What is namban Tsuba

[Jean]

Is it a style (does not look western style)?

Is it the steel?

Are all cupped tsuba Namban and why?

Is namban word used only for western influence?...

 

A picture of a tsuba I recently got with its description, is it namban:

 

Waterwheel mon and Vines design.

7.25cm x 6.95cm x 0.9cm in bowl depth.

 

This guard is cupped in the European style, but made to be work cup down over the saya. The kozuka and kogai ana are set with thin very fine shakudo inserts. The design has been done by use of lacquer and acid to create an acid relief design of Vine tendrils and two mon of 5 cup circular waterwheels.

The workmanship is phenomenally crisp and so is its state of preservation.

Family mon on it, which is almost unheard of for Hizen. The iron is also much better than 99% of Namban tsuba, In hand, the iron felt very similar to Yagami work

[Peter Bleed]

Jean,

As a recovering Namban collector, let me thank you for asking what I think is an interesting question. Of the options you provided, I would have to say it is a “style”, but that description doesn’t help us understand the category we consider “Nanban.”

I have come to the conclusion that is best to think of Namban as a FAD that swept across Japan in the late 18th century.

At that time, Japanese fashion-setters decided that there were a series of motifs that looked exotic and, therefore, fashionable. These included things like beaded mimi, fancy seppa-dai, maybe a couple of Latin (looking) letters, and other designs that did not look “Japanese.” Rich guys could buy well-crafted examples of this stuff, and then the masses would buy cranked out versions the same stuff.

Namban was marketing device that satisfied that fashion interest. Skilled kinko masters may have responded to the fad with master works. Those might be collectible, but at base Namban is the Middle Edo period version of Hello Kitty.

Peter

[Ford Hallam]

I think the appeal of 'Namban' design sensibilities really came to a head in the Momoyama Period;

 

Any number of art histories attest to this but the easiest on-line reference is on Wikipedia;

 

The Momoyama period was a period of interest in the outside world, which also saw the development of large urban centers and the rise of the merchant class. The ornate castle architecture and interiors adorned with painted screens embellished with gold leaf were a reflection of a daimyo's power but also exhibited a new aesthetic sense that marked a clear departure from the somber monotones favored during the Muromachi period. A specific genre that emerged at this time was called the Namban style—exotic depictions of European priests, traders, and other "southern barbarians

 

British Museum reference

 

Metropolitan Museum NY reference

[Soshin]

Skilled kinko masters may have responded to the fad with master works.

 

HI Peter,

 

I agree up to a point with your reply. But I must comment about the above statement for the following reasons. Not only are Kinko Nanban works dating from the middle to late Edo Period of good quality but there was a few iron works that were just as fine and that date from the Momoyama Period to the early part of Edo Period. Therefore I agree with Ford's statement that foreign designs came to a head in the Momoyama Period and not in the Middle Edo Period under the Tokugawa official policy of isolation from the outside world.

 

Here are two tsuba on my Website as examples. Enjoy...

 

1. Momoyama Period Nanban Tsuba (Iron with Shakudo):

http://dastiles1.wix.com/reflections-#!Nanban-Tsuba-/zoom/c5om/image2px

 

2. Early Edo Period Nanban-Katkushi Tsuba (Iron with Shakudo):

http://dastiles1.wix.com/reflections-#!Nanban-Saku-Tsuba-/zoom/c211q/image1f5e

[Jean]

Interesting, can I conclude that this style began in Momoyama and that it shows representation of foreign designs, exclusively southern Barbarians designs. Now I have a few precised questions:

 

Could tsuba bearing Christian cross design be qualified as namban?

 

I have posted a fantastic tsuba I just got, it is cupped so could be qualified as namban, but the design, lacquer and acid etching plus a mon makes it apart. Certainly a made to order one, kogai/kozuka fine shakudo inserts are also unusual.

[Curran]

If I may:

[Jean]

Thanks Curran for posting these pictures, but apart this tsuba, can anyone answer my other questions, which could be sum up like:

 

- are all the tsuba featuring south Barbarian design are namban? (I just realize that this was the basic question to ask)

- if not, what are the features of a namban tsuba or what makes a tsuba a namban one?

[Pete Klein]

This is long but a most interesting read on this subject: http://japanesembassies.files.wordpress ... 9_1648.pdf

 

Thesis by Dr. Lissenden.

[Jean]

Pete,

 

I am going to re-read Docliss'thesis, in light of what have been said previously. It looks not so easy.

[Soshin]

Interesting, can I conclude that this style began in Momoyama and that it shows representation of foreign designs, exclusively southern Barbarians designs. Now I have a few precised questions:

 

Could tsuba bearing Christian cross design be qualified as namban?

