The last word on cast iron tsuba

[cabowen]

All -

I have always heard that Namban Tsuba were cast and having seen a few have always believed this. While some are copper there are many that are iron. In "The Namban Group of Japanese Sword Guards" by Dr John Lissenden he talks about his survey of museums and his own collection and concludes that most are in fact cast. If we accept his conclusions, most Namban tsuba were cast, most were produced between the 18th and 19th centuries and were indeed worn by members of all classes of Japanese society.

-t

 

We have heard and seen the same....It would be hard to believe that many that are so intricately pierced could have been made any other way. I have seen some examples of excellent craftsmanship that were finished with great care and attention to detail, unlike the vast majority of them. I have though not seen a signed and dated example with clear casting manufacture either....so I have heretofore not mentioned this branch of tsuba in connection with casting....

[Steve Waszak]

I am glad I have been helpful and increased your knowledge of traditional iron casting in some small way. If this one small fact has enlightened you, I suppose it would be easy then to imagine how much more you might learn from actual experience...

 

Not much more to add to a discussion that has beached itself in the quicksands of "can't prove a negative" and "Experience?? I can read" territory.....but that is ok, we are all entitled to our opinions....

 

So, no interest in taking this to PMing?

 

Not to belabor the point, but you have made it seem as though "experience" so vastly superior to the learning that one might gain from texts, discussion, and close examination of the object itself after it has been made that one may as well not bother with these latter. I believe I mentioned in another thread that I had grown up in a ceramics culture as provided by my family and our arts community. I have spent decades steeped in the language, aesthetics, philosophy, and, yes, experience of the making of ceramics, specifically in the Japanese tradition. And I can state, therefore, that experience is not the be-all, end-all of knowledge acquisition. I know what I have learned from experience, and what I have learned from texts, dialogue, and the analysis of pieces made hundreds of years ago. The latter is certainly the equal of the former; different types of knowledge are gained. But the concept that a mold would be good for one use only in the casting of an iron tsuba hardly requires living in the deep woods of Japan, spending hours bending over the shoulder of the sage artisan, to learn this "secret."

 

And yeah, sorry, but one can't prove a negative. Just the way it is...

 

Again, let's take this to PMing if you want to continue...

[cabowen]

Not to belabor the point, but you have made it seem as though "experience" so vastly superior to the learning that one might gain from texts, discussion, and close examination of the object itself after it has been made that one may as well not bother with these latter.

 

I never said one shouldn't bother with texts, etc., In fact I have always said they are the place to start. I still believe they are the place to start and necessary before one takes that next step into the experiential realm....

 

I believe I mentioned in another thread that I had grown up in a ceramics culture as provided by my family and our arts community. I have spent decades steeped in the language, aesthetics, philosophy, and, yes, experience of the making of ceramics, specifically in the Japanese tradition.

 

Then you should know well that the entire Japanese traditional craft system is based on experiential learning, or, "learn by doing"....

 

And I can state, therefore, that experience is not the be-all, end-all of knowledge acquisition. I know what I have learned from experience, and what I have learned from texts, dialogue, and the analysis of pieces made hundreds of years ago. The latter is certainly the equal of the former; different types of knowledge are gained.

 

People "learn" in different manners. Not everyone is a pillar of zen.....

 

But the concept that a mold would be good for one use only in the casting of an iron tsuba hardly requires living in the deep woods of Japan, spending hours bending over the shoulder of the sage artisan, to learn this "secret."

 

The "deep woods" and "sage artisan" sarcasm and meaningless hyperbole don't help you in any manner to prove your point. Isn't this exactly what Brian was talking about above?

 

Because the fact that a traditional iron casting mold is a one time thing has escaped your texts does not make it a "deep secret", quite the contrary, it is fairly well known to anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of metalworking. It is something someone that has added hands-on experience to their metalworking education would have grasped and key to understanding why casting iron is a more laborious and material intensive process than forging... It is not that important in and of itself, but had you been aware of this important difference, you would not have made the specious argument on the erroneous assumption that traditional iron casting was "...advantage of casting isn't in the production of one tsuba, it's in the potential to create many pieces in relatively little time."

