Ford Hallam

sorry I can't offer dimensions and measurements, Dirk. As I mentioned at the start of the thread, this isn't mine. It belongs to Bob Morrison. I'm pleased it's stimulating such thought though....we may eventually figure out the "mystery of the little slot" :D

Gosh Ian, ...you'll make me blush your observation regarding cast steel part of matchlocks is a perfect example of what I've been getting at. As far as I know the finest such parts are presently made by Edward J Blackley and sons in England. Really fine people to do business with too.

Hi Ian, with reference to the Goto actually casting gold menuki I would add the following. I've seen those casts taken from apparent moulds. The first time I saw them I immediately realise what they were and their purpose. The moulds are in fact simply imprints taken from the original uchidashi made menuki, either in clay or some similar plastic material. The copies are then created by pouring warm matsuyani into the mould. Matsuyani ( pine rosin) is the stuff we use to hold the work when being carved and inlaid etc. Once it begins to cool you can further work it into the mould with your thumb. I think that it was a misunderstanding of these reference models in pine rosin that has led to this erroneous idea that some Goto menuki were cast. There are a number of practical reasons why this would be unlikely. The most problematic being getting molten gold to adequately fill a mould that necessarily only had an inner cavity with a thickness of less than 1.5 mm. It's tricky even with centrifugal casting. Vacuum ( very modern process ie post war) casting on the other hand does the job beautifully. Therein lies a little concern. If I had in my possession a genuine pair of gold Goto menuki I can, by utilising the technology I was trained in, create copies that would be virtually indistinguishable from the originals. Here's a picture of the moulds you mention...they still make me smile at the misunderstanding. You can see the traces of clay on the rosin. If this was a way of creating waxes to cast you'd still have to hollow out the back as they are solid. Also, it would probably not be any quicker to make them by casting by the time you factor in all the additional clean up etc.

Ian, Please don't get me wrong. I had no doubt at all about your hands on experience given the work you've done as a professional and I think we agree pretty much on most points. My contention, however, is firstly that I judge Nick's tsuba to be cast steel. No need for me to go over the reasons...I've laid out my case. Rightly or wrongly I trust the material I've written may be of use in general terms to others with enquiring minds. The second point, and this is the real statement I've been trying to crowbar in here , is that there is no convincing evidence that tsuba were actually cast in steel in the Edo period. We must use our knowledge of contemporary work practice and technologies to asses unknown works and not come at the subject backwards and use these debatable pieces to build speculative theories. The reason I raised the second point and fallowed though as I did was precisely because there seemed to a feeling in some quarters that while they weren't prepared to see the tsuba as a modern cast piece it was felt more plausible that it might be an older ( ie antique) casting. It is this accomodationist (sic) attitude towards these things I was intent on challenging. In my opinion, Items of such poor quality should sensibly be judged with a great deal of suspicion and only accepted as genuine if their case can be proved. They are just so bad they must be judged as guilty until proved innocent best regards, Ford (Founder of the Society for the preservation and appreciation of all that is finest in Tsuba) p.s. Ian, I really appreciated the piece you wrote on the origins of Namban tsuba. I made a copy for my own records. Thanks