 

Hi Jean,

 

In answer to your question. A old outdated Japanese name for a Catholic church during the Momoyama and Edo Periods was Nanban-ji (Southern Barbarians Temple). I would consider any tsuba with a clear Christian cross design as Nanban based upon how the NBTHK and NTHK use the term in shinsa attributions. I don't think Dr. Lissenden would classify it as such from an academic perspective.

[docliss]

‘Those tsuba that are today called Namban (literally ‘southern barbarian’) appear to have been produced in China or by the Dutch East India Company in India and imported from the end of the 16th century. The category also includes reproductions of these imported pieces later made in Japan’. Ogawa (1987).

 

John L.

[Soshin]

‘Those tsuba that are today called Namban (literally ‘southern barbarian’) appear to have been produced in China or by the Dutch East India Company in India and imported from the end of the 16th century. The category also includes reproductions of these imported pieces later made in Japan’. Ogawa (1987).

 

John L.

 

Hi John L.,

 

Using Ogawa definition would my first tsuba listed in my previous post be considered a imported Chinese tsuba hence I as well as you, and more than a few others think it dates from the late 16th century. My Japanese wife was reading my NBTHK Hozon paper and said that the Kanji listed for the design (karakusa enmon sukashi 唐草円紋透) means circle figures with arabesque openwork design. The second tsuba posted looks like more like a heavy altered Ko-Katchushi tsuba with Nanban designs.

[Jean]

So John, what do you think of the tsuba I have posted:

 

Pro-namban: cupped, vines designs

Cons-namban: hitsu ana with shakudo inserts contemporanous, waterwheel mon, lacquer and etching work.

[John A Stuart]

It makes sense to me that the early Namban tsuba, intricate design and Jizu mimi etc., were brought to Japan as a result of the Korean conflicts where the type was admired by certain samurai, Chinese design. This created a market for manufacture both in China and slightly later in Japan on the west coast as J. Lissenden illustrates. The tsuba having no hitsuana would be early bring backs,with Chinese export tsuba having them as demand was established and of course the domestic tsuba by nature. The cupped guards are by way of European influence, admired by certain samurai, and made only domestically, the two en vogue styles, Chinese and European, incoporated in the design found on them. A question for those that collect them, do domestic Japanese tsuba show a better standard of manufacture, steel/iron, workmanship than the imported (Canton) tsuba? John

[Lance]

I've often seen these tsuba with this type of relief and cupped shape referred to as Hizen tsuba rather than Namban (although Hizen tsuba term can sometimes be synonymous with Namban)

 

 

quick link and pics of another example for reference from another member's site, hope he doesn't mind.

 

http://www.legacyswords.com/fs_ant_tsuba7.htm

 

Regards,

Lance

[Soshin]

A question for those that collect them, do domestic Japanese tsuba show a better standard of manufacture, steel/iron, workmanship than the imported (Canton) tsuba?

 

Hi John S.,

 

In answer to your question no. From my obervations the earlier the Nanban the better the quaily. Therefore by logic this would indicate that generally by the time Nanban tsuba where produced in Japan there was already a decline in quality. I only have two quality pieces in my collection both early so a person with a larger collection like Fred G. might be good to ask. John L. would also be a person to ask he has studied many Nanban tsuba examples in a academic context.

[docliss]

David, I have already discussed your first tsuba in some detail in a previous thread. I believe – and correct me if I am wrong – that it demonstrated all of the defining characteristics of the Namban group of tsuba; that the large, circular apertures may once have contained decorative inserts; and that it probably dates from the Momoyama period. It may, indeed, be a scarce example of an early, imported tsuba of this group. I had hoped that the shinsa panel would have at least suggested a jidai for your money!

Your second tsuba is not Namban, but might be considered to demonstrate a namban influence.

 

Jean, I prefer to label cup-shaped tsuba such as yours not as Namban, but rather as from their school of manufacture – ?Chōshū, ?Bushū, ?Hizen … – and demonstrating a European influence.

 

John, contrary to what one might expect, those later reproductions produced by Japanese artists in the late 18th and early 19th centuries demonstrate a higher standard of workmanship than do the earlier, imported examples. This is doubtless due to the better metalworking techniques available to the later artists.

I am unable to make any comparison of the quality of the iron of these two groups. The extensive sukashi work on these tsuba makes impossible any attempt to judge the quality of the iron, and I know of no modern, non-destructive, physical analysis of this.

 

John L.

[Soshin]

Hi John L.,

 

Thanks for the reply. It was nice that the NBTHK knowledged the fact that my tsuba openwork design is carved in a three dimensional manner by undercutting of the plate surface (nikubori ji-sukashi 肉彫地透). I was a little bit upset that they didn't but Momoyama Jida (桃山時代) on the paper. This might be partially my fault as I told Bob Benson to state on the submittal paperwork that I think the tsuba is nanban with out any age information. I am rereading my original topic about my tsuba with specific interests to your posts. I am doing this as I am working on a more detailed write up about this tsuba for my website.

