Kamakura Tsuba

[davel]

I'm hanging around for quite some time here but never registered..

 

But i think i need some help here. I've got this tsuba in and since i can't read Japanese maybe somebody here can help me out. The guy i bought it from told me it was a kamakura tsuba from the early Edo. Yesterday i showed the documents to somebody who can read a bit Japanese and he told me that the Kamakura dynasty was indicated there.

 

Who's right

 

 

Thxs !

 

Dave

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

 

 

The guy i bought it from told me it was a kamakura tsuba from the early Edo

 

 

This one is right. Kamakura is a work style/school.

[Nobody]

FYI; Refer to the following info.

http://tsuba.jyuluck-do.com/KamakuraTsuba.html

[davel]

I saw that info too so that's why i was getting confused since they guy who read the docs told me that it mentioned Kamakura Dynasty (or something similar).

 

Anyone who can read the docs ?

 

Thxs

[Nobody]

The paper does not say Kamakura Dynasty but only attributes it to Kamakura.

[Curran]

It is "Kamakura" style, which is a school of tsuba that used a sort of design related to Kamakura (wood engraving) style in their design work. The tsuba are therefore called 'Kamakura', but it is not from the Kamakura period.

 

The school went through several revivals over the time (just like birkenstocks and other whatnot of fashion).

Nice example, with papers. I believe there was one like this on Aoi Arts at one point.

 

Hope that helps.

[GARY WORTHAM]

GREETINGS; I'm not sure what i see,but the metal really has a cast look to it, as well as papers i do not recognize. If it was handed to me, I would say it was a reproduction piece, and that it has weird Chinese fake papers. Hope I am wrong for the owners benefit. Sure would be a great time for he tsuba / paper experts to throw in their thoughts and reasons why !!!

 

Gary Wortham

[Guido]

Sure would be a great time for he tsuba / paper experts to throw in their thoughts and reasons why !!!

How about *you* tell us why you think these NBTHK Hozon papers (that look perfectly legitimate to me) are "weird Chinese fakes"?

[GARY WORTHAM]

Ok Guido; I'm up for a discussion. Since most posts, have 1>2 responses per 100 viewing; there are a lot out here, like me, that has random thoughts, and would welcome the ability to express them, for others to think upon, as well as build or bend the evolution of the subject; without the feeling they will be pounced upon.

 

The closeup, seems to show, a lack of real definitive workmanship; which made me feel it could be of a cast nature. I see no bones, folds, or hammer workmanship; which would lead me to a true nihonto piece. The lack of patina, for it's age, also has me in question. Yet, the dry surface may be from the effect of being burned, hence the case in nature of the texture of it's surface. And the crane, it''s poor quality appearance, just doesn't live up to the detailed workmanship, one would expect from the artist of the past.

 

The papers, over the years of collecting; we hear of fake papers, forged papers, poorly attributed papers, etc.; and the ability to reproduce quality paper workmanship is, indeed. an easy task. I believe there are more times than not, in these days, where papers are used to deceive; and only the experts know one from the other, as well as how to confirm their true nature and documentation. So what to trust ???

 

In my opinion, I trust what I see, try to touch, hear as a collaboration from my fellow collectors; and then it's just the choice of the day; subject to change in the future. I can think of an example of a tsuba, I took to the San Francisco show, years ago; where I presented it in hand, to each of the well known and highly respected authorities on tsuba; and was given a different school, age, and description by each.

None of them had the same answer; and it was not till years later; the true definition was found, in a 1980 Christies catalog; and of course, this is always subject to change again.

 

Anyway, so much for my thoughts, Guido, and i would welcome an in depth flow of your thoughts, as well. And to the owner, Davel; I'm sure you have a great tsuba, with true papers; but I hope you appreciate the complexity of this great study and research of Japanese swords and fittings; as well as enjoy the group's discussion and efforts. When Thomas Edison was explaining the fact, that he had thousands of light bulb filaments that did not work, in his search to invent the light bulb; a learned guest expressed the despair, that Thomas must have had, with so many failures. His reply was that none were a failure, but were indeed, each a success, at determining which filaments were not the best choice. Similar to our study, yes

 

Gary Wortham

[reinhard]

Like Guido I'm waiting for an explanation why this expertise is supposed to be a Chinese fake. You haven't answered this question yet. The paper looks perfectly alright to me. As long as you don't present us with any kind of proof for your theory, all your doubts concerning this tsuba's qualities are meaningless. - There's no way back to the "wild frontier" when amateurs made their own rules.

