tsuba to discuss

My dear forumites,

I would like to show you a tsuba for open discussion. Although it is attributed by NBTHK to ?, it is a mumei tsuba and I would like to know what YOU are seeing in it. Age, design, craftsmanship and so forth. Being more familiar with blades myself, I just wonder what you think. Don't be shy. This is supposed to be a learning experience for all of us.

reinhard

Reinhard, it would be good to have some dimensions as reference. Size, thickness, does it have tekkotsu, is the rim thicker or thinner than the seppa-dai etc. I am torn between Owari and Akasaka, but Akasaka feels better to me. Positive sukashi, smoothly cut, rounded mimi. Mid-Edo period. Best I can do from a pic. John

John,

The tsuba is almost perfectly round, measuring 8.0cm in diameter, horizontally and vertically. Thickness of the rim is 6 mm, thickness of the seppa-dai is: 4 mm. There are faint tekkotsu and multi-layer forging is visible. But before presenting the solution on a silver tablet: What about the design? What does it show and in what way are those topics related? And what about numbers?

reinhard

From previous comments of mine you will know that I know very lttle about Tsuba, but I do hope to learn, bit by bit. Thanks for offering us all this learning experience. :lol:

This tsuba looks quite rugged, and a little cluttered, or 'busy'. The thickness of the hammered mimi suggests practicality. The decoration moves it later in history. Are we looking at late Muromachi, or early to mid Edo? The square Hitsu-ana is unusual, as is the fact that it is filled. It looks vaguely like a book!

Finally, a personal comment. I like what I see so far. I stand ready to be corrected at any moment.

PS What does the reverse look like? What does the edge of the mimi look like? How do the walls of the cuts present themselves?

Interesting tsuba Reinhard. Seems to be a geese and mountain/temple scene?

Just a very quick observation while at work...has that whole iron mimi been added later?

Brian

Hi, the design, sukashi walls, seppa dai shape and even hitsu ana shape indicate mid-edo period akasaka tsuba. What bothers me is rim, which is not typical to akasaka and looks to me oddly put. So I am a bit confused, maybe akasaka with late addition of the rim?

BTW the design is a temple under a moon at the upper side, and flock of geese down side. Mike

This looks to me to be the work of the 4th generation Akasaka master, Tadatoki I ( died 1746 )

This, very characteristic, chiselled bevel on the inner edge of the rim is something I've seen in his work before.

Just my shot in the dark

regards,

Ford

Hi,

My knowledge about tsuba is near zero but i don't think this one is an Akasaka. It seems a little bit too large and the mimi is thicker than the seppa-dai (that should be the contrary for Akasaka tsuba).

Nice and interesting Tsuba Reinhard,

I second Fords observations that the chiseled bevel on the inner edge of the rim is seen in Akasaka works.

If there is no indication for an 'added' Dotte-like Mimi I do not think it was modified later.

As for the design, I see the crescent moon, a clove (I miss the wels catfish :D ), pine tree, geese, huts and a pagoda.

This would fit to the Akasaka call, but I am a little hesitating due to the shape of the Hitsu-Ana.

Akasaka works most often have classical, rounded (and thoroughly designed) Hitsu-Ana.

Nevertheless, my guess would be Akasaka work too.

Thanks for an interesting Kantei Reinhard!

Cheers,

Hello

This tsuba is astonishing by its composition. It is not easy at first to give any school name

OWARI & AKASAKA were mentioned. It should not be KANAYAMA because of iron surface, design and rim. KYO-SUKASHI are by nature more aerated. It doesn't remain a so massive yo-sukashi.

Bevelled rim is not common but Ford is right. It appears in some KO-AKASAKA tsuba. Ford mentions TADATOKI 1st (4th AKASAKA) but also it appears in MASATORA tsuba (see TSUBA KANSHOKI P205 bottom) but in any case the design is generally more fluid and bevel doesn't continue with such flat internal ridge. The rectangular design of hitsu ana can be seen in some KO OWARI tsuba and also in some YOSHIRO ZOGAN MON SUKASHI tsuba from muromachi to early edo.

Bevelled rims appear also in TOSA MYOCHIN tsuba and in that case the design is often massive. Its why I would tend towards this determination : TOSA MYOCHIN early EDO would be my answer.

For the design, I have not found anything in my doc fitting with it.

Best regards

Marc

Hello Matk,

I was considering Tosa Myochin as well, somehow the design does not seem right, though I do not know much about this school. Mike

Hello,

You are doing a great job so far and it is a pleasure learning with and from you. As soon as I have some more time, I will provide you with pics of the edge and subtler details. To get on with it, I give you the description of the Hozon paper. It can be translated approximately like this:

"eight views" design sukashi tsuba

maru-gata (round shape)

tetsu tsuchime ji (hammered surface)

ji sukashi (positive silhouette)

dotte mimi (added rim)

ryo hitsu ana (both hitsu ana, one plugged with shakudo)

The dotte-mimi is not a later addition. It was made of exactly the same steel as the tsuba itself and it has the same deep black color and moist lustre. Focussing on hitsu ana is a very good idea when considering early Akasaka work. The steel quality however is similar to Owari tsuba. My next question is: what does "eight views" mean?

reinhard

Here's another pic of the same tsuba taken by daylight and with less disturbing shadows for those, who try to identify the design.

reinhard

My next question is: what does "eight views" mean?

