Katchushi tsuba - a search for a definition ...

[docliss]

May I ask what is the present understanding of the label ‘katchūshi tsuba’? The original meaning of ‘armour-makers’ tsuba’ quite clearly no longer applies to later work, and neither do the earlier characteristics of thin, ita-tsuba with ko-sukashi decoration and kaku mimi. What, then, is a katchūshi tsuba?

 

John L.

[Mark Green]

Hi John,

That is a loaded question for sure.

Most books will say 'Armorers, or tsuba made by armor makers or sword smiths.'

 

Now, if you think about it for a moment. Before the large tsuba making schools of the Edo period, the only people that had the tools, and know how, to make a tsuba, were very likely armorers or sword smiths.

So, it is very likely that any tsuba made pre Edo, was Katchushi.

Katchushi seems to be labeled more to a style. Any old tsuba with a nice raised rim, and a thin plate seems to get that label. No rim, with a bit thicker lens ed plate, and they seem to get the Ko-tosho label.

But it is very likely that a smith or armorer made both. Not many others would, or could, work iron.

That is my thoughts on it anyway.

Mark G

[sanjuro]

Mark.

In fact, there were tsubako although not designated so specifically as such, prior to the Edo period, (although as you say, not usually grouped into schools), and Kanagushi were fairly easy to find in any castle town during the Momoyama period and before that as travelling artisans during the Muromachi period. Many of these were quite capable of producing iron Tsuba as well as the entire tosogu for a sword. However, many of these were simple blacksmiths, as indeed were some Tosho of those earlier periods.

[Mark Green]

Keith,

For sure there were a few smiths out there making tsuba, back to the beginning.

But I would bet the number to be few.

That is why I said 'likely'

Mark G

[sanjuro]

Mark

 

If the number were known I think we may both be surprised. Given the number of swords made for the various conflicts of early times and all the way into the sengoku Jidai, the fact that many were replaced in their entirety, and also that all of those swords (as opposed to tanto) were mounted tachi style, my guess is that there were quite a few artisans of many different types producing tsuba , kanagu, saya and the like. :D

[Mark Green]

Could be I suppose?

 

I would think though, that the tools, and facilities, to work with iron, and alloys, would make this very restrictive in 14c-16c Japan, and anywhere.

But I wasn't there

 

I would think it very likely, that if a town was a big sword making center. There would be quite a few 'side' shops, making fittings for swords. But, I would think those same guys made armor parts, and other things as well. Making them Katchushi

Mark G

[sanjuro]

By way of an answer to John's original question, I dont think that we can really, accurately or legitimately apply the term Katchushi to a tsuba after a certain time frame, unless it were a signed piece. I dont however, recall ever having seen a signed genuine katchushi tsuba, or even encountered one in books. The term has certainly come to be applied to tsuba that appear to be of that style, many of them much later pieces and probably made in emulation of what is now considered to be katchushi. Ergo the name has come to represent a style rather than be applied to a tsuba's origins.

In real terms, its a puzzle and in most cases a misnomer. As an illustration, I have two tsuba that I am certain are genuine katchushi since by virtue of age they can hardly have been made by any other type of craftsman. That they are katchushi however, cannot lie entirely beyond doubt. Another tsuba I own is of the same style as katchushi but I am relatively certain it is of a more recent vintage and a close approximation of true katchushi work.

 

The question is a good one, but sadly not one I have a ready answer to. Perhaps a more informed member would care to elaborate.

[docliss]

Come on guys – can nobody explain to me the basis upon which some tsuba are presently being labelled by cogniscenti such as Robert Haynes and various shinsa panels as ‘katchūshi’, while bearing little obvious similarity to this group as described in the literature?

 

John L.

[sanjuro]

Lack of imagination????????

 

Actually John, I am as confused as you are concerning this. I am however determined not to allow it to overwhelm me. If it wasnt made by a katchushi then it isnt katchushi as far as I'm concerned. :D

 

Its possibly a good thing that my opinion amounts to nothing in the world of tsuba.

[Henry Wilson]

I take Katchushi as being relatively thin plate with a dote mimi usually with a bit of sukashi that is a more than mon sukashi but a lot less than what is seen in ji sukashi. Also I think the plates are generally plane flat on both sides with no tapering or curvature.

 

Old Kamakura style and Onin tsuba are believed to be approximately contemporary to the more rustic Katchushi style and I think we look at these as ways to catergorise Katchushi.

[Ford Hallam]

I think the reality is quite prosaic really. These are merely convenient labels, in as far as they allow us to point to certain objects we generally regarded as being of a type. Whether katchushi were ever made by armourers or merely share some technical features must remain a moot point, I think. Although, I'd be interested to see some armour of the period that does exhibit exactly the same sorts of upset hollow rims the characterise the Katchushi tsuba. I'm have only a passing familiarity with armour but I have my doubts about the association myself.

