Help with new F&K

[raven2]

Hi everyone,

 

I was hoping for opinions and help translating the signature on this F&K I picked up at SF.

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hi Fred,

 

I could be completely wrong, but this set looks contemporary. I might be willing to entertain made in the Meiji period as a thought as well.

[Nobody]

The mei is a big name, if it is genuine.

 

It reads as follows;

後藤法橋 – Gotô Hokkyô

一乗 +花押 – Ichijô + kaô

[Ludolf Richter]

Hi,I believe it could have been made by Goto Ichijo or a student of him.Here is a pic with your piece and shoshin-mei.Ludolf

[raven2]

Thank-you for your replies so far. I thought it might be Ichijo but my poor translation skills are extremely limited (still working on them). I was wondering, Franco, what made you think it is contemporary? Are there specific things you noticed? I would like to understand as much as possible.

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hi Fred,

 

There are a number of clues, but what stands out the most is the simple round single and double cut outs for the insect bodies which hint at a production process. My guess is that the foundations of the f/k were probably made by someone familiar with tosogu manufacturing techniques, but the insects, flora, and finish work give me the impression of very simple and basic jewelery making skill, and not that of someone who was trained and apprenticed for making tosogu for a samurai sword. In my mind this can only lead to the conclusion of either Meiji period tourist item or contemporary. The lack of age, patina, makes me think newer rather than older.

 

One book I highly recommend for anyone drawn toward this art form is; Tosogu Machibori Meihin Shusei by Fukushi Shigeo (2005). Then, you can study top notch work (including Goto Ichijo pieces) and decide for yourself what is and what isn't. It is not an inexpensive book, but worth every Yen.

 

Also, for better understanding of techniques used in making tosogu a visit to Ford's, "Following the Iron Brush" website is most helpful.

[tetsugendo11]

well since I have had the pleasure of seeing this set in hand. I can tell you all that in my opinion, the work is quite nice, and definitely NOT modern. Most likely from around the mid 1800's. The workmanship is done with skill, not a top level piece mind you as my Ichijo kozuka (NBTHK certified), but still nice work. There is attention to fine detail, carving is clean and iroe is done well. contemperary pieces are usually not done in this fashion as well, if one has studied kodogu in Japan, one can see the differences easily. Perhaps serious judgement about kodogu and blades should be done when the item is seen in hand rather than 1 dimensional pictures. Oh , btw the signature is cut well, but would require more study as to its authenticity.

M. Yamasaki

[Thierry BERNARD]

There are a number of clues, but what stands out the most is the simple round single and double cut outs for the insect bodies which hint at a production process

 

could you explain this please I really do not understand what leads to this conclusion

 

thanks

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hello Mike,

 

I'm glad to see you active on this message board and look forward to reading more of your posts.

 

Perhaps serious judgement about kodogu and blades should be done when the item is seen in hand rather than 1 dimensional pictures.

M. Yamasaki

 

Agreed, that is sound advice, there is no substitute for in hand study. Perhaps you would be kind enough to share a few pointers when you say,

"contemperary pieces are usually not done in this fashion as well, if one has studied kodogu in Japan, one can see the differences easily".

Thank you.

 

Fred, I did check following Mr. Yamasaki's post and I stand corrected, indeed this style was being made in the late Edo period, so I thank you for providing a new lesson for myself, as well.

[raven2]

Thank-you for your information Mike. I appreciate the input. I will be trying to learn more about the pieces. I was going to mention that I didn't think the pictures did them justice and they certainly are better in-hand. I am very pleased with them and any more opinions and thoughts will be gratefully received. Franco, you are welcome. I think we all can continue to learn and I cerainly feel I am getting a lot of of it with all the valuable comments the board members kindly provide.

[tetsugendo11]

Some artist with talent would tend to do their works in such a careful precise manner, as they became higher in skill and talent their work takes on a natural tone. Too see such differences, one has to see many, many examples in hand that are deemed genuine. In Japan, study groups provide such experiences, with Q & A sessions afterward. In the case of this set of Fuchi Kashira, the workmanship is precise, and has a flair of being original in its design. Many so called contemporary pieces tend to have a feeling of being a copy of something more well known, rather than being a original design. Contemporary pieces also are made in a different manner, but some trying to use the older techniques.This is easier explained by "example in hand" , as I did at the 2009 Chicago Token kai, where I had an original piece (NBTHK certified), and a modern example of the same design. I first put out the modern piece, and asked the questions typical of any kantei session. It was deemed by all to be genuine and a very top grade example. Then the other shoe dropped when I said that this piece was a modern copy of an older piece. Silence and disbelief came over the room. Then I produced the certified example, and passed it around for all to see and compare. Immediately everyone understood the differences without further words. Then I went on to point out the finer details for further education. In the future, I will do such a study session again, and I hope you all can attend.

