Any Thoughts On This One?

[lotus]

Mokko gata shaped (78.5 wide, 79 tall, rim thickness around 4 mm and ever so slightly less around seppa)

 

Rounded square rim and very light in hand. One piece is missing or purposely removed (hard to tell that was done unless inspecting closely).

 

Probably the most interesting characteristic is the finish (where not corroded) as it is nothing like any of my other tsuba. It is has a glass like smoothness which you could almost intepret as black lacquer except acetone did not touch it. Could it be possibly be Yakite shitate?

 

If so, does that help narrow down the school? I have some thoughts on a school but would rather hear what others think and not bias it....

 

Also, any thoughts on motif?

 

Thanks!

[Rich S]

Nice tsuba.  My "guess" would be Kanayama or Akasaka.

Rich

[lotus]

Yeah, I spent some time going through the books and as far as style, it seemed to fit the Kanayama school pretty well. The wider rim also points to them and maybe even the finish. Though most Kanayama tsuba are thicker, even though I found some in the 4-5mm range.

[FlorianB]

My first impression was Owari but the somewhat unique design make me agree with Kanayama.
It is said their Tsuba are thick but there are also thinner ones, probably a later one.
The smooth surface could be migaki finish and would proof an Edo period origin.

Is there a shot of the missing part? I wonder if it was removed for fitting or omitted purposely.

I’m also curious about the circular tagane with riffles.

Florian
 

[Marius]

Gentlemen, Kanayama is just an appellation. There are no sources, no documents regarding this "school", which is nothing more than a group tsuba sharing some common characteristics (thickness, compactness, pronounced tekkotsu, representing "tea aesthetics", if you will).

 

You can call this what you want (I'd call it a very nice sukashi tsuba), but it does not seem to belong to that group and it does not match Kanayama as described by Sasano, Torigoye or Okamoto.

 

When in doubt, go for (ko)Shoami

[ROKUJURO]

It would also be quite big in diameter for KANAYAMA which is rather rare. But it may be a later OWARI province TSUBA, and a nice one. I like it. Concerning the surface, it might have seen some corrosion or even fire in its early life, but built up a nice patina later. 

Part of the design might be KAN (TANSU drawers) where one little piece is missing. If it was omitted on purpose, you will probably find no traces left.

[vajo]

I would vote Kanayama too.

[lotus]

Not including my vote, we have Kanayama (3), Akasaka (1), Owari (1), and Ko-Shoami (1).

 

Florian, thanks for letting me know about the migaki (mirror-like) finish. That is exactly how I would describe it. So, not Yakite shitate after all. 

 

Based on another discussion that had an papered attribution of Katchushi based on a wide rim and rather large diameter, I was wondering if Katchushi might be another possibility? Ironically, I was very much questioning that call.

 

Discussion here :

http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/26779-attribution-for-this-hozon-papered-tsuba/

 

As for the missing piece, I see faint evidence of file marks. So, not purposely omitted.

[Marius]

Do not count my "voice" as ko-Shoami - I simply do not know. We are not shinsa, we do not have to come up with more or less irrelevant attributions, we have the luxury of saying "no idea".

 

Please just enjoy your tsuba. 

[lotus]

Marius -

 

Understood, this one does not fit neatly into any of the categories. I am just treating the votes more like guesses anyway.

 

And yes, I am really liking this one!

 

Your input is much appreciated.

[Marius]

Patrick,

 

remember, I am a nincompoop   

 

But whatever the opinion, you have a cool tsuba that you can enjoy, and that is what it is all about Of course, attributing is fun, but let us not become obsessed with it. 

[vajo]

Btw i like the color of the iron very much.

[lotus]

Thanks Chris, the patina is deep and dark with mirror like finish. I think the fabric surrounding the tsuba when I photographed it imparted a purple/reddish tint which it does not possess.

 

A papered Katchushi tsuba popped up at Aoi Art that demonstrates the wide rim of which I spoke in my previous post. Though I am unsure my tsuba is large enough to be considered for this bucket...

[ROKUJURO]

Patrick,

have a look at genuine KACHUSHI TSUBA and study their dimensions and properties. They are very different from your TSUBA, as they tend to be large, very thin, and many have a pronounced MIMI (DOTE and UCHIKAESHI). Also, they are much older than yours. 

