Goto Tsujo Tsuba Copy?

[JohnTo]

The good thing about finding a signature of a minor artist on a piece of kodugu is that it is probably genuine.  As the fame of the artist increases, so do the number of copies, fakes, homages and utsushi.  I have a few iron Nobuie and Kaneie tsuba with passable signatures, but look as if they were made yesterday!  The tsuba that I am presenting today for comment is from a bag of 19 loose tsuba, one of about 100 items that represented the remnants of the stock of the a Cape Town Oriental art dealer who died about 30 years ago.  The items had remained in boxes until a recent auction.

 This oval shibuichi tsuba is decorated with a shippo (七宝, literally seven treasures) design, and referred to as a shippo tsunagi (shippo chain) when the inner and outer circles are interlinked, as this example.  The symbol is found in ancient Egypt as well as Asia and is at least 3,500 years old and embodies a wish for family happiness and financial success.  The design is finely cut with smooth even lines with the major open areas between the circles all cut to the same depth.  The evenness of the cutting is so skilful that it looks as if the pattern were made by a machine, rather than by hand.  The tsuba has a single kodzuka hitsu and both the size and overall design indicates that it was made for a wakizashi rather than a katana.  There appears to be some wear on the seppa dai, but the nagako ana looks pristine as this tsuba was probably tailor made for the sword and thus did not require seki gane or punch closure of the nagako ana to obtain a precise fit.

The tsuba bears the signature of Goto Mitsunobu/Mitsutoshi (後藤光寿) with a kakihan. According to some web pages, Fukushi reads the signature as Mitsunobu and the Toso Kodogu Koza says that although the kanji are commonly read as Mitsutoshi, Goto documents list the artist as Mitsunobu, with furigana reading aides by his name.   As the Goto family read his name as Mitsunobu, it would seem that Mitsutoshi may be a modern mistake which has been repeated enough as to cause confusion.

 Goto Mitsunobu was possibly the third son of Senjo and adopted by Renjo (10^th generation master of Goto Shirobei line of family) after the death of Renjo’s son, Mitsuyoshi, aged 25.  Mitsunobu married Renjo’s daughter (probably a good career move) and became head of the Goto school aged 34.  Mitsunobu became Tsujo (11^th generation master, 1663-1721) and lived in Edo. 

The Ashmolean Museum in Oxford has a virtually identical tsuba to this in the AH Church Collection (Accession number EAX. 10899 with collectors number 1158, see pic).  Some of the detail (especially the signature) is difficult to see in the Church example, but the distribution of the circles is the same, as is the placing of the signature.  Only the karahana (four pettalled flowers in the centre of the circles) look slightly different, and are more like four dots in my example (a different punch was evidently used).  As far as can be seen from the Church collection photo, the kakihan appears the same, but the rest of the signature lacks clarity for a critical comparison.  However, the signature on the tsuba in the Church collection is probably misread and is listed as being signed by Goto Mitsunaga.  It is also stated as probably not by Tsujo, the XIth master.

The Boston Museum of Fine Arts has another identical example (accession number: 11.5433) signed ‘Goto Mitsutoshi’ (see pic).  This has the same karahana, as the Church example, and the two look as if they could have been turned out together from a 3-D printer. The ‘Toshi/Nobu’ kanji differs from mine in that it appears stiffer and the lower half has a square rather than a single stroke.

The three tsuba are so similar that I would say that they came from the same workshop and perhaps from the same hand (though probably not Tsujo’s).  One source reports that 24 items by Tsujo have passed Juyo, so I suspect that there are more utsushi extant than genuine works.  The difference in the second kanji of his name is interesting.  Perhaps Tsujo was called Mitsutoshi and Mitsunobu, slightly changing the kanji when he changed his name.  Unlikely, but I like to think outside the box.

Whether genuine or fake I think that it is a skilfully made tsuba and I wish to treat it with care.  Close examination of the piercings reveals some dirt and crud.  What is the best way to remove this without affecting the patina?  Washing with a water based detergent, spraying with an aerosol electrical contact cleaner (alcohol based, no chlorinated material), or soak in white spirit to remove grease?

Dimensions: Height: 7.05 cm, Width: 6.65 cm, Thickness (rim):  0.35 cm

Thanks in advance for any help.

John

(just a guy making observations, asking questions, trying to learn)

[Pete Klein]

I referenced Wakayama Toso Kodogu Meiji Taikei and they're all gimei.