Mike

[raven2]

Thanks for the information Mike. I would truly like to attend because I feel that it would be a very valuable learning experience. I also think that that being able to compare the examples with each other makes it much easier to see the differences.

[Brian]

Mike,

Sounds like an excellent exercise, and well done for presenting it. It is a pity so many of us are unable to attend talks and shows like this.

Fully understanding the limitations of pictures and the internet, any chance of a side by side picture showcase of these items mentioned? Even with 2D images that cannot begin to represent the full effect, I am sure it would be valuable to those of us far away with limited resources.

 

Regards,

Brian

[Ford Hallam]

For what it's worth, i would tend to agree with Franco's initial opinion in suggesting these are not much older than 70 years.

For many of the same reasons Franco hints at...although my analysis of technique use would naturally be somewhat different. The point is made well enough though....not Edo or even Meiji in my opinion. The very unusual circular "nanako-esque" ground is the first alarm bell for me....followed by the relatively flat appearance of the raised inlay. As for the Ichijo school resemblance, I don't see it at all....

 

I also appreciated Mike's comments about much contemporary work being merely lifeless copies. Unless this changes sometime soon the tradition will die....all real art must express vitality.

[tetsugendo11]

OK Since this is getting more attention than it should for a set of Fuchi Kashira that should only be judged when in hand rather than by pictures, I decided to take the time and contact the previous owner of the set and it seems that they came off a handle from a sword with original bakumatsu period mountings. So you guys figure it out!

[tetsugendo11]

oh i forgot the happy face thing

[reinhard]

It is quite difficult to do this on the basis of poor two-dimensional pictures and I agree with Mike on this matter, but I would like to try nevertheless. Comparing the Fuchi/Kashira in question with a genuine example might illustrate some of the things discussed before. - What struck me in the first place was the the very poor treatment of the surface ("nanakoish"), the lack of quality in details and the uninspired design. I second Franco and Ford here. Goto Ichijo was one of the greatest artists of all time in the history of sword-fittings. Works carrying his mei should be analyzed with utmost care. He was an artist in the true sense of the word, remaining always original and keeping his level of craftsmanship at all times. Have a look.

 

reinhard

[Ford Hallam]

It's interesting, isn't it. Images are posted and opinions asked for but when the response is not what was expected or hoped for we're told that we can't really judge from pictures alone. So why bother in the first place then?

 

In fact I disagree. In many cases, this being one of them, I feel it is perfectly possible to make a pretty accurate judgement of work like this based on decent photos. It does, however, require a fair degree of experience in terms of handling Japanese metalwork. When you've seen a lot of pieces and are able to easily asses their relative qualities it becomes quite straightforward to tell dross from average and excellent from merely good.

 

Mike, your comment;

There is attention to fine detail, carving is clean and iroe is done well. contemperary pieces are usually not done in this fashion as well, if one has studied kodogu in Japan, one can see the differences easily

seems a bit odd to me. So what you seem to be suggesting is that modern work simply shouldn't be expected to this good. That's pretty disheartening really.... But seriously, that's not an argument at all....and relying on your observation that if you've studied in Japan then it becomes clear is also a false argument...it's an appeal to authority of sorts and in reality is meaningless also. What you're claiming is that you can tell, by virtue of your advanced study in Japan and if we can't see it...then it follows that we haven't seen enough good work in Japan. Sorry, I'm not convinced by this sort of reasoning.

 

I decided to take the time and contact the previous owner of the set and it seems that they came off a handle from a sword with original bakumatsu period mountings. So you guys figure it out!

 

I'm also always somewhat amused when further "evidence" for a particular piece is drummed up by referring back to something the original owner claimed regarding the provenance. Work must always be judged on it's own merits...not on alleged tales of it's origins. Nothing to figure out in my opinion. I take it then that you were the vendor at the SF show then Mike...if so I can appreciate your irritation with the critical scrutiny they're getting but that's what the forum is all about really, considered and critical discussions on the merits or otherwise of the pieces shown.

