george trotter Posted April 19, 2011 Report Posted April 19, 2011 So, Francois, as things stand now, you know that your kodzuka is signed Tou. You have been advised that your kodzuka is probably not by the great (Yasuchika) Tou, but as reputable Japanese sources say that a number of artists used Tou, the option to do further research is there if you wish. Regards, George.
fritaly Posted April 19, 2011 Author Report Posted April 19, 2011 It was quite informative to read your messages. The more I read on this board, the more I realize studying nihonto is more about history and interpretation than science and rock solid pieces of evidence. Anyway, thanks for the information you provided. Not sure I'll be able to use it for further research because I don't have (at least at the moment) the books you mentioned in my library but who knows maybe one day
george trotter Posted April 20, 2011 Report Posted April 20, 2011 You are most welcome Francois...sorry it took so much trouble to get to a conclusion. While some references list the various names of makers, there are few books on the minor smiths, so you may never know more than you do now. At least you can put in your notes that it is marked Tou, is probably/certainly not the great Yasuchika/Tou, but it is not necessarily a gimei of him either as other minor Tous also worked. You might like to concentrate on finding similar examples of style, workmanship, period. You might be able to narrow it to someone, some group, period, place etc. You might even find another example...lots of fun in the research. Regards, George.
reinhard Posted April 20, 2011 Report Posted April 20, 2011 Anyway, thanks for the information you provided. Not sure I'll be able to use it for further research because I don't have the books you mentioned Francois, as far as this particular tsuba is concerned, you won't need books of reference about names and signatures in the first place. The name TOU on the pile is more likely to be part of the design than some artist's signature. Real mei on kozuka are usually found on the backside and are not part of the design. You better focus on style and workmanship here. reinhard
george trotter Posted April 21, 2011 Report Posted April 21, 2011 The name TOU on the pile is more likely to be part of the design than some artist's signature. reinhard But if it is a signature Francois, you now know that more than one artist used it. Warm regards, George
Lee Bray Posted April 21, 2011 Report Posted April 21, 2011 George, they should name a terrier after you... The design seems to me to be humourous. A wandering, itinerant monk scratching his name, Tou, onto a sign post or similar. The original graffiti artist. To me, this is a humourous dedication to Tou with perhaps a slight poke at artists signing gimei.
george trotter Posted April 21, 2011 Report Posted April 21, 2011 Yes, sorry to be so dogmatic (woof). Pity it happened, but the discussion diverged somewhat aggressively into the need to provide sources (see other "So, its gimei..." thread also). Reference sources are an important part of the information exchange here and when a range of respected sources quoted from are dismissed as nonsense, that claim must be verified or withdrawn IMHO. This is what occurred here...but it took a while and generated some heat. I hope in the end, while tedious for members, this debate has maintained their confidence in the sources (Wakayama and Haynes) used. Of course disagreements occur, but challenges should stand or fall on the quality of the evidence/sources provided, not on the loudest voice. What you suggest about the kodzuka design as "graffiti" could well be right Grey... Perhaps it should be a new thread, but I wonder if there are any members who have pieces with humourous concepts like this one. And on another point, I wonder if any members have or know of examples of kodzukas signed/marked on the front? Regards, and thanks for your patience. Geo.
John A Stuart Posted April 21, 2011 Report Posted April 21, 2011 I have one that has a signature on the face, but, it is in no way by the artisan. It is a tribute to a poet, in this case Shokusanjin (Ota Nampo). A Tanka is on the reverse. Quite a while ago Morita san translated it for me. I think it is similar in concept to the kozuka signed with Touu. (雀とのお宿はとこかしらねともちよちよこされ(御座れ)ささの相手に). "Flying Mr. Sparrow (bird),I don't know where your home (nest), chiyo , chiyo, come here as a drinking partner". John
george trotter Posted April 21, 2011 Report Posted April 21, 2011 Nice John, I can understand how you are attracted to the gentle sentiments. Geo.
reinhard Posted April 22, 2011 Report Posted April 22, 2011 I hope in the end, while tedious for members, this debate has maintained their confidence in the sources (Wakayama and Haynes) used. Of course disagreements occur, but challenges should stand or fall on the quality of the evidence/sources provided, not on the loudest voice. You've missed the point one more time. This was never about finding quotes confirming your particular theory. Neither Wakayama nor Haynes are capable of attributing later TOU mei to an individual, identifiable artist. They are just confirming the MEI appeared again later. When I said: "Prove me wrong" I wasn't asking for quotes from books (I can read them myself) but for presenting us with example(s) of tosogu with later TOU-mei that can be SAFELY attributed to an individual. You've failed to do so far. reinhard
george trotter Posted April 22, 2011 Report Posted April 22, 2011 Ha, Ha...very good. When I said: "Prove me wrong" I wasn't asking for quotes from books (I can read them myself) but for presenting us with example(s) of tosogu with later TOU-mei that can be SAFELY attributed to an individual. You've failed to do so far. reinhard Pity you didn't just say that at the time. It would have saved a lot of bandwidth. Based on what you DID say however, may I just to clarify the "point"...I didn't say "I think there are more than one TOU"...I said "Japanese sources" say there are more than one TOU. You said "There is only one TOU...prove me wrong". In response I and another member quoted Japanese sources which list more than one TOU. (Wakayama says there is a second TOU who is a "different man from Yasuchika"). On the face of it this seems to confirm that there is more than one artist using TOU. On logic...you said there is only one TOU then (contrary to accepted logic) demanded that I prove you wrong. To get logic back to "normal", how about you prove you are right? Any chance you can show us your evidence or sources? George.
Recommended Posts