Now it back to the discuss of Jean's fine tsuba. :D

[Jean]

Very interesting tsuba posted by Lance from Ted T. site. Both sides are decorated unlike mine.

[Curran]

I was logging on to thank Lance for posting the link.

It was good to see the NBTHK papers for the set to Hizen.

 

The similarity to Jean's is considerable.

The Tenold one needs some rust control / preservation, but the iron on these can be a devil to work carefully. Probably best to just give it the horse hair brushing now and then.

 

Seeing it with matching f/k also supports my gut instinct belief that these might have been ordered sets to do personal en-quite koshirae. I suspect there is a matching f/k for Jean's out there in the world, possibly in its own box. Hopefully in the same state of preservation.

 

Jean's is remarkable because the state of preservation is extremely high.

It is so clean and well cared for that, that you could eat off it.

 

One of the recent changes with NBTHK seems to be stricter standards on condition. From 2013: in addition to making Tokubetsu Hozon mandatory for Juyo submissions and raising fees a bit, they also seem to be saying now that they will not paper unsigned fittings unless state of preservation is at least "X". Ie. things that could have gotten Tokubetsu Hozon in the 1990s now won't make Hozon if not preserved to some arbitrary standard. I saw an example of this over the weekend that stunned me a bit.

[Jean]

It seems the same applies with blades. Shinsa is more and more restrictive. TH seems very high level, not talking about Juyo. It is very difficult to predict if a blade will pass Juyo or not. I have seen TH flawless blades failed Juyo. My level of Nihonto knowledge does not allow me to understand the Juyo standards or the shinsa decision perhaps by lack of references....

[Guido]

It was good to see the NBTHK papers for the set to Hizen.

You might be surprised to know that my name is on the back side . I sold this set about ten years ago to Ted; at that time I was haunting many swords shops in Tôkyô, looking for unpapered items that I thought worthy of submitting to Shinsa, and selling them for an appropriate price afterwards in order to upgrade my own collection - you are married yourself, you get the picture .

The Tenold one needs some rust control / preservation' date=' but the iron on these can be a devil to work carefully. Probably best to just give it the horse hair brushing now and then.[/quote']The photos are a bit misleading, to the best of my knowlege they are just fine as is - often iron fittings look kind of rusted in photos even if they aren't.

[Guido]

Shinsa is more and more restrictive. TH seems very high level, not talking about Juyo.

I think that's how it should be, a slight difference in artistic value shouldn't lead automatically to a higher paper - what would be the point of that?

It is very difficult to predict if a blade will pass Juyo or not. I have seen TH flawless blades failed Juyo. My level of Nihonto knowledge does not allow me to understand the Juyo standards or the shinsa decision perhaps by lack of references....

Sometimes one is just working against statistics. I remember very well an Aoe blade I submitted for Jûyô Shinsa. Everybody I showed it to - including NBTHK staff - supported my evaluation. I was stunned when it was rejected. I later was told by NBTHK staff that 3 other Aoe blades were in the same Shinsa, mine was the "weakest" one and therefore failed. Well, it was: at the next Tokubetsu Jûyô Shinsa all of those 3 blades passed with flying colors! Again everybody told me to re-submit it, and to hope I wouldn't have such strong contenders/bad luck again. Instead, I sold it to someone who saw it for what is was, not even looking at the TH papers it already had (and I never told him my tear-jerking story about its Shinsa past).

[Jean]

Yes, that's it, I think that now shinsa (TH/Juyo) is some kind of competition with quota.

 

It explained why, when I got my Yasumitsu from Ginza Choshuya, the shop owner insisted on the fact that it has passed TH and that it was very difficult (not sure this argument was not use on purpose for price negotiation :D )

[hxv]

Gentlemen,

 

Going by the thread's thesis "What are namban tsuba," may I ask your take on the following tsuba, which was originally for sale on Grey's website? I hope Grey does not mind my using his pictures for educational purposes. Your candid thoughts are much appreciated.

 

Regards,

Hoanh

[Peter Bleed]

This remains an interesting thread. I continue to be convinced that MOST of what are counted as "Namban tsuba" are mish-mash creations of stock motifs that reflect the Rampeki or "Hollandamania" of the late 18th century. That fad was a popular phenomenon of mass culture. As Ford points out, there was another - earlier - interest in foreign materials that occurred in the earliest Edo period among the Daimyo elite. Christian motifs showed up at that time, but INHO European sword fittings were rarely copied into Japan at this time. Namban portrayals of this era show European carrying swepthilt rapier. Bilobed and cup guards that inform many "Namban tsuba" date from the 18th century. There were, of course, Continental military campaigns going on as the Momoyama era was passing, so I think it is not surprising that "Chinese" guards were repurposed by Japanese soldiers. All of those things get conflated as "Namban."