The "eight views" are completely called AFAIK "The Eight Views of Ômi" (Ômi-hakkei no zu, 近江八景の図).

The motif bases on eights scenic views of China which were adopted by the Japanese some time about

the Kamakura period for their Biwa lake. Later in the Edo period, when woodblock prints gained popularity,

the Eight Views made their round as postcard-like motifs (single or as a whole).

Do-te has the original meaning of defensive man-made (river/fortification) bank, as I am sure you are all aware. An apt word to describe what we are looking at.

There seem to be quite a few Hakkei: http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%AB%E6%99%AF

Wow, you live and learn. Thanks for the link.

So far I was only aware of THE Ômi-hakkei.

Probably they are the most famous?

The rectangular shape of the left hand side hitsu is apparently nudging some opinions away from Akasaka. I'd just like to point out that in fact while it's not terribly common there are a number of examples of similar squarish shapes to be found in the work of the first 4 masters.

I'm personally still comfortable with my call although I'll admit that trying to pin it specifically to Tadatoki I might be pushing it as his work is generally a bit more sophisticated. This tsuba does have a certain ruggedness about it and the pierced web of the plate is unusually plain for him.

To my eye, although the design does seem a bit "busy", ( as I think John mentioned) it is quite delicately cut out with no areas not having been carefully considered in terms of shape and arrangement. The overall texture of the iron ( it's relative coarseness compared to the refinement of later Akasaka steel ) and the fact that Reinhard tells us the edge shows faint layering further convinces me this work is from the earlier period of Akasaka production so I'll stick with no later than 4th master.

For those of you not yet tired of considering, here are some more pictures. They show basically my limited skills of taking pictures with a compact click-o-matic camera. On the rim some granular tekkotsu as well as linear structures are visible. A further hint are these passages from literature related to this school:

"it seems most improbable to me that the production of the above mentioned group should have been restricted to one place or even to a single family......the metal is frequently the same or resembles that of the Owari guards. In terms of design and quality the earlier......sukashi can be called equal in the rank with Owari tsuba."

"The artistic work of ..... tsuba lies somewhere between Kyo-sukashi and the Owari-schools. .....openwork is bolder than Kyo but more delicate than Owari.....The designs are unique."

John narrowed the subject immediately by saying Akasaka and Owari, but maybe this was too tight a border. Bold angles are pointing towards Akasaka work, the steel quality is leaning towards Owari work, but there is still Kyo-work beyond common expectations, creating a triangle of possibilities.

The key-word has not been said yet and therefore I don't want to set you free now. And what about the eight views?

reinhard

Reinhard, The tekkotsu was always problematic on this tsuba leading to Owari metalcraft, but, Akasaka in style and technique. While pondering these attributes together within and the influence by Ko-Shoami could this be an Ono tsuba? Their designs and metalcraft would fit, I think. John

Did a little Internet research about the "eight views":

In the eleventh century Sung Ti painted Eight Views of the Hsiao and Hsiang Rivers. His example inspired many subsequent Chinese painters to depict the same views:

 

1. Clear-weather mists above a mountain market-village

2. A fishing village at sunset

3. A sailboat returning to a distant inlet

4. The confluence of the Hsiao and Hsiang rivers in the rain

5. A temple bell in the evening mist

6. The autumn moon over Tung-t’ing Lake

7. Geese descending to a sandbar

8. Snow falling on a river at dusk.

 

As Hiroyuki Suzuki has pointed out in his essay ‘The Garden of Shisendo’, in Japan a similar set of eight views was eventually established which closely parallels the original of Sung Ti - The Eight Views of Omi:

 

1. The town of Awazu on a clear and windy day

2. The village of Seta at sunset

3. A sailboat returning off the shore of Yabashi

4. Karasaki in the night rain

5. The evening bell at Mii temple near Biwa

6. The autumn moon over Ishiyama temple near Lake Biwa

7. Geese landing near Katada

8. Snow falling at dusk from Mount Hira, overlooking Lake Biwa.

 

Japanese artists took to the idea of ‘Eight Views’ and established similar lists for other landscapes at Kyoto, Nara, Fukagawa and elsewhere. And, as Suzuki notes, ‘during the Edo period it was fashionable to select eight views inside the gardens of feudal lords. For instance, there were eight views in the Rikugien garden at Komogome and of the Yuin’en garden in Ichigaya, both in Edo’.

http://some-landscapes.blogspot.com/200 ... ivers.html

The Eight Views of Omi (Omi Hakkei) are a group of scenic spots around Japan's Lake Biwa, described in a 16th century poem and perhaps originating even earlier. These views of Omi were depicted in numerous ukiyo-e prints, the most famous of which was a series of prints by Hiroshige published around 1835.

http://www.hanga.com/series.cfm?ID=31

One thing about this design strikes me and that is the deliberate vagueness, or abstraction of some of the elements. What I mean is while some of the aspects are very clear as to what they are, the geese, the temple etc, ... the moon is only just there...it wouldn't be difficult to imagine it slightly more visible and complete yet the maker has clearly and deliberately only included just enough to make it recognisable. The remainder of the elements remain more obscure though. This makes me think that there was a certain kind of intellectual game being played here...one where the maker is showing certain scenes but making them vague enough so as to provide something of a puzzle for the viewer...as sort of "all things to all men" approach.

