Large nanban tsuba

[Jim P]

Hi all I picked up this nanban tsuba last week, its Dimensions are,

【Length】 　 88mm

【Width 】 　 77mm

【Thickness】 4mm(center), most thick5.5mm

Do nanban get much larger than 88mm ?

thanks.

[Curran]

Not that I am aware.

I could flip through the Namban tsuba book and check, but I doubt it.

[Mark]

saw this one online http://www.nihontocraft.com/Namban_Tsuba.html

it is similar, not quite as tall but wider

[docliss]

Dear Jim

 

In answer to your question regarding the maximum size of Namban tsuba, I can inform you that of a random group of 273 such tsuba the commonest height and width were 7.3 and 7.0 cm respectively. There were 4 tsuba measuring more than 8.8 cm in height, and 45 measuring more than 7.7 in width. I can supply these numbers in detail if you wish, but there were 5 tsuba measuring between 8.8 and 9.2 cm in height, and 6 measuring between 8.5 and 9.2 cm in width.

 

I apologise for the errors in my original posting.

 

Kind regards, John L.

[christianmalterre]

Dear John,

 

thank you for those insights-i think i have read this already -but to say it very honest-there´s something on it´s whole arrangement which does confuse me,sorrowly i actually can not say or tell exactly...

I have seen this one and did play in an "intend-purchase"-but finally decided against-maybe cause of the Fukurin?

Which date would you give it?

 

Christian

[docliss]

Christian, Jim’s tsuba, featuring affrontés dragons with a tama jewel, while quite skilfully carved, features virtually no true undercutting, with the openings in the plate being simple holes through it. The ryō-hitsu are probably later modifications, and the shakudō fukurin is an unusual feature. I would suppose that this guard, which I personally would describe as an openwork guard with a very strong Namban influence, to be of the late 18th or early 19th centuries.

 

John L.

[Jim P]

HI all, Thank you John for your comments do you think it can be classed as a nanban. or as you say, ( described as an openwork guard with a very strong Nanban influence,) when I looked at some of the Nanban tsuba it seemed just out a bit. Nanbanbijutsu yes but nanban ? can it be classified under some other group ? As a nanban it is not a common size out of 273 not bad numbers the seller in Japan said, seldom do you find them over 85mm in size. It has a more Japanese feel than a lot of the Chinese type nanban. Has someone seen the shakudō fukurin on others ? I looked on the net but did not find much . John if you have a moment can you send the detail numbers :D and Curran as you have some references to look at and if you have time do you see something like this in the books?

Thank you for the help

[docliss]

Jim, my personal conviction – although not universally shared - is that one of the defining characteristics of the Namban group is the presence of undercutting, so I would hesitate to include your latest acquisition under this heading. But, if submitted to shinsa, it would certainly be labelled as such.

 

I am attaching two histograms illustrating the height/frequency and width/frequency of 273 tsuba of the Namban group, taken from The Namban Group of Japanese Sword Guards: a Reappraisal. John L.

[Brian]

Although not usually a Namban fan, they do grow on you, and this one I got a while ago in trade is one of my fav's.

It does appear to have significant and well done undercutting and some nice detail. Size is 7.7x7.5cm, and I was wondering how common is a shaped mimi like this one has?

It also has that slightly "tacky and cheesy" freely rotating ball that I assume is the tama the dragons are chasing. Kinda like dice handing from the rearview mirror nowdays? :D

Overall, I really like it, and in real life, it has a great dark patina.

 

Brian

[Akitombo]

Hi All,

As a Namban fan, I would agree with the others on the undercut issue.

Heres one not too far away from Brian's.

I have always felt that this school has been overlooked for many years, because there was so many "Pot Boilers" produced.

It was a great joy when Dr John Lissendens book came out.

It is a group of tsuba that need to be given more thought.

Regards

David

[Jim P]

Thank you John for the info, When looking at nanban tsuba in the last few days some did have a Chinese"Pot Boiler" look (good description David) but if you get past them you do see some nice ones.( like Brian's) they do come from a big group and don't seem to get big $ like some of the others and they do grow on you

[Mark Green]

The Museum of fine arts Boston, has many wonderful Nanban works.

 

http://www.mfa.org/search/collections?p ... =1&rows=64

 

Mark G

[Soshin]

Just my two cents on the topic. I really like your large nanban tsuba and I am a lover of the school as well. I would generally consider it a part of the Kanton subgroup of Nanban as I do see Chinese and not European influences in the motifs and design layout. The undercutting that others are talking about are common in Nanban but I don't think are a requirement for inclusion into a very board school. I have a Kanton (Nanban) tsuba that has a Skakudo fukurin of a very dark color as well that I did not notice at first look while purchasing the tsuba on a vacation in Japan. I think the fukurin covers the undercutting of the mimi normally observed in Nanban tsuba.

