Ishiguro Masayoshi Tsuba

[kiku]

Hallo I need the help of somebody who know something about Ishiguro Masayoshi. I have listed one of my tsuba with a signatur and a kao and I am not sur if this is really Ishiguro Masayoshi and I would like to know what kind of kao it is. If anybody can help me and tell me some things about the signatur and the kao please write to me.

Thank you

Best regrads

Kiku

[nagamaki - Franco]

Here is a link http://www.mfa.org/collections/search_art.asp?coll_keywords=ishiguro+masayoshi&submit.x=10&submit.y=14 , to several MFA examples. Where you can compare workmanship and mei, then perhaps judge for yourself.

[Brian]

Just increased the brightness and played with the contrast a bit so it is easier to see.

Also try and upload a close up of the signature if you have one?

 

Regards,

Brian

[Guest reinhard]

This is what Ishiguro MASAYOSHI should look like. Compare for yourself.

 

reinhard

[Ford Hallam]

I think Reinhard's post says it all. Ishiguro Masayoshi is a very BIG name. So the first question you have to ask is; does the work appear exceptional? In the case of the tsuba you are enquiring about I think we can easily see that while it is a perfectly acceptable example of mid Edo period kinko work there is nothing that really takes your breath away.

Another example;

By ironbrush at 2008-02-05

 

Both these examples are very different in treatment to your piece so here's another Ishiguro school work, this one is by Iwama Masayoshi and dated 1833. The subject matter and style is now closer to yours but the artistry is of a different order, I think we can agree.

By ironbrush at 2008-02-05

 

I borrowed these images from the Boston Museum of Fine Art on-line collection. It's a fantastic resource, check it out. Franco has helpfully posted a link on the second post. Cheers Franco. Just bear in mind though, that just because they are in the BMFA does not mean they are all genuine mei. In fact, I would judge a couple of the examples in question to be less than certain.

 

regards, Ford

[Ford Hallam]

Something to consider when looking at these greatly enlarged images is that the real thing is so much smaller, and delicate, that you may realise. In fact, I continue to be quite literally shocked when viewing the originals. Last November I was visiting a collector in Kyoto who had just taken delivery of an Ishiguro Masayoshi Daisho tsuba pair. The images become very familiar but it is as though they are actually about 25% smaller, and finer, than you'd imagine.

 

Anyway, I hope all this helps put things in perspective.

 

regards, Ford

[kiku]

Thank you for your help to everybody. Here is the NBTHK Hozon paper that I own for the Tsuba. Maybe somebody can translate it for me and it will be more clear if it is Ishiguro Masayoshi.

 

Best regards

 

Kiku

[Ford Hallam]

Perhaps the first question you ought to be asking is about the authenticity of an origami that claims this tsuba to be by Ishiguro Masayoshi. You might contact the NBTHK and cross check the papers number. Is there a perforated number punched through the certificate on the far left of your paper? ( not in the image you posted )

 

As always though, it's your tsuba and you must decide for yourself what to think. I imagine that as a genuine Masayoshi you must have paid a pretty penny for it too.

 

Good luck.

[Nobody]

The paper says Masayoshi (in Meiji). So I assume that it is a later generation of Ishiguro Masayoshi or other some Masayoshi.

[kiku]

Hallo Koichi Moriyama,

thank you for this information but can you also tell me something about the kao?

Best

Kiku

[Nobody]

Kiku,

I know little about tsuba. Other persons might answer your question.

 

 

You might contact the NBTHK and cross check the papers number. Is there a perforated number punched through the certificate on the far left of your paper? ( not in the image you posted )

BTW, the perforated number is not unique. The papers issued at the same month shinsa have the same number. But the number on the upper right is unique.

[Ford Hallam]

oops , Thanks for the clarification Moriyama San. I didn't even bother to read the origami, I had assumed that Kiku gathered that information from the paper himself. Thanks for the comment on the perforated number too.

 

regards, Ford

[Brian]

Sebastian (I like the fact that the new forum has real names in your profile )

 

Can you post a clear close-up pic of the mei and kao?

