Netsuke Central

[Rivkin]

This one - less so I guess. but its signed...

Edited January 18 by Rivkin

[Rivkin]

This one is for ninja.

[Bugyotsuji]

Did you buy a single lot at auction, Kirill?

[Rivkin]

14 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

Did you buy a single lot at auction, Kirill?

They are all from one collector. I've picked up couple of blades, and he rolled out quite a few okimono and netsuke... 

[Matsunoki]

2 Men smoking…..what Piers said

 

Kingfiser with fish on lotus leaf…..looks resin fake

 

Toads on bamboo shoot….modern Chinese fake

 

Dutch/Mongol archer…poor attempt at a popular Edo subject. Modern. Possibly Chinese but more likely Japanese tourist.

 

Shishi (seal?)..low quality modern. Looks resin but apparently has cracks so not sure

 

…..imo….from images. 

[Matsunoki]

Zodiac animal group…..Japanese tourist Meiji.

[Rivkin]

Thank you very much, that helps!

[Matsunoki]

The women in the bath house is Japanese Meiji tourist….more a small okimono than netsuke 

The one behind it….an Oni?…..looks more promising, maybe. Image?

[PietroParis]

IMHO:

 

The bird could be a carved tagua nut, in that case it might still have some age. The zodiac animals look modern (and possibly Chinese) to me, and I have doubts also concerning the bathhouse scene (those ladies look a bit too "buxom" for a Japanese antique, and also the faces don't look right). I have few illusions about the oni, but more pictures might help.

 

P.S. concerning the others: the Dutchman is a modern fake, the shishi is not a Japanese netsuke (possibly Chinese soapstone of undetermined age), the bamboo shoot doesn't look very old but it's better carved than most in this bunch. The signature 孝正 Takamasa/Kosho is unrecorded, probably made up although it could also be some post-WW2 (or even contemporary) professional carver.

 

P.P.S. as mentioned by others above, the smokers are a decent Meiji-period export piece.

Edited January 19 by PietroParis

[Rivkin]

Gentleman, behold!!!! Another faux or its actually Meiji?

[ROKUJURO]

The Dutch archer is signed YOSHIKAWA I think.

[Bugyotsuji]

Often the facial expressions will tell you everything you need to know!

[Rivkin]

Thank you, @ROKUJURO, @PietroParis, @Matsunoki, @Bugyotsuji

I blame facial expressions on drinking.

[Bugyotsuji]

The Dutch archer is signed 吉川 Yoshikawa, yes, but the signature looks weak to me, as if someone added it later.

[PietroParis]

1 hour ago, Bugyotsuji said:

The Dutch archer is signed 吉川 Yoshikawa, yes, but the signature looks weak to me, as if someone added it later.

 

I'd say the signature is consistent with the whole piece: a modern fake.

[PietroParis]

15 hours ago, Rivkin said:

Gentleman, behold!!!! Another faux or its actually Meiji?

 

 

Another faux, sorry.

[Matsunoki]

It is worth bearing in mind that during Meiji (and into Taisho and even Showa) the demand for Japanese ivory carvings was massively fuelled by the export market. In response very high numbers of poorer quality pieces were produced quickly by workshops whose skills were nowhere near those of the carvers of preMeiji domestic pieces. The artistry is often very wooden and the detail and subtlety largely absent.

However the demand was there and the customer base often lacked any real knowledge regarding “quality” and thus items such as Kirill shows us arrived in vast numbers.

It is easy to jump to “modern Chinese” but imo many are Japanese…just mass produced quickly by unskilled artists.

Without doubt (imo) many of the pieces on this thread could be argued both ways. Some are obviously modern, others…hmmmm.

Sadly no treasures though.

 

[Clark]

On 1/7/2026 at 10:06 PM, Bugyotsuji said:

Hi Clark, welcome to our corner here! First of all, thank you for your honesty and objectivity, which are rare qualities today, and refreshingly appreciated! It is good to know that what we suspected is not far from the truth. Also it is very interesting to learn about where these NLO are manufactured.

 

Your masks have a pleasingly rustic appearance. Mingei 民芸. They could easily be older than your estimate, I feel. The Okame looks almost Korean. The closest signature I have found so far is a Suisen 水仙, but not yet a Suizan unfortunately. Can we see the backs of your two? 
 

Anyway, we are all learning here. Sadly I let some of my good Noh mask Netsuke go, but I still have a couple somewhere, oh, and a hyottoko ojime!
 

Thank you for posting and introducing yourself! 
 

I apologize for the late response. There are indeed very interesting discoveries on the back of these two kozuka. One of them has a signature that reads "水山," which has been forged on works by Chinese workshops, so I'm not sure of its authenticity. The other back is very plain. I believe the year of the other kozuka may be earlier, possibly around the middle of the Edo period, and its style follows a relatively plain and reserved craft, not yet entering the pursuit of exquisite shapes during the Meiji era, with practicality outweighing decorative value. Such kozuka are often undervalued in the market, but that is precisely where they are very interesting. 

[Clark]

I would like to share another rare piece from my collection: a mechanical netsuke. In fact, I have never seen anything like it before. This netsuke is shaped like a Daruma, made from ivory nut, and features a movable die inside its mouth, which still functions perfectly—allowing you to shake it and see the number. The die itself appears to be made of bone. There is a signature or mark on it, but I am unsure of its origin. It’s possible that this is a modern workshop piece, but I have never encountered any similar design. I’m not very familiar with ivory nut netsuke, and I suspect it may not be very old, though I could be mistaken.

