Twin tsuba and questions...

[lotus]

The first tsuba attached is mine (at least for the moment) and the second twin tsuba is that of fellow NMB member John L. I stumbled upon his thread from 2010 where there was a brief conversation about his tsuba which can be found here :

 

http://www.nihontomessageboard.com/nmb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9056

 

To summarize that thread, John thought it was Ko-Shoami, Colin questioned the sekigane looking like the same iron as the body, and David said he thought it may be Ko or just early Edo Shoami.

 

That said, if you look closely at both tsuba, you can see some interesting similarities. Dimenstions the same, yep. Seppa dai shape the same, yep. And check out those punch marks, overlapping them in photoshop and guess what? They line up exactly. I mean...exactly. What do you all make of this?

 

Also, it almost looks as if the sekagane is of the same iron and is just carved up to look like a real one? I mean that is what it appears to be. Though John mentioned his was of dark copper?? Maybe mine is to, I am no expert but I have some doubts. There is also another issue about mine I would like to bring up but I would rather wait until tomorrow for that. But who knows, maybe you guys can see what I am hinting at? I will post more pics tomorrow.

[lotus]

Ura side

[sanjuro]

From the photographs both Yours and Johns for different reasons, appear to be cast to me.

Then again, what the hell do I know?

[docliss]

Patrick’s tsuba does indeed bear a remarkable resemblance to my own, posted on an earlier thread. The only obvious difference is that the wear on Patrick’s tsuba is much less and the kebori detail much more obvious than is that on mine. Keith has raised the perennial question of ‘casting’, and I am only able to comment on my own, in-hand example regarding this.

 

I am convinced that my own tsuba is not cast for a number of reasons:

• The sekigane are definitely of a dark copper.

• The detail of the mimi would be extremely difficult to obtain by casting

• Provenance; this tsuba has been continously in the WAY collection since it was purchased by him from a dealer in Felixtowe in 1950.

 

Over to members for further comments ….

 

John L.

[Grey Doffin]

If a magnet sticks to the sekigane the tsuba is cast. If it doesn't stick, the tsuba is most likely but not 100% sure not cast.

Grey

[Marius]

The one with sekigane is so evidently cast The second one is cast, too, although of better quality.

[John A Stuart]

We only have these pics to determine this question, but, I agree; cast steel.. John

[lotus]

Is it the sekagane on mine that is the big flag? This is a good learning experience for me, so I would like to know what else you might be seeing that indicate cast. I will do the magnet test soon and report back.

 

Also, I am going to take a picture of the inside sukashi walls that appear to show a cast seam.

[sanjuro]

Let us take each one in turn.

 

I shall ignore for the moment the question of seki gane. seki gane can afterall be added to a cast tsuba.

 

Firstly, John's tsuba. jpeg nmb 1. Lower right hand side. Decayed porosity. This only happens to cast iron. small sukashi seems to have some casting flash. Upper left hand side between petals of the flower, casting granulation.

Secondly, Your tsuba. casting flash in small sukashi elements. Loss of detail in the centre of the flower shows some granulation at base of crosss hatching. A carved iron tsuba does not have granulation at the base of incised cross hatching.

 

Finally, the seki gane. On Johns tsuba the seki gane appears on one side only. A seperate seki gane is usually visible on both sides. On your tsuba the same, but more obviously cast since definition is blurred by fine casting granulation.

On both tsuba there is a lack of fine definition of the design which one sees in carved tsuba. There is also a 'flatness' to the patina of the metal.

 

A small caveat is in order at this point. These observations are based only on photographic evidence and the eye can be fooled by the camera. However, Since there are dissimilarities in the petal structure, and similarities in the tagane marks around the nakago ana, then one is not a direct copy of the other. Therefore, I think we have possibly yet to see the original from which both these copies were made and cast.

 

JMHO.

[docliss]

Cast prior to 1950 - is that really a likely scenario?

 

John L.

[sanjuro]

I'm not sure what you are asking here John.

 

Is it likely that these tsuba were cast prior to 1950?......... Why not? The art of casting is much older than 1950, or 1590 for that matter. Many namban and other tsuba were cast and are of a much earlier vintage than 1950.

 

Am I perhaps missing the point you are trying to make? :?

[Soshin]

Hi Everyone,

 

As I posted in the original topic I feel obligated to reply now. With the additional information and Patrick R. example I feel both are case reproduction of an original Edo period tsuba. This can only be confrimed by having both tsuba in hand to study for a period of time.

My general advice to Patrick R. is to do more in person study at club meetings, and shows. This will lead to a more balance approach to your learning.

 

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[docliss]

Keith, while not doubting that the ability to cast tsuba has existed for aeons, was it really a financial proposition in the 1950s, when tsuba were so very readily and cheaply available? John L.

[lotus]

It would be rather interesting to see a pic of the authentic tsuba that mine was based on, just to see the difference. I am attaching a pic of a tsuba that was attributed to Choshu with the same motif just executed a tad bit differently. It only had the ura side pic.

 

Keith -

Thank you very much for your insights. They match with what I am seeing in hand.

 

David -

I agree and am hoping to make the Tampa show to further my knowledge. That said, I am learning a great deal right now about how to identify a cast tsuba which is very valuable knowledge for a beginner to have. And perhaps this is helpful for other forum readers as well.

[John A Stuart]

Hi John L., as we know old cast tsuba exist that are documented as being so. This allows one to believe information coming to light that this was done traditionally with particularly well known themes more than previously believed. Not all cast tsuba we see are contemporary replicas made to deceive, but, old tsuba made as a cheaper copies for swords of poor/impoverished samurai. Along the lines of those country/provincial tsuba made by metal smiths as a sideline to normal day work. The ones you see that are obviously made by naive craftsmen, frequently in copper. John

[Soshin]

Hi Patrick R.,

 

Posting on NMB is not a waste of time nor should it be your only resource for information. Let me know if you attend the Tampa show as I will be going and have attend the last two years.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[lotus]

David -

I will let you know about Tampa, hopefully I can make it.

 

Now, attached are a few close-ups. If there was any doubt about mine being case, I think these photos tell the truth!

[lotus]

And 2 more

[Soshin]

Hi Patrick R.,

 

Yes it clearly indicates your tsuba is a cast reproduction. I hope you didn't pay to much for it. I wounder if John L. can provide similar photos of the rim and nakago-ana of his tsuba.

Here is a Namban I once owned. It was clearly a cast reproduction and had all of the things you display on your tsuba in regards to the rim. I listed it as a vintage cast reproduction as such when I sold it on eBay as I am a honest person. A very similar tsuba is listed on Aoi Art: http://www.aoi-art.com/fittings/tsuba/F12034.html. I think my old tsuba as well as the one on Aoi Art website are cast reproductions.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[lotus]

I returned it to the seller so it's all good. He had purchased it from the Yahoo Japan Auctions and was surprised to hear it was a cast replica. Would be interesting to see closeups of the other, I agree.

[sanjuro]

Not to be 'picky', but it occurs to me that a seller who has had this tsuba in hand and did not notice that it was a casting, is an ill informed seller indeed. It was immediately obvious from the photographs to most of us here and also to the OP who by his own admission is a newbie himself. (No criticism intended Patrick, at least you have insight into your condition and a degree of skepticism, and that's always a healthy sign). :D