Help with this NBTHK attribution

[zanilu]

Hello to all NMB members

 

I have recently acquired the following daisho tsuba papered by NBTHK as Ko-Kinko.

 

Far from me to question NBTHK from the depth of my ignorance on the subject but... 

 

It is not exactly rare but also not common to find a tsuba daisho of yamagane papered as Ko-Kinko. 

 

As a general rule a yamagane tsuba with an old fashioned design of arabesque or waves, combined with an old looking texture can be regarded as Ko-Kinko,  confirmed by NBTHK attribution. 

As a consequence of the the Ko-Kino attribution a time frame ranging from Muromachi to Momoyama can be considered. 

However the fashion of wearing two swords in matching pair started only at the beginning of the Edo period.

 

As I see it we have at this point four possible options:

1.  A real, ahead of time, Ko-Kinko daisho from the Muromachi/Momoyama   period.
2.  An Edo period daisho made on purpose with an old-fashioned style.
3.  Only one of the two tsuba is from Muromachi/Momoyama period and the other one was later made (Edo period) to match the old one to form a daisho.
4.  Two tsuba made independently but so alike that they could later matched in a daisho.
5.  An additional possibility I could not imagine!

 

If we compare the two tsuba we cas see that, both tsuba are obtained from a solid plate of yamagane with a dote mimi (or better uchikaeshi mimi?). 

Dai mimi

 

Sho mimi

 

The thicknesses are different, the dai is 4.0 mm at seppa dai and 5.4 at mimi while the sho is 3.5 mm at seppa dai and 4.0 mm at mimi. This could point to the possibility that the two were not obtained from the same plate. Possibility also supported by the fact that the sho seems to have developed a slightly darker patina compared to the dai.
There is also a difference in the size of the inland dew drops between dai and sho. On the dai the average size is about 1.6 mm with the most frequent value being 1.5 mm (44% of the total), while on the sho the mean is about 1.8 mm with a most frequent value of 1.8 mm (30% of the total). In the evaluation of the mean values the deformed dew drops were not considered. On both tsuba the dew drops on the ura side are consistently larger that on the ura. 

 

There is also difference in the surface finish of the two tsuba, described on the NBTHK paper as ishime-ji.

On the dai the surface is finished with parallel lines engraved at approximately 45 deg from the vertical, that look like engraved in kosokibori lines.

 

 

On the sho, instead, the surface is finished with a more random pattern.

 

 

The two tsuba have a lot of points in common but not as mush as one would expect from a daisho.
If I would have stumbled in them separately I would have assumed them at least from the same workshop if not from the same artist. 

Any comments on the NBTHK attribution and on how to determine the age of kinko tsuba is more than welcome!

 

Best Regards
Luca
 

[ROKUJURO]

Luca,

as far as I know there was no copper sheet metal readily available in these times (nor brass wire), so I think you can exclude the option that TSUBA were made from the same plate.

Do you remember the casting demonstration in one of Ford's videos? This seems to show that soft metal TSUBA were made individually from a cast ingot. Furthermore, I don't think that TSUBAKO let their work develop as it wants. Every step and dimension is deliberate and calculated, so no coincidence or hazard can be expected. 

Concerning your nice DAISHO, it may have been made by the same hand (or workshop), but perharps with some time between them.

But I am afraid we will never know for sure.

[zanilu]

Jean you are right! I stand corrected about the lack of pre made plates. Sometimes my engineering background make me assume something wrong.

 

<<Concerning your nice DAISHO, it may have been made by the same hand (or workshop), but perharps with some time between them>>

 

I start to see it the same way, the more I think of it the more it looks reasonable.

 

Thank you.

 

Regards

Luca

[MauroP]

Ciao Luca,

it was a popular pattern, so more likely a daishō composed in Edo times from two independent uchigatana tsuba from late Muromachi/Momoyama period.

[zanilu]

Grazie Pietro.

 

I think that your hypothesis also make sense.

And as, rightly said by Jean, we will probably never know.

 

By chance do you have also the measurements of the tsuba you posted?

 

Regards

Luca

[Soshin]

On 11/13/2022 at 12:40 PM, zanilu said:

However the fashion of wearing two swords in matching pair started only at the beginning of the Edo period.

 

Hi Luca,

 

Nice Ko-Kinko dai-sho set you have. Thanks for sharing. I agree with other people's theories as to the origin of the matching tsuba set. It should be noted that there was not any rule against having a set or wearing a matching set of tsuba if you really liked the design for your swords. The practice of samurai carrying a long and short sword started during the Momoyama Period before the Edo Period and would fit the timeframe of the NBTHK Ko-Kinko attribution.