 

reinhard

[Chris Colman]

A posting in December 2007 "Kamakura Bori Hakogaki" shows a piece authenticated by Dr Torigoe, the workmanship is quite naive (for want of a better term), more so than the piece shown here. Examples I have seen show this work style to be fairly typical of Kamakura Bori.

 

chris colman

[Ford Hallam]

Gary,

 

having already received the customary rebuke for throwing in unsupported opinion I'll attempt to elucidate

 

I think this may well be a classic case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. I can see why you thought this tsuba was a cast copy but that coarseness you refer to is more likely due to corrosion. There are enough other areas of the steel that indicate casting to be unlikely.

 

This grainy, almost stone-like texture is in fact quite characteristic of Kamakura style guards as is the relatively naive workmanship( as Chris rightly points out) . It would be a huge mistake to fail to recognize that the tsuba making tradition didn't simply come into being fully developed. The skills and techniques we see in these works have evolved over time, and in some cases the quality of schools has even declined.

 

What is most important to grasp, however, is the specific attributes one should expect to be able to discern in specific examples from particular schools and different periods. Why would you specifically expect to see bones, folds etc in a Kamakura bori tsuba ? Are these particular kantei points? I don't believe so.

 

As to the condition of the patina I would add that this is extremely difficult to judge in a photo and in any case is also quite easily damaged. So using that as part of your argument for it being a Chinese fake may not stand up to closer scrutiny.

 

Personally, I'm in favour of debating the relative merits of differing views however as your speculation was evidently based on a fairly superficial appreciation of Kamakura bori tsuba there seems little to debate

 

I hope you appreciate the complexity of this great study and research of Japanese swords and fittings; as well as enjoy the group's discussion and efforts.

 

Regards,

 

Ford

 

p.s. I was also intrigued that you rejected 3 differing answers from reputable "experts" to the identity of a tsuba in favour of a picture of something apparently similar in a Christie's catalogue. What makes you more confidant in the resident boffin at Christies? he he...I certainly wouldn't be

[GARY WORTHAM]

Ah yes, as a response to Ford; and we wonder why so many who look at the various topics on the board, seldom venture to comment !!

 

1] We all have a " little knowledge ", and that makes it us " dangerous" ??? Well, we are all at various levels of advancing education, from our 1st day till our last. I always thought it was good to toss around opinions, learn from others, explore new lines of considerations; without being pounced on or placed in a demeaning presence. How good were each of us, our 1st day, 1st month, 1st year, 1st 10 years, etc. and then at the end, I'm sure much that we knew will again be undone; as I have heard from some of the most learned in this study, express in conversation.

 

2] As the view of " superficial appreciation " , I gave it my best shot, ; and enjoyed the furtherment of my education, thru the collected positive explanations of all; and know more today, than I did yesterday. Do I consider my engagement of thoughts with others a " huge mistake " ????? I don't think so; just the fashion of it's presentation.

 

3] As far as the 3 opinions at the SF show, years ago; they were all different schools of different eras. Did I say I " rejected their opinions " or is this a poor choice of words being used. And " he, he, I wouldn't be " ; twangs of insult and demeaning connotations. Impossible to be the same, even if one was correct; two could not be. I do not know the sources, persons involved, and data base used at Christies; and I could never consider them a " resident boffin " till I knew who it was and even then, be unable to determine their basis of evaluation, for the said tsuba and catalog items. The photo was a dead ringer, articulate definition, and referred to an undecorated example existing,but it is older, implying this piece. And I would put this piece's identification up for scrutiny of those mentioned at the show, and feel confident they would agree with the new data shown.