 

Henry,

 

your mention of Kamakura bori tsuba is worth noting as it shows that there was at least one group of specialist tsuba makers, working in iron, operating at the time. That the techniques employed are relatively advanced, compared to early Tosho tsuba, may indicate that this group was not an isolated anomaly.

 

As for Onin guards, I think they are really just Tosho guards with a bit of added decoration. I don't see any reason to assume Tosho guards had anything to do with swordsmiths as there is nothing at all similar in the techniques employed here either. As I suggested, these are just convenient, descriptive labels.

[docliss]

With my thanks to Ford and Henry for their contributions, I remain puzzled by some attributions to the Katchūshi group. Why, for example, has the attached tsuba been described by Jim Gilbert as ‘today it would probably be attributed to Katchushi’, and by Robert Haynes as ‘Katchushi in Ko-Shoami style – ca 1500’? Yes, it has a kaku-koniku mimi, and a thin plate (2.25 mm), but why ….

 

John L.

[Pete Klein]

Easy -- because 'They' said so...

 

(perhaps think on this in a broader context)

[sanjuro]

Pete

 

Perhaps because 'They' can never be challenged, nor their word doubted by mere mortals such as we.

[Pete Klein]

LOL -- yeah Keith -- that pretty much nails it... LOL! OK - just my jaded two pfennigs: Aside from signed pieces (although you could make argument for the inclusion of Kaneiye, Nobuie and Hoan) a lot of this categorization falls well into the realm of theory without merit. It's mostly conjecture without any science or record to back it up. IOW's it's nonsense until proven otherwise.

 

(I can hear Ford laughing hysterically half of a world away...)!!!

[Ford Hallam]

ha ha...heretics! the lot of you :D welcome to the club

[Henry Wilson]

What makes this Katchushi?

 

http://world.choshuya.co.jp/sale/tousou ... /index.htm

[Pete Klein]

Henry - darling - because the paper says it is!

 

[sanjuro]

I can see where your two pfennig's worth comes in. There is after all no proof that what we classify as katchushi (I mean the real thing made prior to mid Muromachi) was actually made by an armourer. Nor for that matter, that Tosho was actually made by a swordsmith. It's all conjecture and assumption in the absence of proof to the contrary. Like you say, it stands until proven otherwise, and there is no danger of proof to the contrary being presented. SNAFU! :D Gotta love this wierd affliction we share! :lol:

 

And the powers that be, rule us all....... TADAH!

[rkg]

what's in a name...

 

A great many of the current "classifications" of tsuba are really kind of arbitrary. "Old Iron Tsuba" just didn't have a

good ring to it when selling pieces to the gaijin tourists, I guess...

 

Its my understanding that (this month) having more complex sukashi and maybe some kebori is what gets the

"head scratchers" lumped into the katchushi rather than tosho bin...

 

Best,

 

rkg

(Richard George)

[sanjuro]

I dont know about you guys, but I can handle the appelation of heretic to my name..... Its better than being famous for being famous like Paris Hilton!

[rkg]

Ford,

 

Interesting assertion on the tosho vs. onin tsuba. I've always thought that the metal they used on the pieces

classified as onin has

in general a more "doughy" look/was more susceptible to corrosion than what in general got used on the toshos - is

this then a result of different care of the surface to try and protect the zogan decorations (or maybe the toshos

were all lacquered to prevent corrosion) or different heat treatment or..?

 

Best,

 

rkg

(Richard George)

 

As for Onin guards, I think they are really just Tosho guards with a bit of added decoration. I don't see any reason to assume Tosho guards had anything to do with swordsmiths as there is nothing at all similar in the techniques employed here either. As I suggested, these are just convenient, descriptive labels.

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Richard,

 

I'm not sure I'd make any distinction between the material used in Tosho and Onin guards. It seems to me highly probably that many of what are now classified as Onin are exactly Tosho with later added decoration. Undoubtedly though, there were some made from scratch at the time also.

 

Onin guards may well have been lacquered too. It would have been a simple matter to polish the urushi away where the dots and wire stood proud under the coating.

 

The steel/iron used for Onin guards must be of at least a reasonable quality ( homogeneous) because it would be a real pain to have metal crumble or split when doing all that inlay ( I know this from experience :? ) so I'd suggest that, if anything, the Onin guards required a more well processed material to allow for the decoration to be carried out. There may be something to the observation regarding corrosion you made that follows from this hypothesis. Steel/iron that still contains slag and other impurities can sometimes be more corrosion resistant than more refined, homogeneous material. Old wrought iron is a good example of this. Hmmmm....is this enough conjecture to further undermine the notion that Tosho tsuba are better steel and thus made by swordsmiths