 

Again, let's take this to PMing if you want to continue...

 

There is no point discussing this with someone who is not up to speed on the processes under discussion....Therefore I think we are at the end of the road. You can go ahead and have the last word if you need to....

[Soshin]

Hi Thomas H.,

 

I was going to complain about how long this thread is but then I had to reply being a fan and collector of Nanban tsuba. All Nanban reproductions I have seen are made of cast iron. I have observed antique Edo Period Nanban tsuba and are cast iron and others that show signs of forging of relatively homogeneous iron. After reading three issues on Nanban tsuba in the Token Bijutsu monthly magazine I have come to the conclusion there isn't any shortage of wonderful high quality Nanban tsuba out there and likely some of them are made of cast iron. Do I think casting was often used to make tsuba? No. Could it have been? I don't know enough to answer that question completely but some members of NMB have provided some very helpful information.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[Henry Wilson]

I can't make head nor tail of this thread. Would Chris and Steve and anyone else like to summarise in a few concise bullet points?

[Steve Waszak]

Sorry, but on re-reading your "argument" here, its sloppiness just begged for response.

 

You say:

 

This is where the limitations of book learning are glaringly obvious and why experience actually working with craftsman, forging and casting is relevant: traditionally, iron was cast with sand and the mold is destroyed when the piece is removed after cooling

 

You then say:

 

Because the fact that a traditional iron casting mold is a one time thing has escaped your texts does not make it a "deep secret", quite the contrary, it is fairly well known to anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of metalworking.

 

If you cannot see the absolute contradiction in these two statements, it helps explain the incoherence of your overall position. The CONCEPT of single-use molds is one that requires ZERO experience or association with either the material or the artisans themselves. What you say in the first quote above makes it seem in a would-be disingenuous way as though hands-on experience would be REQUIRED to learn the one-use-of-a-mold-only CONCEPT. Then you say (correctly, this time) that such a concept is not a "'deep secret,' quite the contrary." I can imagine that anyone trying to follow the "logic" of your position would be perplexed at the very least. You then go back to the false notion that experience would matter in grasping the concept of the single-use mold in the quote below:

 

It is something someone that has added hands-on experience to their metalworking education would have grasped...

 

As a capper, in the quote below, you manage to contradict yourself quite nicely in a single line:

 

It is not that important in and of itself, but had you been aware of this important difference, you would not have made the specious argument on the erroneous assumption that traditional iron casting was "...advantage of casting isn't in the production of one tsuba, it's in the potential to create many pieces in relatively little time."

 

So it is "not that important," but it is an "important difference"... And you butcher the quote integration at the end so badly that the whole claim you make here amounts to gibberish.

 

Your argument is contradictory, and is grossly misleading in the way it seizes on tangentially-relevant details and exaggerates whatever importance they may have as though they were central to the primary issue. As an argument, it is singularly unimpressive, and laughably smug in its tone.

[Steve Waszak]

Henry,

 

If you'd like to exchange PMs on this, I'd be happy to chat about it with you. But this thread is over for me...

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[cabowen]

Based on your replies here it is clear that you have sparse, if any, knowledge of either the CONCEPT of traditional iron casting or the PRACTICE. So I have to ask myself, why are you arguing about something you know nothing about? Are you someone who simply likes to argue and can not admit you are wrong, despite proving through false claims that you have no real knowledge of what you are arguing about? Wait, you don't have to answer that....

 

The POINT was casting was a more material, time, and labor intensive practice than forging and was therefore not an equal substitute for forging, remember? If you want to discuss that, hit the books, maybe even get some experience, in any case, please EDUCATE yourself so you know what you are talking about. Until then, I will be asking myself why I continued to waste my time with someone who has proven he has insufficient knowledge of the subject to discuss it in any depth...ugh.....

 

POINTLESS, off-topic bickering.....My apologies to all, especially Brian....

[sanjuro]

Steve, Chris.