thanks for the feedback Gents, much appreciated

Hi Ian, in response to your comments; Cast iron tea kettles were exactly what I imagined someone would offer as a claim for casting. The fact is there is almost no comparison between cast iron and cast steel artifacts. The technology required to cast steel like this was simply not available in Ed period Japan. Actually, about a week is more close to the truth. on average, using a bow drill and a spear point as described and through 5mm plate, about 5 min. The actual piercing out of a guard like an Akasaka piece takes on average a day and a half using a modern Jewellers piercing saw. Piercing with copper wire and an abrasive grit takes about 2 and a half times as long so I'd suggest about 4 days. Even if we for a moment imagine that they had this sort of technology how would this struggling "back-street fittings maker" have afforded what would certainly have been cutting edge technology? See the questions I propose need to be answered before you can posit this hypothesis. And following from that, if this advanced steel casting technology was available why was it only ever used to produce such awful junk? no...not likely, the Japanese didn't eat bread then :D Not sure what you're trying to suggest, you seem to be implying that my position is that unless it's a singular work by a great artist isn't not valid work. I've never suggested that at all, just that there;'s a point at which some items become so devoid of any redeeming qualities that I find it hard to see how they may have been produced in Edo period Japan at all. I whole heartedly agree with you about the different grades of work produced but I maintain that there is a cut off point in terms of crapness. I think these attempts to imagine plausible scenarios that might explain how such rubbish came to be produced is a bit "cart before the horse". It remains to be shown that these are of any age at all. What you appear to be offering is, "if it looks old it is old"...I can't find this acceptable as any sort of reasoned argument. Again, I will maintain that this sort of rust is not any sure indication of age...any tool left outside for 10 years will easily look far worse than this. And fakers don't use gunk...the creation of rust based finishes is very efficiently achieved with fairly simple methods. But I suspect you know this and the implication that modern fakers are just inept bodgers is misleading. They know what they are doing and are getting better at it. They know what we will be looking out for and are perfectly able to add bits of simple inlay, sekigane etc as well.

Hi Piers, I was asked once, "is there any money in Tsuba?" as in, is dealing with them a viable business. I reckon the one certainly answers that question. :D

Mark, Nick, have either of ever actually filed steel? Do you know how hard the stuff is? If either of you honestly believe the appearance of this piece is due to natural wear could you at least offer some sort of explanation as to how. This sort of wear isn't even seen on 200 year old wrought iron hand rails in London, that have had hundreds of hands rubbing them every day. The wear is so even and glaring artificial I'm staggered there is even any more discussion on the thing. Nick, you have repeatedly stated that it clearly isn't a modern copy but have admitted that it "may be", "is probably" an old casting. As I've pointed out, the technology required to produce such small and complex steel castings simply wasn't available in the Edo period. A basic knowledge of metallurgical technology will prove that. Again, do you have any idea what it takes to produce products like this? What you refer to as the casting flange is nothing of the sort, as I described earlier, it's a remnant of the wax mould. A couple of minutes with a scalpel is all it takes to remove while still in the wax form. If this is the only feature you rely on to identify a casting then I'd suggest you'll be easily fooled. Casting is very common and relatively cheap today...but it wasn't always so. Please ask yourself the following; 1. What would they have used to take a mould from the original with? 2. How would they have then filled that mould with wax, bearing in mind the need to fill all the spaces completely? 3. What material would they have been able to use to encase the wax model, that would retain the required detail and withstand the high temperatures required for casting steel? 4. How would they ensure that, with only gravity to help, the molten steel would actually fill the mould, especially all those thin sections? 5. Why, while we have quite a few references to the technologies of bronze and cast iron kettle casting from the Edo period, and a number of very detailed accounts ( Prof Gowlands papers in particular) of the state of Japanese metalworking technology at the turn of the last century there is not a single mention of this sort of achievement? This sort of advanced technology would have been a shock to Europeans to say the least because while the Victorians were jolly good at casting iron and steel making was improving the process of casting steel, never mind at this scale, was still a long way off. 6. Apart from dodgy looking tsuba have you ever seen any other verified, small cast steel objects from the Edo period...or any other culture at that time, for that matter? 7. While we know that Japanese casters were adept at producing original wax models do you know of any evidence that suggests they were able to produce multiple wax models from a mould? If you think that sand casting might be an option let me assure you, even with the very sophisticated sand casting technology available today, casting a steel, sukashi tsuba is not a viable option. I know, about 25 years ago I produced a number of copies of guards from the Sasano book, in perspex, with the intention of having them cast in steel. The specialist foundry gave up after 3 attempts because the thin sections imprinted by the models in the sand simply collapsed every time. In fact the dancing crane tsuba I did about that time, which is in my picasa gallery, has a small hole drilled in the seppa-dai on the ura, to help with it's removal from the sand. It didn't really help As I said before, I'm not interested in trying to change your opinion, Nick. What I would like to do is to remove this notion, that cast steel tsuba were made in the Edo period, from the range of probabilities. I just feel that as long as some people continue to think that there is a possibility that these terrible bits of "tsuba shaped cast steel" are in some way genuine then people will keep wasting their money and other people will continue to make the cursed things. I say this because even in this discussion you have seemed, in a few posts to suggest that it might be an old casting. It seems to me therefore that you see enough to call it a casting but yet you still maintain it has some age. My point would be, if it looks like a casting it's modern. That's all I have to say on the subject. In future I'll refrain from commenting on anything that I think may be a modern cast copy because, to be frank, I'm tired of debating with opinions that have been formed without any reference to real metalwork technology or practical experience and I end up sounding like a broken record Apparently my sarcastic humour isn't always appreciated either, but please...given the effort I make surely I ought to be allowed some fun. and it's surely better than getting angry It's a thankless task being a heretic. Thanks for the birthday wishes, Chris. Older...but no wiser regards, Ford