 

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David S.

[Jim P]

Hi David, Thank you for your thoughts, I have gained a bit of an insight into nanban tsuba in the last few weeks. I liked the look/shape of that tsuba. I would love to see your Kanton (Nanban) tsuba that has a Skakudo fukurin, as I have not seen a lot Nanban with fukurin. In my quick look on the net nanban is a very broad group have a look at this Nanban tsuba (http://www.samuraishokai.jp/equipment/ts036.html ) I would not have picked it as nanban at first glance and this one (http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/t ... ouds-11309) so is it just the theme that makes it nanban ? Thanks

[Soshin]

Hi David, Thank you for your thoughts, I have gained a bit of an insight into nanban tsuba in the last few weeks. I liked the look/shape of that tsuba. I would love to see your Kanton (Nanban) tsuba that has a Skakudo fukurin, as I have not seen a lot Nanban with fukurin. In my quick look on the net nanban is a very broad group have a look at this Nanban tsuba (http://www.samuraishokai.jp/equipment/ts036.html ) I would not have picked it as nanban at first glance and this one (http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/t ... ouds-11309) so is it just the theme that makes it nanban ? Thanks

The first Namban tsuba you linked to has a strong European influence. This is apparent characters at the bottom of the tsuba which has stylized Roman letters. Most of the information I have about Namban tsuba is from Tsuba An Aesthetic Study where Torigoye and Haynes spends some three pages on the subject. They divide the very wide group of Namban into three subgroups: Namban, Kanton, and Kagonami. The original Namban style had has strong European influences like the first tsuba you linked to were made in the southern port cities of Hirado and Nagasaki. The very early Muromatchi Period tsuba made in Chinese for export to Japan are also classified as Namban.

The Kanton were those tsuba that had a kaku or dote mimi with engraved designs showing a strong southern Chinese style influence with Chinese dragons and a very symetrical design. These were copies of the earlier Chinese style Namban export from China during the Muromatchi Period.

The Kagonami also had the Chinese style dragon and other mythical animals but with a asymetrical design that are very complex in detail. You see that in the second tsuba you linked to. By the end of the Edo period there were production places all over Japan including the original places in Kyushu and Edo, Kyoto, Aizu, and Yokohama. Mostly only copies of the Kanton style of Namban were being produced of varying quality.

Here are some quick scans I have of my tsuba. I think it is a classical Kanto (Namban) tsuba that shows the characteristic symmetric design with Chinese style dragons casing a diamond. This type of craving techique in the surface of the tsuba is called Namban bori. The overall size of the tsuba is a little bit on the small side at 6.9 ✕6.5✕ 0.5 cm. The scans show the very dark sakudo fukurin very well. I am not sure when the sakudo fukurin was added to mine but I have assigned a middle Edo Period age to the tsuba based up on accumulation of dust and oxidation in the sukashi; and the deep color to the patina.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David S.

[docliss]

David, please correct me if I am wrong, but I would label Jim’s first linked tsuba as Hirado, while his second might equally easily be labelled Hizen, or even Bushū work. That they both evidence a strong foreign influence we are, of course, in agreement.

John L.

[Jim P]

Hi David, Thank you for the post it gives me better insight on Nanban and its subgroup's. Also thanks for taking the time to post

your nanban .

John. As I look at more tsuba I understand that a lot more understanding is needed, have a look at the 2 thousand-monkeys-designs not a lot to pick them as 2 different Schools

http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/t ... sign-11323

http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/t ... sign-11321

but its opened my eyes to the excellent tsuba and the great diversity from this School But I know what you mean about the different

Schools

[docliss]

Jim, both of your linked tsuba are Yagami tsuba, each made by one of the three masters of the Noda family – Mitsuhiro I (ca 1750-1800), Mitsuhiro II (1748-1823) or Mitsuhiro III (ca 1800-ca 1870) – working at Yagami in the province of Hizen. That such tsuba are sometimes labelled as Namban is due simply – and impractically – to the fact that they demonstrate a foreign influence. But, surely, such a feature should not preclude their correct attribution?

 

John L.

[Soshin]

David, please correct me if I am wrong, but I would label Jim’s first linked tsuba as Hirado, while his second might equally easily be labelled Hizen, or even Bushū work. That they both evidence a strong foreign influence we are, of course, in agreement.

John L.