 

Please guys, agree to differ but let there be an end to this. Would you continue this merely for the edification of those who derive shallow satisfaction from watching a clash of intellects and personalities? All due respect, but this is serving no worthwhile purpose, and I am sure you both are much bigger men than this public disagreement warrants.

 

Peace......

[cabowen]

Steve, Chris.

 

.......let there be an end to this.

 

[Brian]

Indeed. And I think that like myself, most are just skipping the "back and forth" bickering and not even reading it anymore..so it is pretty useless.

The thread title was not an instruction from Ford!

Ok..you 2 are now forbidden to post again in this thread. Not physically banned....I'm just telling you both that any further posts in this one will be deleted. Both of you...go sit in the corner and think about what you have done.

 

Carry on folks...

 

Brian

[Mark Green]

OK then,

 

So, as far as Namban tsuba go, does anyone have, or seen one that was signed, and dated, by a known Japanese tsuba maker? That would surly clear it up!

I know squat about them. I always thought the iron was imported anyway.

But, a lot of them sure look cast iron.

Mark G

[Rich T]

God, I am ever so glad I got out of forums. I feel sorry for you Brian...............

 

Rich

[Ford Hallam]

God, I am ever so glad I got out of forums. I feel sorry for you Brian...............

 

Rich

 

Yes, you called?

 

No need to worry, Rich. Saffers are a hardy bunch...as your rugby team well knows. We quite enjoy a bit of rough and tumble, unlike some Chardonnay sipping, quiche eating antipodeans and lets not mention that stuff you try to pass off as beer

[Brian]

God, I am ever so glad I got out of forums. I feel sorry for you Brian...............

 

Rich

Rich,

I only do it because I have no life. If I wasn't sitting here in front of the pc all day when not at work..what on earth would I do? :lol:

Besides...I know where Ford lives..so I can always send some "heavies" round to his house.

As for the rest of this lot... The few good ones make up for the rest I guess. Why else would I put myself through this?

 

Brian

[Toryu2020]

Brian-

You forgot to add

 

"and thanks for contributing to the topic Kodogu Guy!!"

:D

-t

[Ted Tenold]

What a gyp! I read through 5 pages of posts looking for some magical "last word" that would bring peace to an otherwise contentious divide. Yet, no word, and no peace... Will someone please strike "those guards who's type shall not be spoken" from kodogu terminologies?

[sanjuro]

Gee. I thought the last word had been uttered by Ford, a page or so back.

I am now content with the thought that there are no authenticated cast tsuba made and signed by a Japanese tsubako. Please dont prove me in error................... :D

[Thierry BERNARD]

Gee. I thought the last word had been uttered by Ford, a page or so back.

I am now content with the thought that there are no authenticated cast tsuba made and signed by a Japanese tsubako. Please dont prove me in error................... :D

 

so what is the goal of this thread???

[Bugyotsuji]

Everyone seems to want to have the last word.

 

Omega.

 

Amen.

 

Aummmmmmmmmmmmm.......................

[sanjuro]

Thierry.

 

Apparently it is gin for gin's sake, (to borrow an extract from your signature line). Lack of proof in both the affirmative and negative cases has arrived at the eternal impasse. I guess this subject will be debated until such time as some sort of proof in either case is submitted. Since it has been pointed out that you cannot prove a negative (ie. There was is and never has been a cast iron tsuba produced by a Japanese tsubako.) Then we await for proof of the positive case (ie. That a cast iron tsuba has been produced signed and authenticated as the work of a Japanese tsubako).

 

In case 1 for the negative there can be no proof. In case 2 for the positive there is no apparent proof. So I tend to agree with you that 5 pages of discussion and disagreement has produced very little.

[Soshin]

OK then,

 

So, as far as Namban tsuba go, does anyone have, or seen one that was signed, and dated, by a known Japanese tsuba maker? That would surly clear it up!

I know squat about them. I always thought the iron was imported anyway.

But, a lot of them sure look cast iron.