 

4] So, good discussion, hope all got something out of it; especially the new to the study; and is the core of the philosophy ' when you look for the best, you will find it ", being served ???

 

Gary Wortham

[Ford Hallam]

Gary,

 

there's no point getting all huffy at this point and attempting to gather all the other non-posters on your side to help assuage your bruised ego.

 

Your attempt to twist my opinion that this may be a case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing is similarly disingenuous. My point, which I believe you understood, was that your superficial understanding of the subject had in fact mislead you and led you to make statements that revealed precisely the limitations of your understanding. My comment was merely a cautionary one, and one we all ought to remain well aware of...not just relative neophytes.

 

You stepped in to this discussion and asserted that in your opinion the tsuba was a Chinese cast copy and that the papers looked dubious.

 

These are pretty heavyweight claims to make....and unless you can back them up you are going to have to face some serious critique.

 

You were completely uncompromising in your assessment and in fact a careful reading of your comment does reveal a superficial understanding of the matter. I tried to elucidate but you took this to be demeaning

 

As for "giving it your best shot" ...what does that actually mean? It's the sort of thing I've heard on Pop Idols... Is this supposed to earn you some credibility for effort?

 

As far as the 3 opinions at the SF show, years ago; they were all different schools of different eras. Did I say I " rejected their opinions " or is this a poor choice of words being used. And " he, he, I wouldn't be " ; twangs of insult and demeaning connotations. Impossible to be the same, even if one was correct; two could not be. I do not know the sources, persons involved, and data base used at Christies; and I could never consider them a " resident boffin " till I knew who it was and even then, be unable to determine their basis of evaluation, for the said tsuba and catalog items. The photo was a dead ringer, articulate definition, and referred to an undecorated example existing,but it is older, implying this piece. And I would put this piece's identification up for scrutiny of those mentioned at the show, and feel confident they would agree with the new data shown.

 

...of course here we'll just have to accept your judgement...despite already having proved fallible in reference to the tsuba that started this topic.

 

and is the core of the philosophy ' when you look for the best, you will find it ", being served ???

 

I'm not at all sure that that "philosophy" is relevant here...seems a bit "new age" to me and I don't recall agreeing to anything as vague as that when i joined this forum. In any case, how does a neophyte recognise the best ?

 

 

Anyway, I've said enough...I've no more invested in this "chat".

 

enjoy,

 

Ford

 

p.s. I don't suppose you're the same (master) Gary Wortham who runs the Woodlands dojang teaching the modern system called Chayon-Ryu

[remzy]

i see nothing wrong with this tsuba... beside that it is all bent!!! he he, just kidding.

[Pete Klein]

http://home.earthlink.net/~jggilbert/kamakura.htm

 

Jim has some good info also. It is interesting that Kamakura tsuba rarely will take a polish, possibly due to the porosity of the metal. I wonder if they were fabricated from discarded tamahagane not suitable for sword forging?

[Ted Tenold]

I've prompted this hypothesis for a few years now. The greater portions of the Kera or "bloom" from the smelter are not suitable for sword manufacture. Only a minor percentage is. Yet they had to be doing something with the rest of the material. Let's face it, this was precious stuff to make back in the days before Mr. Bessemer. Tea pots, door hinges, tansu fittings, tools, nails, stirrups, horse bits, and yes, why not tsubas. The lower end of the carbon contents would have different working properties suitable for perhaps the carving, cutting, and sculpting of such works as Kamakura tsuba. Ford would be better able to discuss "working perameters" part of the discussion, but I think that the regional differences we see in tsuba plates and manufacture techniques are attributable to same reasons we see regional differences in sword steel and working styles.

[remzy]

Interesting points there Pete and Ted, it might indeed be why the metal look so "porous" as mentioned. That combined with age and corrosion.

[GARY WORTHAM]

Did my homework and research; since this topic site was viewed 644 time and 23 comments; must be of interest to many.

