Same Tsuba And Still Different

[vajo]

These two katana tsuba (8 cm Ø) looks on a first view very similar coming from the same artist or studio. On a scond view they are different.

 

My first thought was akasaka, than i go more (ko) shoami.

 

What you think?

 

 

 

 

[kissakai]

Akasaka is a reasonable call but the mimi (rim) is unusual

Is the pattern on the back different from the which I asume it is sp Choshu is a maybe

Kyote and Kyo Shoami but not convinced with seppadai

Now the more experience collectors can step in

[seattle1]

Hello:

 They do not appear to be Ko-Shoami.

 Arnold F.

[vajo]

Different carving on the backsides.

[Ford Hallam]

I would suggest these are characteristic of a type ascribed to the Bizen region.

 

More frequently they feature brass inlays, especially as flowers or blossoms. The curious 'worm track' carved lines and dots on the trunks are pretty unique to this group, that and the general 'naive' or robust rustic quality of the sculpting.

[vajo]

The color is deep brown. I take the pictures from the former owners for asking here.

 

Thanks Ford. So i could call them Bizen Shoami?

[vajo]

This is the color and texture.

 

This is the bark of a sakura tree. I dont think the tsuba design looks rough and naive. No wormholes there :-)

[kissakai]

I see worm/tracks

I don't have many Bizen examples

I could throe Umetada into the mix

Once you get some replies you can check each of the schools and compare yours against known standard examples

In effect unless we have a mentor it is how we learn shame is there is always something that bits us in the bum!

You may see an example of this in my next post

[vajo]

Kissaki i see some bizen tsuba as Ford says, with that zogan inlays. These sakura tsuba are not fit into this group because they look very well made and they are not rough and naive. You find bones in the rim an they have a fine and different carving. But and this is the good news. An experienced and well known member of the nbthk germany has given me the right school for this.

So no need for me to discuss this in that way further here.

 

Thanks

Chris

[Bazza]

> So no need for me to discuss this in that way further here.

Except to say what "right school" the well known member of the nbthk in germany has given you for this.  As parties to this discussion, and you as the OP, this opinion (for it is but an opinion!) should be put into the mix for the Board members at large.

 

BaZZa.

[ROKUJURO]

.....This is the bark of a sakura tree. I dont think the tsuba design looks rough and naive. No wormholes there :-)

 

Chris,

 

this is UME, not SAKURA.

[vajo]

Kyoto

Date early 17th century (1601 - 1700)

Artist/maker

Shōami School / Kyō-Shōami 

Dimensions 8.1 x 8.1 cm (height x width)

Material index iron

Technique index forged, openwork, cut.

 

Some sources.

Reference Ashmolean Museum (EAX.10248), Völkerkundemuseum zu Dresden 1977 (Kat.-Nr. 34619)