made using shibuishi was because it was a requirement as expected by the commissioner? I know the quality of the internals of a mechanical watch does not make it tell time more accurately than another watch, especially compared to a cheap quartz one, but there is a reason why certain jewels and metals and "complications" are used in high end luxury watches. Therefore, one conclusion that could be drawn is that it wasn't the normal low ranking foot soldier who could commission these pieces, but someone from the middle to higher ranks? Similarly, if we assume shibuishi was used, it might point to a production location where the cost of silver vs yamagane may not have been as great as in other areas of Japan, during the same time. Therefore indicating an area either rich in silver ore OR which had an active traded in it from mainland China or engaged with European trade.

-I think we might be able to exclude certain locations in a similar way, also by assuming that if Ezo fittings went out of style after the jidai period, it was perhaps because they weren't favored by the areas which finally gained control - the ko-mino style being preferred by the winners (hence Ezo styles possibly coming from an area that lost). This idea comes from a recent and very enlightening conversation with a fellow board member regarding the sudden cessation of Oribe ceramics once Toyotomi came to power and killed off a certain tea master....

 

3) It does seem to me that the menuki in question and the style it represents does have a more aged/weathered look than compared to the early koshirae examples. Tracing the history of Zen Buddhism and development of the Tea Asthetics as well as wabi sabi, which existed well before the Edo period might also help date Ezo menuki, as well as provide details about the environment of the location of production if combined with ideas from #2.

 

Yes, lots of conjecture, but possibly a means on which to refine the theory of Ezo that later, more academic research can support....

 

and

[BMarkhasin]

Junichi,

 

I really admire your questioning and persevearance but you are asking for a crash-course from ground zero in Ezo and ko-Mino. Some of these answers and understanding comes from years of exposure which you also need to pursue. Some answers are readily pursuable with independent study and collection (recurring theme). You can ask a million questions, get a million (and one) opinions), and establish extensive databases, but handling /owning trumps all of that. We cant take all the fun out of it for you! I'll try to address your questions below.

 

 

Question #1. It is widely accepted that Ko Mino is a Muromachi/Momoyama period group, that especially in the early examples shares stylistic characteristics with Ezo. Most Ko Mino examples are made of shakudo, or a shakudo-like alloy, while a smaller subset are yamagane and even solid gold. They also share characteristics with ko Kinko and Goto works of the period. It is generally believed that this group is of mainstream origins - Kyoto/Nara and other key urban centers. Ko Mino are found associated with numerous koshirae, some of which have been associated with individuals or have some form of attributed dating ie. donation date to jinja etc. There is a lot of literature out there on this group, and it is a very popular area for collectors. I hope other forum members will contribute to the ko Mino discussion...

 

Construction techniques are not my forte.

 

Question #2. Shibuichi has been used in high-end tosogu for a long, long time in Japan. I dont think these types of fittings (at least not the high quality ones) would be considered 'basic fare', and are likely more prestige items. I think we have to assume multiple production centers throughout time. Artisans prior to Edo period restrictions were relatively free to move, and took their skills with them. As for locations of resources, Japan is relatively rich in gold, and to a lesser degree silver. Mines are scattered throughout the islands. Gold tends to be more concentrated in the northeast. Some mines some have been in use since ancient times. The winners/losers line of thought I dont think is realistic - there was a prevalent, unified culture operating through most of the country. Styles, aesthetics evolved/merged, died, as they always do. If you dig deep enough, you can actually find cultural / religious representations in tosogu that can be dated based on what we know of their relative periods of acceptance -- but this is rare. Ezo style was supplanted, but it never really died. Same can be said for Mino I think.

 

Question #3. Koshirae are extremely rare and cherished possessions. They have usually been carefully preserved and attended through time, and look the part. Disarticulated fittings rarely enjoy the same treatment. Considering the timespans involved, a difference in appearance is of no surprise.

 

Best,

Boris.