 

1] Per the most respected authorities of the book; " Tsuba an Aesthetic Study " the learned, Kazutaro Torigoye & Robert E. Hayes; their below comments are as follows:

 

a] 1st period Kamakura dated from early Muromachi till end of that period.

 

b] 2nd period was an " imitation " of that period; made during the Momoyama period.

 

c] 3rd from early Edo was a " copy of the imitation ". The designs of the 3rd " have Chinese influence ", " leading one to believe these pieces were imported ".

 

d] So, where does this piece fit in ??? Were others of this style, made even further into late Edo period ???? As with many smiths of the later Edo period, who made copies of early works. Is this a copy of the copy of the imitation of the 3rd period ???

 

2] I can see, from the books, I have since researched, on this style, why i was inclined to believe the tsuba to be of such nature, as to be that of a Chinese knock off.

 

3] Purpose of this NMB, for me is to discuss, learn, listen to others, study, research, have others listen to me, and enjoy. All of which has been found on this thread. Thanks !

 

4] Looking for the best and you will find it; refers to the positive as well as informative comments, from both Pete, Jacques, Moriyama, Curran, and Ted. Thanks !!

 

5] My knowledge on this school and subject has added to my future thoughts and ideas; as well as understanding the vast, diverse reaction of others, to attempts to word your own personal thoughts and ideas.

 

6] Here is the tsuba I had mentioned, and I would welcome any additional help, on the accumulation of it's identify; ex: era, school, age, motif, etc. sukashi mokko plate - iron, with shakudo fukurin. 79mm x 79mm x 3mm.

 

Gary Wortham

[Curran]

I have not seen too many what I would call "1st period" Kamakura.

Here is an NBTHK papered one that I sold cheaply a while back. I believe it to be 1st period.

Extremely dense and heavy. Felt like 1/4 inch of armor plate.

 

Lacquered with the lacquer having worn off in places and either partially removed or not lacquered in the chrysanthemum petals.

 

Curran

[GARY WORTHAM]

Thanks for the example, Curran. Now that's a very nice looking tsuba, and helps me understand the the early Kamakura design and workmanship. From the book of Robert E. Haynes, the common motifs of plum flowers, cherry flowers, grass, etc., low relief carvings; really backs up your 1st period placement of your tsuba. The above discussed piece, which started this thread, is miles from the example you have provided. I can see how one would be lost in the transition, in linking the two, in the Kamakura school.

 

Gary Wortham

[Curran]

Everybody keep a cool head?

 

I didn't like Kamakura tsuba that much when I started collecting, but have seen quite a number now from the "different periods" and say I have come across some nice ones here and there. I think the one I owned was rather simplistic and wonder how it would have looked on the koshirae of the time. ~Functionalist~ collectors always like that one, but a time came when I had to sell. Oh well.

 

I've seen later koshirae with Kamakura tsuba closer to the one that started this thread. Sometimes they work quite nicely with the koshirae for an overall aesthetic.

 

Curran

[GARY WORTHAM]

Greetings to Curran; I actually think " simplistic ", would be better served, in the more descriptive form of " mute elegance ", referring to your example. I myself would be proud, to be the owner, of that which you sold !!! To quote a little more from the dialog of Robert E. Haynes' book; " the samurai class keep this style alive for more than 200 years, seeing in it, their own taste and reserve ". Nice endorsement of the earlier period productions, such as the one you sold. I went thru my Compton catalog #1, and looked at his Kamakura examples, and would take the one you, sold over his, any day.

 

Gary Wortham

[Guido]

Dave, if this partially pseudo-philosophical and outlandish discussion didn't scare you away by now:

 

You got a very nice Edo period Kamakura Tsuba with legitimate papers. IMO it represents well the rather rustic emulation of Kamakura-bori wood carving, and has a rare Wan-gata shape. It's a decent piece that you can be proud of, and way above the junk, fakes and mediocrity that is posted here so often. Thank you for sharing.

 

To everybody else and in general: there's not a fine, but rather bold line between politely pointing out shortcomings in workmanship or identifying Gimei, and making wild guesses and unsupported claims. Of course everybody is entitled to an opinion, but not all opinions are equal or educated or even valid.