 

Well technically speaking Hirado and Nagazaki are both port cities located near each other in what was once Hizen Province. They both had a degree of European and Chinese influence that affect a tsuba produced there. Therefore using the Torigoye and Haynes classification system I would think the first tsuba would be classified as Namban as I think there is a bit stronger European influence with the use of the stylized Roman letters. I was thinking the second linked tsuba was a Kagonami but I am not really sure as I have not seen many tsuba of this type described as Kagonami.

The two thousand-monkeys-designs is another design that comes like John L. says from artists of Hizen Province that shows a great degree of non-Japanese influence and also by their location near Hirado and Nagazaki cities in Hizen are often given the Namban label. Thanks John L., Jim, and others for the discussion.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[Soshin]

I just wanted to post some scans of this month NBTHK magazine (Issue #648, pg. 21) that like last month was featuring the Nanban group in the tosogu section. Here are two tsuba by the Yagami school that show even more of a Nanban influence then the classic school motif of the two thousand monkeys. Right now I am a little "on the fence" about if Yagami school should or should not be included the large Nanban group. These two tsuba have many design elements seen in the large Nanban group.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David S.

[docliss]

David, thank you for the fascinating scans of two tsuba by the Noda Mitsuhiro artists. I have never considered that tsuba by the Yagami school, featuring the ‘thousand something or others’, should be considered to be Namban, but these two tsuba certainly qualify for inclusion in that group. They are, of course, somewhat atypical in that one features an original kozuka hitsu, and both have conventionally shaped seppa-dai and bear mei.

 

John L.

[Soshin]

Also wanted to post this scan of a Nanban tsuba with all of the typical characteristics of Nanban tsuba (stylized seppa-dai design, dote-mimi, and no signature) but with a motif of many monkeys setting in trees all in different positions. The intermeshed arms, legs, and tree branches create a familiar Nanban-bori arabesque pattern frequently made of vines in more typical Nanban tsuba. This tsuba could have been made by a Nanban tsubashi trying to imitate the monkey designs seen in the Yagami school.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David S.

[Jim P]

Hi David, Thanks for the scans and discussion.John Its been interesting following and trying to work out the Yagami and nanban. schools and the differences

[docliss]

Although I do not consider Yagami tsuba of the ‘thousand monkeys’ type to qualify for inclusion in the Namban group, Jim’s earlier posting of two such tsuba from the MFA collection appears to make this thread an appropriate place for the inclusion of the attached images.

 

This tate-maru-gata, sentoku guard measures 7.1 cm – 6.7 cm, and depicts the ‘thousand monkeys’ theme in katachi-bori, the animals with tiny, gold inlaid eyes. Many amusing details may be seen on careful examination, the design including the three sambu-naru monkeys that could speak, hear, and see no evil, and a pair playing the game of strength known as kubi-kubi.

 

It is inscribed HISHU YAGAMI (NO)JU MITSUHIRO

MOTTE (WO) XXXXXX KANE KORE (WO) SAKU,

and is ex the Radford, Peak and Hawkshaw collections. Part of the inscription on the ura surface has been defaced, and comparison with a similar tsuba illustrated on pp.554-5 of Tsuba Daikwan suggests that this may have read ‘Sentoku Kane (wo) Motte Saku Kore (wo)’. Sentoku was a valuable alloy, the use of which was at one time confined to coinage, and this may be the explanation for this defacement.

 

Noda Mitsuhiro I studied in the namban school of Nagasaki before developing his own style, and is probably the originator of the two Yagami Namban tsuba posted by David. N. Mitsuhiro II was the younger brother of the former artist and, like his brother, worked in both iron and brass. N. Mitsuhiro III was the eldest son of the first artist and his works are scarce. His mei differs from that of the first two masters, whose mei are very similar, although I believe that the second and third vertical strokes of the ‘shu’ kanji differ in that those of the second master are vertical while those of the first curve markedly to the left. In Bushido, Vol.3, No 1, pp.18-21, Robert Burawoy makes a distinction between the works of the first two masters, suggesting that the mimi of the second – and more skilled – artist has the animals in a variety of postures, whereas those of the first master are continuous and identical.

 

On the basis of these two facts, I have concluded that this tsuba is by N. Mitsuhiro I.

 

John L.

[Jim P]

Hi, One more, One hundred monkeys Noda Mitsuhiro II for comparison ( http://art.thewalters.org/viewwoa.aspx?id=14744)

[docliss]

Thank you for posting that - a lovely tsuba. But I would have attributed it to the first master rather than the second. Are there any other thoughts on this? John L.