 

[lotus]

Jean -

 

I very much agree with you, but I have also read (Haynes) that they made tsuba throughout the Edo period and moved on from there older style to adjust for the tastes of the times. That said, they seemed to still be thin and quite large like you said. In that way, I agree that a Katchushi call is probably not applicable for mine. Though, I would be curious as what NBTHK would determine.

[ROKUJURO]

Patrick,

as there is no KACHUSHI school, there are no TSUBAKO who followed their masters work style into EDO JIDAI. We believe that early KACHUSHI TSUBA might have been made by armour smiths as a sideline, but later on, KACHUSHI was just a style, and some EDO TSUBA makers adopted it. TSUBA from this period are mostly a little thicker and can be smaller in diameter, but may use similar SUKASHI motives.

[FlorianB]

Gentlemen,

indeed we do not much really know about Tsuba. The whole classification-system we follow today came from later times especially out of the middle of the last century, based on comparing and looking for similarities. This system is far from perfect and all those “cross-over” pieces prove this.

There is, however, no other or better system.

Dealing with Tsuba would be rather boring simply to state that someone made a piece at some time in the past somewhere in Japan.

In respect classifying seems obviously a desire of man - why not speculate further and put a Tsuba in a labled box?

Florian

[lotus]

Jean -

 

Very good points on Katchushi, thank you. And Florian, I absolutely agree with your statements on the desire to classify tsuba! Speaking of which, I inspected my new tsuba under magnification and lo and behold on one area where the patina has rubbed off, I found traces of inlay in 3 places (see attached photos). I also found what I think is evidence of "file" like marks used to remove the inlay (see red arrow on 2nd pic). My theory is that someone had the inlay removed and the tsuba re-patinated because in all other areas where patina is intact there is no evidence of inlay.

 

That said, all current evidence points to a Heianjo call based on diameter, rim width (broad) and it being rounded square, thickness and with evidence of inlay on the rim. Why not Shoami you say? The broad flat and rounded square rim along with inlay being on the rim like in most Heianjo guards. The design is slightly different then what we see in this school as it has more of a Kanayama feel to it but I think it is still the best call... I am going to play in photoshop and see if I can add some decoration to it just to "visualize" it. My PS skills are rusty so not sure how good it will come out.

 

Do others now agree with this call given the new evidence?

 

 

[Geraint]

Dear Patrick.

 

It is quite a jump from what you illustrate to your Heianjo call.  As Heianjo are honzogan it would be a great labour to file off the plate to remove all the inlay depressions and not a very likely thing to do, wouldn't you say?  

Do you think that what you describe as file marks might be the prepared ground for some nunome zogan instead?

 

All the best.

[ROKUJURO]

Patrick,

I don't think HEIANJO.

What you call inlay would have to have a recessed area or groove in the metal plate to accommodate the (mainly) brass inlay pieces. Depending on the period, HEIANJO had flat (HIRA ZOGAN) or slightly raised inlay (TAKA ZOGAN). On your TSUBA I think I can see remains of metal on the surface which would then be called NUNOME or IROE ZOGAN. This is not really an inlay, but an application on the surface of the TSUBA plate by amalgam or soldering techniques, as far as I know. But this, again, is not a HEIANJO technique.      

[lotus]

Yes indeed, you both make excellent points. I will look into schools specializing in nunome or iroe zogan then.

 

Geraint, yes those marks could be preparation for nunome zogan. The tsuba identification guide does list Heianjo as doing both low relief and nunome inlay. And Hayes states they used both raised and flat. I assume by flat he is referring to nunome?

[Geraint]

Dear Patrick,

 

I think the reference you quote distinguishes between inlay that rises above the surface of the plate and what might be called flush inlay.  Distinct from nunome zogan which is very thin foil or wire adhered to the prepared ground by hammering.

I have not come across a reference for Heianjo guards having nuonme zogan.  You might enjoy this,  

 

All the best.

[lotus]

Geraint -

 

Thanks, I will check that out. Until then, I photo shopped a couple nunome zogan designs onto my guard. Think I prefer the 2nd one...