I will have a look through my books and see if I can match up the kao.

 

Brian

[kiku]

Hi Brian,

here is the close up of the mei and the kao. I hope you will find something at your books and thank you very much for your help.

Best

Sebastian

[nagamaki - Franco]

Just bear in mind though, that just because they are in the BMFA does not mean they are all genuine mei. In fact, I would judge a couple of the examples in question to be less than certain.

 

regards, Ford

 

Yes, after so many years of collecting, sooner or later the idea of not accepting everything at face value when it comes to nihonto, hopefully begins to sink in.

 

also, having checked the mei in the post above with those in my book, sketchy at best IMO.

[Brian]

He's no. 270 in the book Shosankenshu, but it gives absolutely no info on him at all. Shows the correct kao though. I'll keep looking, but maybe someone with Haynes etc will be able to assist further.

 

Brian

[kiku]

Hi Franco,

I dont understand what you mean with IMO. Is it real mei and real papers or what? Tell me clear what do you mean.

Best

Kiku

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hi Franco,

I dont understand what you mean with IMO. Is it real mei and real papers or what? Tell me clear what do you mean.

Best

Kiku

 

Hi Kiku,

 

IMO = "in my opinion". As for papers, I don't know what to tell you about this matter, and it looks like 'nobody' may have found an answer in a meiji artisan. Contact the NBTHK and ask.

In comparing the mei to those of "Ishiguro Masayoshi" tsuba examples in Fukushi's book, it is not favorable. This is only suggesting its not the mei and work of the 'big guy'. Shinsa organizations have access to extensive literature, records, and examples, which tells them when a piece is trying to be the fake copy of a masters work, or if a piece is simply the work of another artisan signing the same way. As collectors we must use our own best judgment. Your piece could well be legitimate, just not 'THE' ISHIGURO MASAYOSHI'.

[Guest reinhard]

Just to give you an idea what we are talking about. I'll show you a comparable Tsuba by HIROTOSHI, who worked first in Mito and later moved on to Edo around 1800. There have been countless Kinko-artists during later Edo-period and it's not always possible to find out what you want to know about them. Some of them took grand names. Just forget THE Ishiguro MASAYOSHI. Your Tsuba seems to be a nice piece of later Edo-Kinko work. All that matters is: You like it or not.

 

reinhard

[Curran]

Dear Reinhard,

 

I do not understand your point. Please explain more.

 

The Hirotoshi tsuba of the cranes looks to be gimei. Did you intend to illustrate this? I have attached a tsuba by Hirotoshi (aka. Hironaga). Sorry that the image is highly reflective, so it looks poor. It was papered by NBTHK to the founder of the Uchikoshi (sp?) school.

[Ford Hallam]

From what I can see I think Reinhard is showing us a tsuba that is very similar in design and actual style to the one that started this thread. This is also not by a big name but "merely" yet another of the many highly competent artisans working in the Edo period and in a style that is indistinguishable from many others.

 

Moriyama San has highlighted the fact that the origami states a Meiji period artist. I don't see any reference to the Ishiguro school and as we have established this is unlikely to be relevant. Haynes lists 6 artists who all used the same mei but there is no matching kao. The papers can be taken at face value and as genuine because it is not making any extraordinary claim ( something I didn't at first recognise. )

 

And as for the example that Reinhard has posted, I fail to see why that example should be deemed suspect on the basis of another work by the same artist that is in quite a different style, as is the mei, too. I think to make that sort of call we need at least to compare like with like. In fact in my opinion, the example that Reinhard posted seems to my eyes to exhibit finer technique, and frankly, with these types of work there is never a great deal of real artistry so what is there left to base any sort of qualitative judgement on?

 

regards to all, Ford

[Guest reinhard]

I didn't mean to open a discussion about HIROTOSHI (who was a respectable artist). As Ford pointed out correctly: I wanted to show you different stages of skill. Don't go for the signature first. A signature should confirm your judgement and not vice versa. - The Hirotoshi-Tsuba I posted was part of the Compton-collection and once belonged to Hon'ami Nisshu (according to Christies).

 

reinhard