As some of you may know I'm involved in the making of a film that will document the making of a kinko tsuba. As one of the versions of the film will be for a general audience, not you knowledgeable fellows , we need to include a certain amount of background information. I need to show what tsuba were and how they were worn. So what I'm looking for is a period photograph, preferably a full figure, of a samurai wearing a daisho and where the tsuba are visible. If anyone has anything like that and if they'd be prepared to allow me to use a copy in the film I'd be very grateful if they would pm me. I've got photos in books but they are simply too grainy when we blow them up to a usable size...Just thought a period photo, or something that looked like a period photo, would be more interesting. Thanks for reading, regards, Ford

Boy! you chaps are good :D ...so you've identified the shell game from the "listening to Incense" pastime and it's association with the Heian period aristocracy. You've noted the connection of the "mon" (don't believe they are in this instance though) to the Genji and Barry hits atari with the link to the Chapters of the Genjimonogatari (The tale of Prince Genji). The symbol on the left refers to Chapter 44, Bamboo River and the other to chapter 31, Cypress Pillar. The game of Genji-Koh involved the players "listening" to incense. It's said one doesn't smell the stuff but rather "listen to it" 5 different types of incense were used, and 5 packets of each were prepared giving 25 individual packets. The master of ceremonies shuffled them and selected 5 at random. The players then tied to identify them and recored their answers by means of short horizontal and vertical strokes marked on paper. 52 different patterns are possible using 5 of the 25 samples. These correspond to specific chapters of the book. Chapter 1 isn't used as such, there are in fact 53 chapters...how inconvenient. The signs can be seen to comprise essentially 5 vertical lines, however short. The first line on the left is the first scent that is smelled ( listened to), the second the second scent and so on. Should any of the scents repeat they are then linked by a vertical line that joins them. So for example, if each packet contained a different sample then you'd have only 5 vertical lines, which is chapter 2. Chapter 31, The Cypress Pillar,( the one on the right) indicates that the first and last scents were the same, the second and fourth were the same and the third was different from the rest. Chapter 44, Bamboo River, is almost the same but the three in the middle were all the same. What this actually may mean on this guard is anyone's guess....as is that odd slot across the nakago anna. Sorry, I don't have a clue about that....I was hoping one of you might figure it out

The perfect accessory to take with you to the next DTI; You can get one here

I was thinking more of Umetada Shigenari. he did a bit in steel...and the Umetada of course are noted for their use of soft metal. The plum blossoms are particularly convincing to me. To be honest though, I can see the other offerings validity too....hmm

This rather unusual tsuba belongs to Bob Morrison. I'm posting this image here, with his permission, because I think it might make a nice puzzle for those of you who enjoy digging up some of the more obscure references in Japanese art. So, the question is; what is the subject of the design and what 2 plants, or trees, are alluded to? As an extra bonus question; what is that strange horizontal slot across the nakago ana? Anyone suggesting a hidden Christian sign will be shot and I should add, this is definitely not a modern cast copy

