Sukashi Tsuba #2: Mantis And Wheel

[JohnTo]

The second 19thC sukashi tsuba shows a praying mantis and a wheel, a fairly common subject for tsuba design.  I bought this tsuba as part of a job lot at a recent auction.  When I saw the image in the auction catalogue I knew that I had to go for it.  The other six were worth having too, but I fell in love with this one.  I think there is a ‘Mantis Dude’ out there who might like this tsuba as well.

The story behind the design of a mantis and wheel is probably well known to most of you, but worth repeating.  One version concerns the ‘King of Qi’ who, while in a procession, noticed a mantis standing up defiantly on the road in front of one of his carriage wheels.  Upon being told what the insect was the King is supposed to have said ‘What a pity that it is just and insect.  If it were a man it would be the bravest warrior in the world.’  The king then ordered his carriage to carefully go around the mantis without crushing it.  The story is also related in a different form as a quote by the Chinese Taoist philosopher  Chuang Tzu (Zhuangzi) who said ‘Don’t you know about the praying mantis that waved its arms defiantly in front of an approaching carriage, unaware that its arms were incapable of stopping it?  Such was the high opinion it had of its talents.’    The mantis is often represented in Asian art for its bravery, however the inclusion of the wheel in this tsuba is a reminder that no matter how brave, one should be aware of ones limitations and act accordingly.  I do wonder if this warning is aimed at the wearer of the sword bearing this tsuba, or to a potential adversary.

An earlier (ca 1700) version of this tsuba is shown in Sasano’s sukashi tsuba books (#208 or #232 depending upon the version) and is attributed to the third generation Akasaka master , Tadatora.  The Tadatora tsuba is, as far as I can see from the photos, a  two dimensional representation (i.e. flat) except for one of the eyes of the mantis.  Another, more abstract version, of this design was sold as part of the Compton Collection (Christies, Part II, Lot 71) and attributed to the Akao, Echizen school. Yet another version in Shakudo with gilt details was sold at Bonhams (6 November 2012 Lot 207, I was the underbidder on this lot.  Damn!).  Apparently Dick Tait posted a question here in 2013 about a similar tsuba.  Unfortunately, I can’t download his pictures, due to some format problems I guess.

 My tsuba is more refined than the Tadatora one (Note that I do not say better, depends upon your ascetics) in that the mantis has more of a three dimensional body on both sides and the legs and the antennae are more finely carved, like kyo-sukashi work.  The masterful stroke in the design of my tsuba is the portrayal of the eyes of the mantis in gold.  Presently the tsuba sits on a shelf facing me as I sit and as evening approaches the dark iron fades from view, leaving just the two gold eyes staring defiantly out at me.  Spooky!

An exact copy of this tsuba (essentially same dimensions) can be found in the collection of the New York Metropolitan Museum of Fine Art, the only difference being the presence of punch marks around the seppa dai in the Met’s example (accession number 46.122.109), purchased in 1946.  I think that they are almost certainly made be the same hand.  Unfortunately the only information that they give, on-line, is 19C tsuba.  So we come to the usual crunch question: School and maker please.

 

The second question is whether my or the Met’s tsuba is a fake/copy as there are a lot of copies of sukashi tsuba appearing on the market?  I think that both are genuine because:

1. The Met’s example was purchased in 1946, making it unlikely to have been used as a template.
2. My example was purchased as part of a job lot of 7 varied tsuba, which looked to be part of an old collection.
3. I would expect the artist to have made several copies of a design that sold well.
4. The presence of tiny lumps and bumps (tekotsu or corrosion) make it unlikely that mine was machine made, despite the exactness of the carving.
5. I don’t want mine to be a fake and even if it was, I’d still love it!

Dimensions:  Height: 7.4 cm, Width: 7.0 cm, Thickness: 0.4 cm .

 

I’m happy to date this tsuba to the mid 19thC.  The fine carving of the legs and antennae of the mantis seem to shout; Kyo-sukashi, as does the D-shaped rim.  Akasaka (in view of the earlier Tadatora version) is an obvious assignment, or possibly Owari or Shoami.  Opinions please.