[John A Stuart]

Ok, I’ll take the first bite of the poison apple of Mino-bori fittings. Early tachikanagushi worked in a soft metal medium and their focus as we can see on old koshirae was elaborate floral themes with rather sparse animal figures. Gilt copper and shakudo dominated. During the time Kyoto was the capital, and indeed the seat of the Emperor and court, the elite fittings were being made by Kyokanagushi, ko-kinko works. These artisans congregated in the sword making areas, of which Mino, especially Seki, during the Muromachi period was a, if not the, premier sword manufacturing area. The area had the resources, forests for charcoal, ores for various metals, rich clientele, at hand which was convenient. These kanagushi settled in the area and formulated their own stylisation improving on the Kyokanagushi ko-kinko styles. These are where you see menuki very similar in style to those termed Ezo, which I believe should be classed kanagushi alone. Very similar floral themes and some animal figures as in tachikanagushi fittings. It was this style of fitting that Goto Yujo was trained to make and after some further experience and training in Kyoto and upon his return to Mino helped make into an independent style in itself. Typically fall time floral and insect themes, Star flowers, Tang grass, Crysanthemums, Mantids, Crickets, etc., but, not restricted to those. Where do we draw the line for ko-Mino and Mino-bori? May I suggest sometime in the first 50 years of the Edo period. Ko-Mino being mostly from the Muromachi and Momoyama periods. It was at this time that much Mino-bori was made in Edo, the new hub of the rich clientele and sword producing area. It seems there is much disparity in the quality of these fittings, from black shakudo to brown (gold content), heavy kin-uttori to light, complicated carving to sparse. Here are some pics of Gordon Robsons SF ’07 Mino-bori exhibit, some of mine and some gleaned from the web. Included is a ko-kinko tsuba just for comparison. There is much more to say, but, a start? Menuki are the hardest to find, so, I include other types of fittings. John

[kaigunair]

Very nice John! Much appreciated. Probably pushing it, but any rear shots of the menuki?

[John A Stuart]

Not of those. One thing that is common is there are no neashi and the edges of the menuki are roughly finished. If you go to Rich's site Kodôgu no Sekai - 小道具の世界 I remember a pair of ko-Mino menuki that he has great photos of from all aspects. He had a little write-up about them as well . It is worth checking out. Gordon will have some pics as well and could help I'm sure. John

 

EDIT I have the link. These menuki have silver and one neashi. Murphy's law, eh? http://kodogunosekai.com/2009/04/10/ko- ... %E8%B2%AB/

[BMarkhasin]

John,

Thanks for the pix and great summary. I have a number of questions developing related to the kantei features, age dating of this group and relation to early Goto. As I understand, the steep-sided execution and height of good quality ko-Mino works is a key kantei point. We see this on virtually all Juyo level pieces, especially evident on kogai/kozuka. However, the earliest menuki examples I have seen did not really show this kantei point very well. The menuki had a gradual rise from edges to center (~2 - 5mm) -- see first picture below to reference this style of menuki. Was this a phase of development before the steep sided varieties became dominant? Below are a couple of photos of a set I used to own. Note that the top-down view completely misses the sense of height of the edge view (thanks to Richard K. George for the side view pic).

 

 

 

 

Also, I have heard from others that silver was not used initially, but is more associated with the late 1500's into Edo period. This coincides with the age attribution of Momoyama for the posted menuki (see silver zogan dew droplets), but what about earlier examples - was silver used in mid-Muromachi? And regarding the Goto relation, can someone show an image of Yujo work which has ko-Mino aesthetic/ attributes??

 

Thanks.

 

Best,

Boris.

[John A Stuart]

I have pics of two kogai from Tosogu no Jiten. One is ko-Mino and one is Goto Yujo for comparison. Also is a pair of menuki in the style by Yujo from the Goto-ke. May I cheat and refer you to the Jiten where there are these examples and earlier, like Onin work and others, which show how the style was in use by many schools. Even within the group is controversial attribution. As you leaf through the various Goto books you do see remnants of this style appearing from time to time. What does not persist within the Goto tradition is the large oblong sukashi type menuki of ko-Mino, Ezo or Tachikanagushi. Myself, being a novice, know that ko-Mino and related schools existed well before Yujo (Kamakura period) and am not sure what scholars mean when they mention Yujo's influence on ko-Mino fittings beyond increased use of kin-uttori and animal figurals, lions and dragons, oh my. Not having heard of silver prohibition, but, gold was predominate early when it was used, with the multicoloured gold alloys and other soft metals coming later. I am sure those more versed with the group can add data. John