I have to suggest the Umetada group. This was my first, gut response....and judging from the feedback from Steve I'm a little more confident. Second or third master, certainly not shodai. just late night ponderings.... regards all, Ford

oh dear, Nick, I thought I'd leave this thread alone now, having said what I wanted to but some of your most recent comments need to be addressed. others before me suggested Kinai, I was merely going with the consensus. My point remains though, show me a similar antique tsuba with copper eyes and brass whiskers and I might be inclined to reassess my opinion. As for the fact that it isn't a casting, simply stating that it "clearly isn't" doesn't amount to an reasoned argument. actually, you did say it was Kinai, in reply to Rich Steins comments; and your reply saying that's what you thought too. fair enough...just checking. If that's true then why are you getting so upset with my opinion. I seem to have given you precisely what you wanted then. So you are prepared to admit it may be an old casting, then what convinces you it's not newer? If you think it might have been cast then I think you've said enough. You claim to be able to tell these things so I must believe you, problem is I don't think you find the technology was up to the job in the Edo period. If you doubt that then try and find some other object from that period that was as complex, and small, and cast steel. You're doing it again, simply stating something doesn't make it a fact. It doesn't matter how many times you say I'm wrong it won't really have much weight until you make some effort to show why. If I'm eventually shown the error of my ways I'll graciously concede defeat. It doesn't hold up according to your opinion and you have yet to show why other than simply to say I'm wrong and that it's obvious....a bit arrogant don't you think. I would have hoped for a more reasoned response. ...and my elaborating on my opinion and offering my reasoning and rationale isn't me going on the attack, that's merely a legitimate part of debate. One final note, Nick, it was never my intention to change your point of view. Experience has taught me that opinions rarely change in exchanges like these. I wrote what I did so that there would be an alternative opinion for readers to consider and to present some new information with which to evaluate work like this. It genuinely doesn't bother me if I am proved wrong...at least I'll have stimulated a much closer look and a more thorough analysis of what we think we know. Hi Dr John, yes, I was aware of that objection :D but it's a bit of a moot point sometimes as quite a lot of the wax can't escape before it's vaporised. But he's technically quite correct...that's 'cos he's German . Personally I prefer the French term, it just sounds nicer regards, Ford

Copper eye and brass whiskers....hmm, well I'd say unless you can show me a genuine Kinai dragon tsuba with copper eyes and brass whiskers then yes, I still think it's a cast copy. I notice that in the close up you show the areas not polished/ground smooth, and in the recesses are quite coarse and grainy as I'd expect from a steel investment casting. The copper sekigane looks to be proud of the seppa dai too....how would that work then? The irregular lines are on the inside of the mimi, as I stated. Anyway, looking at the way the steel has been so obviously ground down to smooth it it out and the fact that it's obviously been done to hide the overall coarseness of the metal (because it's cast steel ) I don't know why I'm bothering to try to explain this to you. You'll believe what you want to. I tell you what, Nick, as you clearly get your knickers in a twist when you get "less than favourable" comments I'll refrain from commenting on your bargain finds in the future. To be honest though, you'd make it much easier if you simply didn't buy such crap. I'd prefer to be able to say something nice once in a while :D I'm only trying to raise standards ...and perhaps I might have bought it for a pound...but only to give to my 7 year old son to add to his little collection. Jean, I get the distinction you make but in English, in this use (ie; lost wax) the word can imply, as in French "cannot be retrieved/gotten back". The wax hasn't been wasted really, it served a valuable purpose. Although in Nick's tsuba's case that's obviously debatable.

Hi Jean, in the Jewellery trade it has traditionally been referred to it as "cire perdue" in England also ...mainly, I suspect, because it sounds sexier than "lost wax". I use many other French words in the studio too Of course this method can use any model made of wax and doesn't need to rely only on an injection moulded wax model. If the model was carved or hand formed (in wax) and then cast, there would be no seam line at all.