 

Some further points to consider; has anyone else seen a similar bevelling of the edge of a nakago-ana on a fuchi's tanjo-gane like that before. It seems a bit over worked to me, as though the maker was trying to be too clever ...and the actual placement/composition of the elements that make up the design are very awkwardly arranged which leaves me feeling there's a lack of experience in this matter too.

 

The shitodome seem to be misaligned in the images as shown also. This may be corrected by a clearer photo but if not I'd suggest that's a pretty bad mistake. One Goto Ichijo certainly wouldn't have allowed.

 

 

This is a genuine Ichijo tsuba which show some similarity in terms of the flowers and grasses. The general elegance of delicacy of the tsuba is quite different from feeling one gets for the fuchi/kashira under discussion though.

 

 

...and another Ichijo tsuba which shows well his elegant design abilities and technical precision. Both these examples are from the Kiyomizu Sannenzaka Museum in Kyoto.

 

 

I think the question of the authenticity of the mei is now irrelevant as the workmanship simply isn't in the same building as that of the master. The question now is; was the spurious mei added later or at the time of manufacture? My view, because the copper patina is so consistent as to indicate the original, artificial patination, is that the mei was cut when the piece was made. This, in my opinion, makes it an outright fake.

[Jean]

I am not going to interfere with the topic in itself but with the general comments made by Ford, with which/whom I totally agree.

 

1 - You can see thousand of swords/Kodogu but it does not imply it makes you an expert, some people will be good others not. Experience if not backed by knowledge can be very misleading.

 

2 - To say that nowadays craftsmen cannot reach the level of skill of yesteryear craftsmen is ridiculous and an insult for nowadays cratsmen and believe me, we know historically, in France, what craftsmanship means.

 

3 - Now the origin of the object : I shall make no comments but I wonder how many times I have heard the story of the grand father or great uncle bringing back a war souvenir (there is also the variation of great find in an attic) which after inquiry is a "modern fake" ...

 

Now, for the fun, and that's why I am against e-bay great find (too good to be real), I know personally someone in France (Ch ....) who bought in a garage/flea market (20 years ago) a rusted sword for about 75$ which (after being kissed) revealed itself as a true Taikei Naotane.

And to finish, I have not met but heard of hundred of people buying for much more money things which were not worth a dime

[raven2]

It's interesting, isn't it. Images are posted and opinions asked for but when the response is not what was expected or hoped for we're told that we can't really judge from pictures alone. So why bother in the first place then?

 

Actually, Ford, I was the one who orginally posted and asked for opinions and I feel I have been learning a lot from this thread, which was why I posted in the first place. I never said that you can't really judge from the pictures, although I do feel it is certaily better to see the piece in hand.

[Ford Hallam]

Sorry Fred, I should have been clearer..my comment was actually directed at the general disclaimer that is often made. I did note that you asked for both some input on the mei and opinions.

 

I'm relieved that you feel you're getting something out of the discussion too. These sorts of debates are, I think, the sort of thing the NMB does quite well. We're all challenged to look more closely, think clearer and develop our understanding of the subject together.

[raven2]

No problem Ford,

 

I bought the piece because it appeals to me, not for the mei and that I think is the important thing, at least to me.

[drbvac]

You know - this "debate" is very interesting and educational and no-one is getting annoyed which shows how civil we can be. I know less than nothing about Tosuga but in the pictures posted by Rheinhard, two things strike me, The mei are not exactly the same and the finish of even the nakago-ana on the original posting is not clearly cut out of the top of the kashira, Considering the makers attention to detail even little things like the openings are finished to the highest standards - IMHO.

 

That said the posted ones are nice - just "not as nice"

 

2 cents on observations

[Pete Klein]

"contemperary pieces are usually not done in this fashion as well"

 

I have a feeling that what Mike was referring to was the theme 'in this fashion' and even if the reference was to workmanship the use of 'usually' simply means that most of what we see in modern work does not come up to the older master's standards but does not preclude the possibility of such standards in modern workmanship. ( Just being a Virgo! LOL ) As for Ichijo by the mei 'needs research' generally is nice way to say 'probably not'.

To my eye this is very nice mid Edo workmanship -- most likely not Ichijo -- for all the reasons mentioned above.

[Ford Hallam]

Pete,

 

so what your saying in effect is that the spurious mei must have been added later then as Ichijo was right at the end of the Edo period. I mean his mei couldn't have been faked before he was born... (just being a Gemini )

 

Here's photo of him...he looks quite the part, doesn't he. The tanto he's wearing ( in Aikuchi mounts) was made by Koyama Munetsugu.