This strikes me as a particularly urban game...perhaps a little trivial compared to the more prosaic concerns of battle hardened warriors. I wonder if this could tell us something about it's origin and who it was intended for.

I also came across this much later version of the same subject. It's far more literal and it's obvious what all the elements are.

The image comes from the Tokyo national Museum collection catalogue.

Thank you all out there. Your input was amazing and far beyond my expectations. You made the best and more out of my non-professional pics. Since I'm not an expert on sukashi tsuba and this is not a kantei with a lecture, I'll just give you my thoughts.

John pinned it down at first sight: somewhere between Owari and Akasaka. My compliments. Nevertheless I'd expect (especially early) Owari tsuba to be more static and symmetrical. The steel quality however is equal. Akasaka is a good choice as well, but early Akasaka tsuba are characterized by typical hitsu-ana and seppa-dai shapes. Generally they have an easier appeal than this one. The bold-angled design however is pushing towards Akasaka. Marc eliminated Kanayama with good reasons. Generally they are smaller and steel quality is different. Ono tsuba usually have simpler design, their surfaces appear "molten" at times and granular tekkotsu are very prominent.

This tsuba feels somewhat heavy and its massive dotte-mimi and thoroughly worked steel give you a "no-nonsense"-feel. On the other hand, it displays a refined artistic concept within its solid frame, as Ford has pointed out. It is representing to me the borderline between "simple" Muromachi aesthetics and a more sophisticated attitude on the horizon. - However, Shinsa came to conclusion it is a SHOAMI tsuba. Personally, I don't consider this a Shoami tsuba within the pool of vague attributions, but the "real thing" SHOAMI.

Thanks to all of you for your investigations. Especially to Martin and Markus on the subject of "eight views"

reinhard

An interesting tsuba to discuss with some extraordinary features. A nice change. A real head scratcher. Thanks. John

Thanks Reinhard, I quite enjoyed this exercise. I find the attribution of Shoami a bit of a let down though, it seems increasingly to be the default setting; "when in doubt say Shoami" :D Do they indicate any particular Shoami group or period?

regards,

Ford

but early Akasaka tsuba are characterized by typical hitsu-ana and seppa-dai shapes.

Hi all, late in on this, this is not actually correct. Early Akasaka work has typically, miss matched hitsuana and odd and strange shapes, as well as both sides being the typical kozuka ana shape only large and thin in construction. But Ko Akasaka generally have one hitsu a lot smaller than the other. They are also know for very odd shapes and hitsu that are incorporated into the design.

This is Akasaka, and I always thought it Owari.

I find Shoami an odd call for this guard. I never consider Shoami to be a let down though, just to add to Fords comment, I have some fine Ko Shoami tsuba, (I collect these) and they are as good as anything going around.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Rich

Hi Rich,

I didn't mean to denigrate Shoami at all, rather, my disappointment was due to the rather vague label. As I implied..."when in doubt say Shoami", in the sense that the designation can be so broad as to be almost meaningless when applied to works that are so "uncharacteristic" of any specific Shoami group. I'm left feeling none the wiser as why this might be termed Shoami.

regards,

Ford

Hello Rich and Ford,

Sorry for not making myself clear enough. By "typical hitsu-ana" I meant the sloping shoulders and sometimes "miss matched" size-relation of hitsu-ana seen in early Akasaka tsuba. "Typical" meaning the unexpected (or miss matched) in this case. - As for SHOAMI attribution: After all that has been said by now, this seems to be a reasonable attribution to me. What I was trying to explain was: There are many tsuba attributed to this school for no good reason nowadays. E.Kremers, former student of Sasano sensei, calls it: "...a deplorable custom to call those guards Shoami that cannot be definitely identified." Nevertheless there have been great, nameless artists belonging to this school and attribution to Shoami has become unfairly underestimated. Some of their works are true masterpieces, reflecting taste and workmanship on a very high level. Their former high esteem can be seen in their name: It derives from AMIda Buddha and origins from the same root the Hon'AMI family of sword-appraisers got their name from. Thus experts on Noh were called ZeAMI and those on ceramics SoAMI. Unfortunately these great tsuba tend to be forgotten within the bulk of helpless Shoami-attributions.

Anyway, I'm not the expert around here and I bought this tsuba with the paper. No chance to ask the juror what made his mind. Thanks again for your great input on this one.

reinhard

I think the appellation of ko-Shoami is used to differentiate from the masterwork done by earlier artisans in this group and later derivative examples which showed lack of imagination and skill. Too, Shoami was used to describe other metalworkers that didn't make tsuba at all, originally describing a group of silversmiths. As I understand. John

This Akasaka example is what led my thinking astray