Nobuie Generation Question

[Winchester]

Greetings, This is probably more of a newbie question, but in reading and getting bits of information here and there…I find myself at a crossroad and not sure what to make of it.

 

I recently came across a reference to a ‘Nobuie Akechi”.

 

In not making assumptions……….and understanding that there are 1st Generation, Genki, and Tensho…if a generic statement was made such as Nobuie Akechi (the latter being the clan?) then a reasonable person would assume reference to 1st generation when other references could have been made—should that have been the case. Does this seem to follow???

 

 

[Jake6500]

16 hours ago, Winchester said:

Greetings, This is probably more of a newbie question, but in reading and getting bits of information here and there…I find myself at a crossroad and not sure what to make of it.

 

I recently came across a reference to a ‘Nobuie Akechi”.

 

In not making assumptions……….and understanding that there are 1st Generation, Genki, and Tensho…if a generic statement was made such as Nobuie Akechi (the latter being the clan?) then a reasonable person would assume reference to 1st generation when other references could have been made—should that have been the case. Does this seem to follow???

 

 

 

I'm not sure I'm following but assuming I am understanding the question correctly, I don't see why there would be any generational implication from the use of the clan name alone. The Akechi clan name became significant after 1540 but was in use even before then...

 

What exactly is meant by "first-generation" here? Do you mean the first "Nobuie Akechi"? If so that makes sense to me and I think it would be a reasonable assumption, simply because there is no use of a qualifier like "second" "third" "younger" etc.

 

Do you mean the first generation of "Akechi clan" retainers? If so, that does not make sense to me at all and I see no reason to make such an assumption.

 

Providing a bit more context such as the specific passage you've come across might also help others interpret your question or give better answers than this one...

[Winchester]

Thank you, Jake. It seems my reading of the line is correct, that is, referring to the 1st generation. Just trying to be objective and while this is the most likely, I was curious if I was missing anything.

 

Context:

 

A book I don't know the name of, but have a scan of one page, indicates that a tsuba was signed by Saotome Ienori, "a disciple of Nobuie Akechi, [and is] excellent in both workmanship and texture."

 

 

[Winchester]

I'm really just trying to figure out what I have and doing some light detective work. Either it is an early piece and I have not been able to find references (most likely) or it was made but an exceptionally skilled armorer. Both situations are positive in my view. Here is the loose notes I have:

 

Major Premise/Theory: What I have is a tsuba that was done by Nobuie's disciple/apprentice, Saotome Ienori. This would have been done in Nobuie's lifetime. 

 

Minor Premise/Support: 

Signature does not appear to be same in this example: https://www.bonhams....o-period-circa-1800/

 

Counterpoint: 

 

A) https://tsubakansho.com/tag/kamakura-bori/ 

--> May reference book as Nakamura 1963. Not validated yet.

B) Tôken Tsuba Kagami, Banzuke was published around 1800s that ranks tsuba makers from the beginning through present.

 

Materials I have to try to tie everything together: A) green papers (yes, I know they are not ideal and it will take time for me to get resubmitted because I will not mail this); B) publication, the tsuba is published in a book, but I do not have the name of the book, just scan of pages AND the book is what makes this reference; 

C) From Markus Sesko, the reference: "And this brings us to the tsuba makers banzuke that I was talking about (see picture below). It is titled Tôken Tsuba Kagami (刀剣鍔鏡) and was compiled by Noda Takaaki (野田敬明, 1759-1825) some time during the Bunsei era (文政, 1818-1830). ... It is also interesting to learn that two Saotome artists are found within the top ranks. Anyway, it becomes clear that this banzuke focuses on tankô (鐔工), i.e. tsuba craftsmen...". ...Saotome Ienori is listed as a top tsubashi. 

[Brian]

Bear in mind that some of the Nobuiye lines are thought to have been workshops, not individual smith.

[Winchester]

Interesting, thank you, Brian.

 

i feel like there is something here; then again, i could be off and just spinning my wheels.

 

But, hey. I’m having fun.

[Jake6500]

Interesting... I know some collectors have reservations about green papers but personally I think they are still reliable 95% of the time. If the paper makes an attribution to a particular artist or school, I'd be of the view that it is probably correct. Given the added context I think the text probably is referring to the first generation.

 

Have you translated the certification to see exactly what it says?

[Winchester]

Part of it is translated in that section on the forum. I’ll add it here.

 

Added:

 

雲龍図鐔 - unryū (no) zu tsuba
鉄地 撫角形 - tetsu-ji  nadekaku-gata
銘 早乙女[家]則 - mei Saotome Ienori

[SteveM]

The perfectionist in me demands I repeat the correction from the other thread. Please forgive:

The theme as described on the paperwork is 雨龍 (amaryū, or rain dragon), not 雲龍 (unryū, dragon in clouds). 

[Iekatsu]

Brian,

 

This might help:
https://tsubakansho.com/tag/ienori/

I would not put too much stock into the Nobuie claim, Saotome Ienori (the armour smith) worked in the Late Edo period, the Saotome armour smiths were well known for making Tsuba, particularly Utsushi of older styles.