 

 

I understood the gist of what Mike was saying but that was the problem...as you've explained, by saying "usually" we still have no definitive statement and yet this vagueness is used to validate the claim that the work is definitely not modern. This is fuzzy logic...

[Pete Klein]

Ford -- LOL -- sorry, I meant to write mid 1800's. Too much Cabernet last night.

[Ford Hallam]

One more thought occurred to me while mulling over this pair of fuchi/kashira. The background texture is clearly made with a nanako punch but has been using in this case to merely create a sort of random, jumbled pattern. The interesting thing is that this is more like the sort of very early grounds we see on the earliest examples of Japanese metalwork ( and Chinese for that matter) before there was any attempt to create more defined grains and alignments. What we subsequently see is a gradual development of the technique culminating in some truly staggering refinement and precision. It's true that towards the end of the Edo period we see examples that are less than perfect but never quite as "accidental" as in the present example.

 

Given that the maker is clearly attempting to emulate the look of a particular type of Ichijo's work, a style that generally features pretty refined nanako, is it not significant that the ground in this case is fudged? To me it says that the maker was unable, or lacked confidence in his ability to make a convincing nanako ground so he opted for a more creative solution. This is what worries me...I don't think this would have happened were the maker a professional working in the Edo period. Nanako production, although often carried out by a specialist in the studio would have been part and parcel of the standard training of any kinko artist worth his salt...or should I say; worth his rice :D

 

Anyway, I hope my various observations on the pair in question at least provide some further aspects to consider when judging soft metal work in general.

 

regards,

 

Ford

 

p.s. It's a lovely sunny day here in cape Town, albeit a bit chilly. The studio is flooded with wonderful light and I'm having a very calm day carving bamboo leaves in shibuichi...pity you can't pop in to have a look ....but we'll soon have a DVD that'll be the next best thing :D

[loiner1965]

cannot comment on the pieces in question as my experience in this field is basi but i would like to say on the pictures ford posted....

just looking at them even on a 2d screen they are mind bogglingly beautiful and indeed a work of art...i cannot imagine what they look like in the hand....alas i will never be able to afford anything like those but i am content just to admire them on here......

carry on now chaps with your discussion :D

[tetsugendo11]

Wow, looks like Ford has been busy while I was away. Sorry for the ultra late response, but I have been busy with work. I guess I don’t have as much free time as Ford to post things on the board. Speaking of which, as simple question for Ford, since he can do “Kantei” from pictures, Ford, you never really said who you thought made this set of Fuchi Kashira that is signed by Ichijo. Your answer would be very educational for all. As for me , I was taught to only kantei items in hand only as there are always things that cannot be seen by pictures alone, but as I have seen this set in hand, I have an opinion of who made them as well. I think that of course the signature is suspicious (easily guessed from comparison to proven examples), but I was taught to be very polite when publically asked about a sword or fitting (privately is different). We must respect other collector’s feelings as they are the ones that appreciate and collect these items.

 

Also I have uploaded a picture of a similar surface texture from a kokinko tsuba that resembles that of the “Ichijo” fuchi kashira in question. Of course the tsuba texture is a bit more primitive, but considering the age, it is understandable in my opinion. Perhaps this type of texture wasn’t meant to be nanako, but I believe only the original artist can answer this question. Also a Shonai kinko kashira that has a similar feeling, but in truth, I have yet to see a modern piece with this type of texture. Perhaps someone was trying to be innovative, either way an attractive set regardless of the signature. But most likely student work in my opinion.

As for the application and style of the design, a similar in feeling NBTHK papered signed Ishiguro set seems good for comparison of the MAIN DESIGN style only.

 

Also for those that are interested, this tanto that Ichijo is wearing in the photo that Ford posted has all of the fittings made by him, this mount and blade was in the collection of the late director of the NBTHK Suzuki Kajyo sensei and I believe has been donated to the NBTHK by Mrs. Suzuki. He had an incredible collection, and I am fortunate to own a piece from his collection.

 

For Mr. Jean. I really had to be misunderstood, I prefer to speak in person rather than post typed opinions that can be misinterpreted or turned around. I will post a separate subject in regards to my feelings about modern artist in the sword world. Please read it carefully, and if you have any questions, please e-mail me at my website tetsugendo.com.

 

Ford, I will be in Japan at the November show if you would like to continue the discussion about this set of fuchi kashira. I hate typing!!! Also I would be very interested to see in hand a tsuba you made at the show.

[tetsugendo11]

kokinko tsuba and shonai kinko kashira