I see you're still finding those bargains for under £250, Nick :D In my opinion this is a fairly recent cast steel copy...not sure I'd pay a quid for it though. The belt sander finish that has levelled the high points and the very irregular, inner rim are the most obvious indicators to my eyes. Thanks for the link Steve. Some nice examples of Kinai work there but also some really horrible bits that give the school a bad name. Interesting that there appear to be a few obvious cast copies there too. This tsuba is on the same site and is presented as an example of a genuine cast tsuba that is a legitimate piece. The technical explanation is very poorly informed but the main issue would be the idea that the tsuba discussed was cast in a 2 part mould. This is, according to this vendor, indicated by the seam lines that are clearly visible in the nakago and hitsu ana. Perhaps a brief description of the reproduction process will make it easier to understand and help with the identification of castings in future. If you start with a genuine tsuba it is quite straightforward to take a rubber mould. This can be done with various liquid latex type rubbers that are simply poured around the piece and allowed to cure, or in a proper vulcanizing press, as jewellers would do. Either process yields a block of rubber encasing the piece. The rubber is then carefully cut apart using a scalpel. Care is taken to either keep the seam line in areas that can easily be tidied up after casting or hidden in complex pattern Typically, when a piece is thus embedded in rubber it will also have a rod of metal ( about the thickness of a pencil) laid in so that it touches the piece on the rim and extends to the edge of the rubber. This will form a channel through which the molten wax is subsequently injected. Jewellery workshops specialising in casting use a pressurised wax injector. Most of the roundedness we see on castings comes from the inevitable shrinkage of the wax at this stage. The seam (also known as flash in the trade) is a result of the molten wax being forced out through the gaps in the rubber mould. What I want to highlight here is that many of the tell tale signs of casting are more often evidence of the wax model and not marks left by the actual metal casting. It simply isn't usual practice, nor very effective, to cast such small and complex items in reusable, 2 part moulds even today when we have far superior materials with which moulds can be made. Once the wax is made it is then encased in investment plaster (plaster of paris) mounted on that rod I mentioned. That's called the sprue btw. The wax is melted out and the metal pored in. The actual casting can be simply a gravity pour or it can rely on centrifugal spin in some process, to force the metal into the mould. The most accurate casts are generally produced in vacuum casting. Here the flask holding the mould is place on a vacuum machine that is released as the metal is pored in. The vacuum then sucks the molten metal in very effectively and yields the sharpest casts. So, if you see evidence of a seam inside the openings of a tsuba it was probably cast from a wax injection moulded model and is therefore modern. I can't be sure when the process was developed ( none of my older books on Jewellery making mention it before the 1960's) but pressurised wax injection is a very new addition to the metalworkers technology. In the interests of trying add to the general understanding of the techniques used to reproduce tsuba I hope my brief diversion from the topic of this thread will be excused.

Thanks Brian, just to clarify what happening, seems my long rambling blog entry is a bit confusing. We've got the wakizashi tsuba with the tiger, The dai tsuba is now missing. last seen in a 1964 Exhibition catalogue. We have the b/w photo from that. I will be recreating the missing tsuba and the whole process is being filmed in high definition. The end product will be a commercially produced DVD of the whole journey. This film is being made for the specialist audience...you lot :D There will be a more general interest documentary made also. This is intended for public broadcast and will be presented initially at a couple of documentary film festivals. There is also a strong likelihood that the Japanese Agency for Cultural Affairs may back a version, in Japanese, for Japanese television. I was a 2 time recipient of study grants from this agency so my work since is a small return for the investment they made in me. We'll have more than 20 hours of footage by the time we're finish filming so there's a lot we can do with the material.

Hi Curran, there's a full image of the mei at the start of this thread.

Sorry about the delay...there has been a lot to organise in the last 2 weeks but it's all coming together now. You'll find some images and details of what I'm up to on my blog, here. There has been some suggestion in the past that the tsuba in question was made by the son. I can find no real evidence for this apart for an unqualified entry in "Tsuba, an aesthetic study" that claims works in the West bearing this mei are inevitably by the son. It isn't clear whether the suggestion was that they were deliberate fakes ( no Kao is shown or mentioned and they are very different anyway) or whether they are merely misidentified. I've compiled a gallery of images from NBTHK journals of Hagia Katsuhira's work as well as his son and adopted son ( who was the better of the two and this was possibly why he was adopted). What is clear though, and I've found some good examples of similar tsuba ie, pierced and carved tigers and bamboo, is that this present piece is in an altogether different class in terms of design and sensitivity of technique. I'll be doing a detailed and comparative aesthetic analysis of some of these pieces as I work though this project that has just got under way. I'm hoping this may help pave the way towards a more considered reappraisal of kinko work in general. regards, Ford

Sorry about the delay in getting round to letting on to what my secretive project is all about. You'll find all the details and some images on my blog, here. It's very long entry because I wanted to record the whole story of how we got to this point so if you just want to get to the important stuff I mention that in the bottom half. Thanks for your interest.

