Matsunoki

Nope, not me. Compare to a similar subject (unsigned Hamano I think)…..big difference in quality although mine is by no means the finest work….but I like it🙂

Hmmmm, probably not the faceplate from kagamibuta netsuke. The quality is nowhere near good enough. I have seen similar to these ones used as links in lower quality tourist type bracelets set in white metal surrounds or simply linked with small chain links. Also set in mounts as a brooch. No offence intended Laura or Charlie….but they are pretty rough🙂

A mistake (if you buy one not knowing what it is) 🙂

I agree totally Victor. The deer tsuba above looks lovely at first glance but closer examination shows that the meticulous detail and subtlety is not there. It is a bit stiff and wooden. However, this deer piece is still an attractive tsuba and maybe the artist will continue on his journey. But the extra detail is what takes 10 times longer to achieve. It’s the best modern one I’ve seen except for Fords’ work.

Actually looking again…..no. How about this one on bay…..it is dated 2001.….same shape nakago ana. Same artist? These are all modern imo

Sorry….the original tsuba, the subject of this topic. Look at things like the tigers’ feet. Also I haven’t checked the actual description but the tiger looks cut into the plate rather than inlaid. It has no finesse or subtlety The one Victor shows is better.

Horrible! Somehow lacks the refinement of quality found in Bakumatsu and Meiji pieces Personally I’m thinking they are much more recent and intended to deceive.

Hi Lewis I bought this (ie the original subject of the topic) from a Japanese dealer in April 2023 and with import tax it cost £378. I sold it at the Birmingham Arms fair but can’t remember who to or how much. In hand it was a lovely tsuba in far better condition than some thought. The distressing and apparent wear were all intentional. The iron was excellent.

Thank you Rohan, I understand. That is my bad photography with an iPhone. The Mei actually carry the same dark patina as the rest of the nakago with a bit of more recent shirasaya dust etc…..but mostly they are “black”. Images can really confuse things yes? These ones I just snapped in different light and they are a bit more accurate re colour. Thanks Uwe…..yes indeed! Very similar. Even more confusing🙂 Kirill, thanks again. And there was me planning a world cruise! Seriously, I bought it because it was interesting and it did not dent the wallet much! It is still interesting and I thank you for your help and interest. Yep, puzzled me as well……but I have seen it before even with just one original mekugi ana. So we think a fake mei was added when the two ana were already there? That’s a bit of a giveaway. Thanks to all. Anyone wanna buy a strange little tanto🙂🙂

@Rivkin Many thanks Kiril Anyone…… OK so the mei is fake (probably) but the nakago looks genuinely very old (not messed with) and the mei (and date) looks like it’s been on there an awful long time again without being played around with. That makes me wonder when it was added. If the tanto is Nanbokucho were they adding fake mei at that time? Doesn’t look like it was added even vaguely recently. Does the hamon preclude Kamakura from consideration? Could it be a pupil ……daisaku daimei?…..there seems to be a huge variety of Kunimitsu mei with apparently little certainty regarding exactly who was forging and signing what, Any opinions anyone?

Thanks Mauro. It was Ford that said his signatures varied quite a bit over a long career (70 years from memory) and what you show does rather confirm that. To my eyes there are sufficient similarities to mine to increase the chances that it is OK. Certainly the workmanship and artistry are of a high standard…..imo far higher than much of his “rural life” outputs. Thanks again.

Hi Piers …..Got to do it while we’re alive haven’t we? This was one that had I left it, it would have nagged at me forever but, alas, I fear the truth will remain elusive. It needs a polish to see and then shinsa if deemed worth it…..and stuck here in the UK, that won’t happen. Shame, but whatever……it is such great fun yes?

Hi Brian, interesting how we see things differently! When I put the horimono on my tanto next to the first one you show they are chalk and cheese. Personally I prefer the simplicity of mine to the “over the top” …almost overwhelming appearance of yours! OK….interesting question for all observers…..which of the two would you like on your tanto? (Please don’t be awkward and say none🙂)…… left or right? (Just for fun folks!)

Horimono…..they generate very polarised opinions yes? To the blade purist this tanto would for sure be better off without it but to the bling loving merchant that possibly had it done it was the height of fashion. I suspect this tanto had a very flashy koshirae as well…..possibly Bakumatsu, but that is pure speculation. As John says, figural horimono are notoriously difficult to execute, trying to get a 3d vision of a fierce and scary divinity into a small 2d space is not easy. Dragons, bonji etc are simpler. The actual figure of Fudo is only 4cm high and a lot of detail has been crammed into that space. Personally I think it is 8/10 for a Fudo one but opinions will vary. Also….they are very difficult to get a decent image of and in this case I was focussing much more on the blade forging details which has distorted the horimono on several pics (taken at slanted angles rather that full on flat). Any other opinions anyone? No-one prepared to give the blade a shot?🙂

Well, I’ve tried to capture some of the activity in this little tanto. Hellish tricky with an old polish and stains just where yiu don’t want them…..there is a lot more “midare” that falls outside of the remaining Hadori finish that simply will not show up. OK so we do not have the classic Kunimitsu but does anything else suggest itself? Could we say it is a Kamakura period blade or are we drifting later? All opinions welcome