Regards, John

(Just a guy making observations and hopefully learning by asking questions)

NYMMFA Mantis Tsuba.docx

[Mantis dude]

Hi John,

 

I am not online a lot sadly but I saw your post for obvious reasons.  First off, congrats on owning one of the coolest themes out there (no bias on my end). Mantis Rule!  That being said, this is a very common design layout.  Each school has their version of it, well, many do.  Specifically to this exact version with what you called "three dimensional", I would say rather than 1 artist, my guess is that many artists made these.  The more realistic depictions are most likely later edo so I would agree with you on dating.  It isn't Akasaka.  They didn't do inlay (as far as I know).  I would think you statement about the tadatora would make many collectors head explode.  Something you can't do in pictures is understand the iron/metal a tsuba is made with and how it's forged. That is an important ingredient in understanding and collecting tsuba.  There is some writing by Dr. Torigoye in the Haynes catalogs on this subject (I believe reprinted from famous/respected writings).  Perhaps someone else can add where to read other than in the Haynes catalogs.  In the writings (going off memory), to understand tsuba you have to understand the metal first, aesthetic design is the 2nd component (not the first).  To put simply, I don't think you are going to find any experienced collectors to agree with your statement.

 

 Specifically to your tsuba, it honestly isn't anything special.  The carving isn't that crisp and my guess is the metal isn't anything grand.  The transitions from the mantis to the rim aren't finished that well. There are issues with the tsuba and to put it bluntly your tsuba is not more refined than the tadatora.  Your statement about tekotsu or corrosion is a bit misplaced.  If someone machine made it, corrosion could be added.  It goes back to the iron.  I think you should not be worried about machine made but more casted tsbua.  Although I don't think it is, it could be.  Sometimes in hand is the only way to tell.  Saying it is more refined than what is considered a masterpiece is a bold statement and shows you have a ways to go on learning (not that I don't).  Before you take it personally, I do like the tsuba and have held several just like yours.  At best the tsuba is middle of the road.  Some of my favorite tsuba are in this zone although as I continue to learn and get the occasional opportunity to hold tsuba done by masters you get a better understanding of where these tsuba really are.  I am in probably the same boat as you that I don't have opportunities to hold pieces with a teacher.  I have held enough quality tsuba to know that you need to hold them in your hand.  Books and pictures have limitations.   

 

My best guess to a school is bushu/choshu based on once seeing a signed very similar tsuba.  Best of luck,

[JohnTo]

Hi Dude,

Thanks for your reply.  If you look at my original posting it stated that ‘My tsuba is more refined than the Tadatora one (Note that I do not say better, depends upon your ascetics) in that the mantis has more of a three dimensional body on both sides and the legs and the antennae are more finely carved, like kyo-sukashi work. ‘   I considered putting ‘I DO NOT SAY BETTER’ in capitals, and no doubt should have.  By refined I mean the representation is more lifelike and detailed.  Much in the same way as a Rembrandt could be considered as more refined than a Picasso.  In the old sukashi tsuba, typified by Sasano’s book, the quality and forging of the iron is paramount.  In later sukashi tsuba (like this one), emphasis seems to have switched to a more detailed carving of the design, plus embellishments with gold nunome highlights.  I would not be surprised the tsuba makers at this time just started with sheets of industrial grade(nambam testsu) iron as it usually looks homogeneous.  I have a couple of cast iron tsuba (bought cheaply I hasten to add) and the iron looks totally different, so I don’t think that it was cast

Best regards, John

[Mantis dude]

Hi John,

 

I'm going to try and frame this in how I see it because if you were to say more refined piece, I and I think most would look immediately to the Akasaka piece.  What I see is comparing a rembrandt to holiday inn wall art.  I hope that illustrates where I am coming from? Not trying to be an ass, it's just how I see the pieces more or less and frames the conversation better in terms of collecting tsuba.  A more refined piece would not use homogeneous metal (nanban/namban is foreign steel not sure that is what you meant to say?), as later works might have used.  The evaluation of a piece doesn't change, just the amount of quality pieces does (more tourist art/ lower quality in late edo).

 

In general, when I think of reproductions, I think of it being cast, machine made pieces aren't much of an issue in comparison.  As a general rule of thumb, I would be looking for signs of casting.  I had an older casted piece which was very different than the modern stuff.  Wasn't as obvious and fooled many. It wasn't until I started looking closely at the details that it became more apparent that it was cast.  It came off a wakizashi that had been mounted for many decades, I'm guessing at least from WWII if not older.  Actually, it wasn't until i had a 2nd one that I questioned it.  Since then I occasionally will see one for sale and almost always it is sold as "real tsuba" from the edo period.

 

Best of luck,