[Rich T]

Read this, it may help

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~jggilbert/kamakura.htm

 

Also, this too is most likely an early Kamakura tsuba that was then treated by a Ko Shoami artist to add the nunome.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

Richard

[davel]

@Guido I'm following the discussion from the sideline but i'm enjoying it and learned a whole lot more

 

Thxs to everyone (not that you should stop discussing now..) !

 

Dave

[Bazza]

@Guido I'm following the discussion from the sideline but i'm enjoying it and learned a whole lot more

 

Thxs to everyone (not that you should stop discussing now..) !

 

Dave

Well, it is with some trepidation that I venture here with an iron tsuba that may be in the category of (quote Guido) "the junk, fakes and mediocrity that is posted here so often"!!! I've had this for nearly thirty years and have always been somewhat indifferent to it alongside its Goto and Ishiguro shakudo nanako cupboard-fellows. It is, however, original to a handachi with original koshirae and katana dated 1862 by SENDAI HYAKURYUSHI NAGASHIGE (Hawley Brown Book NAG 106?). It fits the characteristics noted - granulated appearance, sukidashi bori, thin?, naive and not signed. The two pictures below show the front and back of the tsuba, dimensions 83mm high x 76mm wide x 3.5mm thick at seppa dai and 4.0mm across mimi.

 

The last two pictures are of some marks on the mimi that could be corrosion pits, but I'm of the opinion that they are deliberately placed. An imitation of Nature's worm holes??? The tsuba has a muted ring when struck (not sonorous, like a bell) and shows evidence of forging with a fold line evident on both sides of the nakago ana and a small fold evident on the mimi.

 

I don't for a moment think this is a first period Kamakura Bori tsuba. I've always thought it was Edo period and was obviously chosen carefully by the owner of the (made to order) Nagashige katana, which by the way is a long, slim blade quite unlike any I've seen before. I've wondered if it was a Fukkoto interpretation of a Heian tachi!!!

 

Anyway, I'd appreciate any opinions on this tsuba that appears to conform to the characteristics of a Kamakura Bori tsuba.

 

Best regards,

Barry Thomas.

[Curran]

Rich,

 

Thanks for posting an image of that tsuba. I thought to ask others to post for "1st period" Kamakura tsuba examples. I'm not sure I agree with the dating by Jim Gilbert of the first one on his site, but then I doubt he'd care a hill of beans. Just my feeling on the matter.

 

Barry,

Knee-jerk reflex is to look at the carving (clouds and general dragon) and point more towards shoami work. I know it is a sin to just say that and not back it up with better explanation. Armchair opinion is that it doesn't have the sukashi associated with later Kamakura bori and the design isn't so much as framed as the ones like Dave's where the elements look like they were lifted off Korean or Chinese celadon / porcerlain. Peter or Rich can probably state a better argument.

 

Any pictures of the tsuba on the koshirae the way you received/found it?

 

Curran

[Rich T]

Hi Barry, I agree with Curran, as in I am not getting a Kamakura feel. I wonder, there appears to be no evidence of any uttori, but this looks very much like Hizen work, which is closely associated with the Namban tsuba except Hizen tsubako worked with little sukashi and used uttori to finish off the work. The mimi though is odd, it is not bold enough or something. It does, for want of a better explanation, give it a Shôami feel. I think it is an Edo period tsuba, and later more than earlier.

 

Cheers

 

Rich

[Bazza]

 

Any pictures of the tsuba on the koshirae the way you received/found it?

 

Curran

 

Curran,

Yes, coming later. I'll have to take them. The koshirae has some very interesting features, one of which a visiting Japanese togishi said he had never seen before. As a teaser, the same is lacquered gold and the remaining menuki is a swastika. This appears to be very much a custom-ordered sword from the blade to the koshirae.

 

Thanks too for your opinion Rich. As a result of this little exercise I have looked even more closely at this tsuba and have discovered a couple more things about it. I'll try and photograph them with my macro lens, but it could take a few days before I'm back.

 

Regards,

Barry Thomas