[JohnTo]

Pete. Thanks for the reference, I don't have it, but luckily you do.  One thing puzzles me about the number of gimei in the Edo period and that is how did they become so numerous in what was effectively a police state?  As I understand it, the Togugawa Shogunate kept a pretty tight contol on everything, for example the kabuki and ukiyo-e print makers were subject to strict censorship.  How come those involved in making swords and kodogu were making so many forgeries?  For example, I hate to think how many examples of waves inscribed Omori Teruhide I have come accross.  It makes me think that officials, maybe even the local daimyo, were taking bribes and turning a blind eye to the number of forgeries being produced in their locale.

 

Best regards, John

[Vermithrax16]

JohnTo wrote:

"The good thing about finding a signature of a minor artist on a piece of kodugu is that it is probably genuine."

 

I accepted this as a fact BEFORE I started studying and looking for kodugu. After some experience, I think we can put this one to bed. Gimei can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever. 

 

Raise hand if you got the movie reference.

[Teimei]

JohnTo wrote:

"The good thing about finding a signature of a minor artist on a piece of kodugu is that it is probably genuine."

 

I accepted this as a fact BEFORE I started studying and looking for kodugu. After some experience, I think we can put this one to bed. Gimei can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever. 

 

Raise hand if you got the movie reference.

 

 

 

[Pete Klein]

Just call me Terminator...

[kyushukairu]

John, here's a photo of the tsuba from Ashmolean which I took myself

[ROKUJURO]

..... One thing puzzles me about the number of gimei in the Edo period and that is how did they become so numerous in what was effectively a police state?  As I understand it, the Togugawa Shogunate kept a pretty tight contol on everything,.....How come those involved in making swords and kodogu were making so many forgeries?....

John,

 

this might have to do with the fact that forgeries or copies are looked upon differently in East Asia. You may remember the problems with Chinese fakes of Western brand items (not only clothes), and in the 1960's, the same problem was seen in Japan. I remember an important industrial fair in Japan of that time where a true copy of a BMW motorcycle was shown - even with the blue-white brand badge! The Japanese were proud of it, and the West was shocked and protested against industrial theft.

 

When the first few TEPPO guns were purchased from the Portuguese on TANEGASHIMA island, nobody expected the Japanese to be able to copy these, but in fact, they were fast (and successful) in doing so! 

 

There were several accepted reasons for making copies, and most people did not care too much.

 

In the late 1970's (if I remember correctly), there was an auction of Asian Arts in Cologne, Germany (Lempertz). They displayed a beautiful blade with a gorgeous HAMON and O-GISSAKI, but with obviously GI-MEI (I think it was KIYOMARO). The blade was eventually bought for an enormous sum (about DM 8.000.-- if I remember correctly)  by a Japanese dealer, and many of us guys watching this were astonished and asked themselves if the buyer was perhaps not knowing this. 

 

But I learned from Michael Hagenbusch, that the blade was certainly bought knowingly and probably sold at a very high price to a Japanese collector who would never ask if the MEI was genuine or not. He said: 'The new owner will put it in his KATANA-DANSU and be happy to own a KIYOMARO and never show it to anybody.' 

 

So forgeries are - at least in my understanding - mainly a question of the social acceptance of non-authentic items, and are not always seen as critical as we do in the West.   

[JohnTo]

Thanks Kyle,

Your photo of the Asmolean tsuba is much better than their on-line version.  I would say that the signature and kakihan are identical to mine, as is everything else about the two tsuba.  So they were probably made in the same workshop, by the same hand, though probably not Goto Renjo.

Thats the great thing about NMB, there is often someone out there with the info that you want.

 

Regards, John

[DRDave]

Nice looking tsuba.

[nagamaki - Franco]

But I learned from Michael Hagenbusch, that the blade was certainly bought knowingly and probably sold at a very high price to a Japanese collector who would never ask if the MEI was genuine or not. He said: 'The new owner will put it in his KATANA-DANSU and be happy to own a KIYOMARO and never show it to anybody.' 

 

 

 

Consider as well that unless a Japanese person is well schooled in nihonto, it is highly unlikely that they would know if they are looking at a genuine piece or not. And, then, if they were, they would probably be too polite to say anything.

[Timur]

John, just came across this thread. Here is another one published tsuba of the same workshop but without hitsuana. 

[Timur]

And for your research here are the photos of the one that I have.