Hi Nick, I'm in SA now but I was in England for 18 years up until 3 years ago. I know well what is available :D . If you've got loads of very good swords and fittings for under 250 quid then I reckon you've taken all the bargains Either that, or as I was alluding to in my post, our assessment of what constitutes very good quality may vary somewhat. In any case I assumed my meaning would be understood figuratively (and as a bit of a joke) and not absolutely literally. I've no doubt bargains can still be had but that does presuppose the buyer knows what he's looking at. Shan has repeatedly demonstrated an uncanny talent for finding dross, I was merely attempting to help him improve his eyesight. Perhaps the old saying is right though? "There are none so blind as those who will not see"...

I wrote this reply on Saturday morning but before I could post it my internet connection went down only to be reconnected this morning. I see Shan has been sent to stand in the corridor again so he‘ll be unable to comment on what I have to offer but never the less there may be something in my ramble that is helpful. This may be the crux of your problem in assessing quality, Shan. If you can honestly say that there is nothing for you to learn from a decent blade than I really wonder what you see. The best advice I can give you is to teach yourself to see, really see what's in front of you. It's easy to notice the superficial aspects of things, the colour, shape, design ect. but real connoisseurship begins when you begin to apply your judgement to every tiny aspect of the things you're looking at. As you've been told, books are very useful in helping you gain an appreciation of what the best stuff looks like. Pictures will never tell you the whole story though...at best they are an indication of what the object is about. But, with experience and a memory of lots of comparable pieces in mind you will be better equipped to gauge the relative qualities of any given piece. Of course, as you say ( and many others) you buy what you like. I think it was Guido who pointed out that this is hardly a profound statement and that in fact it's practically a non-statement in that it tells us nothing of any use at all. The real problem with this sort of justification is that it seems to miss the point that it is possible to educate and refine ones appreciation and vision of things. By this I'm not suggesting that we will all end up at the same level of understanding or that we should all gradually move to the same tastes. Not at all, only that by making the effort to better see what you like and by really analysing the pieces, the workmanship, the design and overall aesthetic etc you can gradually enjoy a deeper and richer experience of the artistry they display. I know that my disparaging comments about your Akasakaesque ( bit like Kafkaesque only more confused, illogical and devoid of real meaning) tsuba were not pleasant but I didn't make them to put you down or to try and act superior in any way. I have other ways of doing that My concern was to highlight it's complete lack of any redeeming features or any aspects that might be appreciated on an aesthetic level, or purely craft level for that matter. I maintain that pieces like that only get in the way of any real learning or enjoyment...they are a con and do you a great disservice, apart for being a complete waste of money. Quite seriously, I have bits of scrap metal in my studio that offer more interest to my eyes and I would suggest that the nearest manhole cover could offer you as much or more in terms of pure visual and tactile pleasure. I'm not being sarcastic here, what I'm getting at is the very real danger of trapping yourself at a terribly mediocre level if you don't broaden and inform your view of the subject. Of course, what this means is we end up admiring most those things just out of reach. This is not always a bad thing though because by recognising the qualities of truly great works and better appreciating them we can then bring that honed understanding and sensitivity to bear in our search for hidden treasures of our own. If I could end by offering one concrete bit of advice to you to help you "improve your game" it would be to ignore the subject matter of the fittings you look at. What I mean is, don't let the actual image trick you. If you are considering 2 tsuba, one with a tiger on it and one with some flowers and you absolutely love tigers you may be a little biased in your judgement. This is perfectly natural (and human, so take comfort in that ) but it can subvert our ability to see things more objectively and you end up "buying what you like" even though in terms of quality the flowers were far superior. In a more general sense this also applies to the object themselves. You clearly have a bias, like all of us, of sword related things. Given a choice I bet you'd choose a tsuba ( any tsuba) over a coffee mug any day. In terms of quality and aesthetics that decision may sometimes be the wrong one ...and one last tip; don't buy anything for less than £250. :D

Hi Rich, sorry about that...it's all been a bit hectic here and the weather has been fouls os getting some decent images done is proving tricky ( I prefer to use natural light ) I'll try and sort it today and write up a blog entry to explain what's a'foot