[Clark]

Unfortunately, due to the deterioration of Chinese-Japanese relations, it is increasingly difficult to find high-quality netsuke in China today...

[Bugyotsuji]

Hi Clark, great to hear back from you! Thank you for these additions.

 

The first two are difficult to appraise, but I think your comments cover the area pretty well. They are either genuinely old, or they have been cleverly made to appear old. Since masks do not generally fetch high prices, though, the question could be why fake one, even more so a plain wood netsuke? As to the signature, however, I agree. There is no recorded 水山 Mizuyama or Suizan that I can find. The Mei is suspiciously close to Suisen 水仙, a name that is already rather rare, and he was not a mask carver anyway, so my instinct would tell me that it has been added later, as you suggest.

 

The tagua (ivory) nut netsuke though is more interesting for me. The face is probably not Daruma but Hyottoko. It is quite clever how the die/dice functions, and somehow typically Japanese in concept. These karakuri netsuke tickle the mind as you try to work out how the artisan made such a thing. They were however making netsuke from vegetable ivory towards the end of Edo and into Meiji, so it could easily have some age to it.  Can you get a clearer shot of the signature cartouche? It's just on the edge of being readable... but no guarantees!   Personally speaking, I like it a lot!

[Bugyotsuji]

9 hours ago, Clark said:

Unfortunately, due to the deterioration of Chinese-Japanese relations, it is increasingly difficult to find high-quality netsuke in China today...

Beyond the netsuke angle, this makes me sad to hear. In my experience individuals tend to get along together well, but when politics become involved ... I will say no more. 

[ROKUJURO]

7 hours ago, Bugyotsuji said:

......In my experience individuals tend to get along together well, but when politics become involved ... 

Piers,

that is exactly my opinion and experience.

[Bugyotsuji]

Meantime a netsuke quiz.

6 cm long and 2.5 cm at the widest bulge. I have had hyōtan netsuke made of Edo glass, shinchū brass, wood, horn, ivory, etc., but this little baby is the most realistic so far. What material is it? (The mouth surround looks to be silver.)

 

 

[ROKUJURO]

19 hours ago, Clark said:

.....a mechanical netsuke. In fact, I have never seen anything like it before. ....

...but they exist:  The chicken can be moved a bit in its egg. Signed MASASHIGE with KAO. It is elephant ivory, probably made in the 20th century.

[ROKUJURO]

30 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

Meantime a netsuke quiz.... What material is it? 

Perhaps a dried "baby" HYÔTAN?

[Bugyotsuji]

That was too easy, Jean! Yes, I was quite surprised that they could find such a baby, and then season it like an adult gourd.

 

As to karakuri, I have two or three examples, lotus seeds in a pod, a worm in a chestnut, etc. You also see moving tongues, popping eyes and so on. Secret fun! 

[Clark]

10 hours ago, Bugyotsuji said:

Hi Clark, great to hear back from you! Thank you for these additions.

 

The first two are difficult to appraise, but I think your comments cover the area pretty well. They are either genuinely old, or they have been cleverly made to appear old. Since masks do not generally fetch high prices, though, the question could be why fake one, even more so a plain wood netsuke? As to the signature, however, I agree. There is no recorded 水山 Mizuyama or Suizan that I can find. The Mei is suspiciously close to Suisen 水仙, a name that is already rather rare, and he was not a mask carver anyway, so my instinct would tell me that it has been added later, as you suggest.

 

The tagua (ivory) nut netsuke though is more interesting for me. The face is probably not Daruma but Hyottoko. It is quite clever how the die/dice functions, and somehow typically Japanese in concept. These karakuri netsuke tickle the mind as you try to work out how the artisan made such a thing. They were however making netsuke from vegetable ivory towards the end of Edo and into Meiji, so it could easily have some age to it.  Can you get a clearer shot of the signature cartouche? It's just on the edge of being readable... but no guarantees!   Personally speaking, I like it a lot!

No problem, this is the supplementary photo, including the holes, signature, and details. The coloring of the dice is rather primitive, which to some extent excludes the possibility of being made in a modern workshop, but the red cinnabar in the signature is still quite obvious, which somewhat increases the likelihood that this is a modern work. But the most important aspect is the design. The mechanism of the root attachment, as pointed out in the following post, is not uncommon, but the root attachment with an embedded die is indeed rare. One theory is that this root attachment corresponds to the gambling habits of small Japanese merchants during the Edo period. If it were a work of a modern workshop, there should be many similar designs, at least not uncommon.

[Clark]

34 minutes ago, ROKUJURO said:

...but they exist:  The chicken can be moved a bit in its egg. Signed MASASHIGE with KAO. It is elephant ivory, probably made in the 20th century.

I can be quite certain to tell you that this piece comes from a modern Chinese workshop, and its signature, "正重," is a representative signature of a large number of modern Chinese workshop works. In fact, the traces of mechanical processing by modern workshops can also be seen from the carving style. If you browse the second-hand market in China, you will see a large number of works with similar signatures, which are not uncommon. I highly recommend against purchasing works with such signatures, regardless of the price.

[ROKUJURO]

Thank you Clark!

I got this NETSUKE as a present from a friend in 1969. We had seen it in a shop window in southern Germany every time we went to town, and as I liked it a lot, she eventually bought it for me.

It may well be Chinese, but at that time and with no expertise......it happens!

It was expensive, by the way!