I hope we can continue this conversation in Tampa.

Peter

[Soshin]

I think the appeal of 'Namban' design sensibilities really came to a head in the Momoyama Period

 

Hi Peter B.,

 

From the quote above Ford was referring to the Azuchi-Momoyama Period approximately dated from 1573-1603 not any part of the Edo Period. I personally extend the date of the Azuchi-Momoyama Period to include the Siege of Osaka castle which ends in 1615. After the battle Tokugawa Ieyasu had killed off anyone else that could have had any claim to rulership of Japan (i.e. Toyotomi clan). A great proponent of foreign "Nanban" culture in Japan of this time period was the Shogun Oda Nobunaga. The popularity of foreign culture continued under leadership of Toyotomi Hideyoshi to include the invasion of Korea 1592–1598. Here is a good Wikipedia article about nanban trade period which ended by 1614: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanban_trade_period.

Great to hear you will be attending the Tampa show this coming weekend. Both of my nanban tsuba are papered so I will not bring them to the show but we can discuss this very interesting topic more at the show. I will be there all day on Saturday and Sunday. :D

[Henry Wilson]

Hi Hoanh

 

Interesting tsuba. Some candid thoughts below.

 

I notice a passing similarity to the double ring halo 二重円相光 seen on many Buddhist statues starting from around the end of the Nara period. The double round halo, represents the light emitted by the Buddha, as emphasized by the rays surrounding the lotus cushion on which the head and body rests.

This tsuba seems perfectly round and the execution of the beads and the vine style carving brings to mind detail of statues such as the Dainichi Nyorai in Enjo-ji in Nara. Incidently, the halo also reminds me of old mirrors and some Kagamishi tsuba.

However the beads on the tsuba are probably rosary beads called nenju　念珠 and are used for Buddhist prayer and invocation. They are usually associated with a chant called 'shoumyou nenbutsu‘ The number and shape of the beads varies in different representations of it and are usually found as attributes to the Thousand-armed Kannon and other Buddhist deities.

 

If we look at the Seated Fukukensaku Kannon in Kofuku-ji in Nara, there is a similarity between the halo and the vine work seen on the other tsuba. Vine work is believed to have arrived in China with Buddhism via the Silk Road and is very commonly seen in Buddhist art work. During the Tang dynasty, floral patterns set on vines quickly became a popular motif and the weaving of the vine represents an unbroken and never-ending wish as well as completeness.

Experts differ on the origin of the vine. Some believe it originated from the Greeks, a style developed by their architects and it travelled from the Mediterranean via central Asia. Others believe that a honeysuckle vine pattern entered China via India. It probably entered Japan along with Buddhism and there is also stylistically a similarity to some Ezo fittings which could have originated in the Kyoto (Kinai) area, but that is another story.

 

 

I hope this information helps and is of interest.

[Soshin]

Hi Hoanh

 

Interesting tsuba. Some candid thoughts below.

 

I notice a passing similarity to the double ring halo 二重円相光 seen on many Buddhist statues starting from around the end of the Nara period. The double round halo, represents the light emitted by the Buddha, as emphasized by the rays surrounding the lotus cushion on which the head and body rests.

 

This tsuba seems perfectly round and the execution of the beads and the vine style carving brings to mind detail of statues such as the Dainichi Nyorai in Enjo-ji in Nara. Incidently, the halo also reminds me of old mirrors and some Kagamishi tsuba.

 

However the beads on the tsuba are probably rosary beads called nenju　念珠 and are used for Buddhist prayer and invocation. They are usually associated with a chant called 'shoumyou nenbutsu‘ The number and shape of the beads varies in different representations of it and are usually found as attributes to the Thousand-armed Kannon and other Buddhist deities.

 

Hi Henry W.,

 

Very interesting write up about the tsuba Hoanh posted. Only one minor point I can think of given my knowledge and that is Kannon is not a Buddhist deity (ten 天) but a Buddhist enlightenment being (bosatsu 菩薩). The double ring halo I don't see around images of Buddhist deities or the Buddhist demigods (Ashura 阿修羅).

I was more than a bit upset to see this tsuba sold so quickly off of Grey's website before I was able to purchase it myself. Does makes me wonder who the new owner is as these type of early Nanban style tsuba with interesting Buddhist symbology don't come along often for sale.

[Henry Wilson]

Thanks David. Call it a holy slip of the toungue...