Mark G

 

Hi Mark G.,

 

I have did some research per your request and haven't found any. Nanban tsuba are generally not signed and because they were produced in Nagasaki, Hirado, Kyoto, Osaka, Edo, Aizu, and other places it is often difficult to impossible to determine the origin of a piece. In the Token Bijutsu issue number 646 that I have specifically focused on them the NBTHK don't provide any signed examples. Two other issue I have Nanban related or influenced schools and while some of those are signed none are dated. Here are two quote from the translation of issue that might be useful to the discussion.

 

There are no famous Nanban-tsuba masterowrks and a reason for this might be that the iron is often bad.

 

The jigane shows no gloss and many pieces are rusty, and some make even the impression if they are casted.

 

Historically Nanban tsuba were first discussed in Kinko-tanki published in the year 1839. I hope what little information I have found is helpful.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[Ford Hallam]

Technical analysis' done by Prof. Cyril Stanley in the mid '70's revealed at least one tsuba inscribed "nambantetsu" as being of wrought iron. The general appearance of the iron as described by David would be consistent with this analysis.

 

As for the methods of manufacture every iron example I've examined in hand has revealed traces of chisel work in the openings and evidence that the opening were initially drilled.

[Soshin]

Hi Ford,

 

I have examining both of my Nanban tsuba under low magnification of a hand glass. I can clearly see signs of chisel work on the surfaces most notable the seppa-dai on one of my tsuba and main motifs on the other. The openings of wrought iron surface also show evidence that they were drilled. The two Nanban tsuba in my collection show no signs of being cast. As I have a interest in the Nanban tsuba group I should collect more to examine and study. :D

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[Mark Green]

Thanks Dave,

That is very interesting. It may be, that any cast Nanban are of Foreign origin. Or, much later copies.

Still no smoking gun has surfaced. Hummmmm??

Master Ford's last word on cast iron tsuba is looking quite plausible. As long as the Jury isn't from FL.

cheers, Mark G

[Toryu2020]

For your edification;

 

http://www.tsuruginoya.com/mn1_3/b00044.html

 

Signed and papered, Iron Plate, Namban tsuba and although the maker is listed as being from Kanton he IS listed in the Kinko Jiten. Not sure if I read the listing correctly but he may also have worked in Nagasaki?

 

Standing very close to the muzzle...

-t

[Bugyotsuji]

Just read that whole page but nowhere does it say it is a cast (iron) tsuba.

 

It does say that it was made either in Canton or in Nagasaki, though, and it does give a bit of historical background to the three streams of Namban tsuba.

[Lorenzo]

We discussed this tsuba a while back here:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10258

[Ford Hallam]

I have to say that I'm finding the idea that a certain category of Namban tsuba, like this example just linked to, may have been made by Chinese artisans to be quite reasonable. It's these oddly shaped seppa-dai that make me feel that this group were physically separated from the rest of indigenous Japanese tsuba-ko. It almost as though they were working from drawings/paintings of real tsuba and had never actually seen real ones. We see a similar "misunderstanding" in some of the modern fakes we see on the net.

 

Just to speculate a little further...if you were going to set up a manufacturing base to make products like tsuba to export to Japan you probably want to sell something that the local market didn't already have. The more characteristic "interwoven vines" design does have a precedent in Chinese Jade carving so it's plausible that this technique was adapted to plates of wrought iron to create something unique for the Japanese market.

 

My feeling is that a foreign place of manufacture is thus more likely but without some solid evidence of this sort of trade we're still guessing really.

[Toryu2020]

http://www.samuraishokai.jp/equipment/ts037.html

 

So I don't know where the answer lies,

but it seems clear this is where we need to be looking -

 

Namban tsuba were very popular, they were worn by members of the Buke

Many appear to have been cast (see example above)

Many appear to have been manufactured before the Restoration (hence the papers)

 

Whilst we are still looking, the ease with which an uneducated lout such as myself has finding these examples suggests a little more serious searching and we are likely to find "made in Japan" cast tsuba of the right period. Where is Dr Lissenden when you need him?

-t