Shibuichi Echizen Aoi tsuba

[JohnTo]

A quick look at the first two pictures of this tsuba and I expect many of you will jumping up and down shouting ‘Easy!  Echizen Kinai tsuba of aoi leaves.’  Just like the one I’ve included for comparison signed Echizen ju Kinai saku.  Problem with my tsuba is the it is probably shibuichi and mumei (Kinai were never shy about adding signatures).

The tsuba is 7.2 cm x  6.9 cm x 0.4 cm, Weight: 132 g and is essentially a standard Echizen aoi design.  The tsuba is almost totally symmetrical about the vertical axis, having two kogai hitsu ana and matching tagane around the nakago ana, making assignment to the omote or ura impossible.  The inlay karakusa scrolls are the same, but the raindrops on the leaves differ.

So who made it?  I have never seen a shibuichi Kinai tsuba, but this does not mean they did not make any.  The quality looks above their standard output, so why not sign it?  Best explanations I have are that maybe it was made for a high-ranking samurai, by another workshop, who liked to wear a bit of bling on formal occasions but still wear the tsuba design that lesser ranks used, or it was made by a kinko artist as a copy of an iron Kinai tsuba to make a more saleable product for the Western market.  Either explanation would explain the lack of wear.

Look forward to your comments.

John

Just a guy making observations, asking questions and trying to learn

[MauroP]

Kaga-kinkō or Shōnai-kinkō?

[Spartancrest]

It might be blasphemy but that guard looks too good to be Kinai ! 

[kissakai]

Too new?

[Geraint]

Dear John.

 

Thoughts not answers but.....  Matched hitsu in the form for kogai is not a feature of Kinai work generally.  The scrolls are stylistically a little removed from typical Kinai work and seem to be honzogan rather than nunome zogan.  The seppa dai is rather koban shaped for Kinai work.  Oh, and the fact that Kinai examples usually have the design firmly contained within a mimi.

 

There is this one,https://japaneseswordbooksandtsuba.com/store/tsuba-kodogu/t227-amazing-echizen-kinai-tsuba-5th-generation/ 

 

Although the design takes us straight to Kinai I would guess that this is one of those cases where design does not equal school.

 

By the way I love it!

 

All the best.

Edited October 3 by Geraint

[Spartancrest]

This one has the Aoi leaves as part of the outline - no rim  https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/2076-jp-samurai-sword-guard-aoi-openwork-tsuba

Polished iron not Shibuichi and not Kinai either IMHO. No signature - who else used the Aoi pattern?

 

           another on ebay   https://www.ebay.com/itm/186824825810

 

Edited October 3 by Spartancrest

[When Necessary]

You have a beautiful tsuba there, John.

 

My gut feeling is that the side with more raindrops (your second photo) is omote as it is slightly more decorated.

[lonely panet]

Looks very modern. Post ww2 imho

[thutson]

It also looks modern in my opinion, but a nice and well executed piece.

[JohnTo]

Mauro, I'm not really familiar with Shonai, but that looks as good an attribution as any from pics I have seen.  I did buy a 'shibuichi Kaga' tsuba from Bonhams about four years ago (pic attached, signed Kashu ju Katsukuni)) and the workmanship looks similar.  It was evidently made of an unusual shibuichi alloy in that it was magnetic and had some rust spots.  At least they did not describe it as shakudo!

I agree with Dale, it looks too good to be Kinai.  A bit like Ferrari using a Fiat as a model for their new car.

thanks for your comments, John

[Curran]

On 10/2/2025 at 12:45 PM, MauroP said:

Kaga-kinkō or Shōnai-kinkō?

 

Oooff. I had similar thoughts, but the geometry seems younger.

Beginning to think it is Meiji or newer. Very well made, so I hesitate at saying post WWII.

 

Size ratio of the seppa dai and the hitsu-ana do open up to me the idea of whether it possible it was made by a talented Japanese artists somewhere in the 1960s or so?

But there is a lot of good workmanship in there. I find this one challenging.

 

 

[Matsunoki]

Possibly made for one of the tsuba competitions in Japan?

[Curran]

1 hour ago, Matsunoki said:

Possibly made for one of the tsuba competitions in Japan?

 

Yes. I thought that likely too.

Other than some of the ratios being very Un-Edo, it is a very well made tsuba. Someone had skills.

[zanilu]

22 hours ago, Curran said:

Size ratio of the seppa dai and the hitsu-ana do open up to me the idea of whether it possible it was made by a talented Japanese artists somewhere in the 1960s or so?

 

Curran, your reasoning is based on some rule or criteria. Do you care ti elaborate it a little more?

 

Thank you in advance 

 

Regards

Luca

[Curran]

On 10/4/2025 at 12:51 PM, zanilu said:

 

Curran, your reasoning is based on some rule or criteria. Do you care ti elaborate it a little more?

 

Thank you in advance 

 

Regards

Luca

 

Okay- teasing you a bit:   you want a simple grand formula, then go with E=mc^2

 

More serious:   with each school and each maker, there are _SOFT_ rules about size, shape, finish, and %_percentage of seppa dai vs total volume displacement of the tsuba.

The seppa dai size is partially constrained by the surface area displacement of the saya and the tsuka. A tsuba with a seppa dai so much larger than the saya and tsuka face displacement =  looks weird and unaesthetic.

At least amongst the Higo schools, certain schools and certain generation had specific rules. Thus the seppa dai is a very important kantei point amongst Higo schools. This is also true of Akasaka tsuba.

 

This tsuba has a seppa dai and hitsu ana % that is greater than almost anything seen from 1500 to 1910.

It has ratios only seen in tanto tsuba, but it is definitely not a tanto tsuba.

The far most likely reason you might end at this sort of ratio is if you are creating a tsuba for display that is not meant to be mounted, free of mounted aesthetics, .....----or is for a massively thick non-Momoyama/Edo saya and tsuka.

 

Therefore:  either it is a very eccentric late Edo or Meiji era tsuba, or it is a 20th century work.

Those are my thoughts.

 

 

 

[zanilu]

 

1 hour ago, Curran said:

Okay- teasing you a bit:   you want a simple grand formula, then go with E=mc^2

 You know Curran, I am an engineer so if you talk about a rule I do expect it... 😉 

 

Luca

[Dan tsuba]

Curran, 

A great post! 

You stated that “with each school and each maker, there are _SOFT_ rules about size, shape, finish, and %_percentage of seppa dai vs total volume displacement of the tsuba.”  

Also was stated “At least amongst the Higo schools, certain schools and certain generation had specific rules.” 

I am very interested in what you stated. 

Can you provide pictures or references that I can refer to about these rules? 

Thanks! 

 

[Jake6500]

14 hours ago, Curran said:

 

Okay- teasing you a bit:   you want a simple grand formula, then go with E=mc^2

 

More serious:   with each school and each maker, there are _SOFT_ rules about size, shape, finish, and %_percentage of seppa dai vs total volume displacement of the tsuba.

The seppa dai size is partially constrained by the surface area displacement of the saya and the tsuka. A tsuba with a seppa dai so much larger than the saya and tsuka face displacement =  looks weird and unaesthetic.

At least amongst the Higo schools, certain schools and certain generation had specific rules. Thus the seppa dai is a very important kantei point amongst Higo schools. This is also true of Akasaka tsuba.

 

This tsuba has a seppa dai and hitsu ana % that is greater than almost anything seen from 1500 to 1910.

It has ratios only seen in tanto tsuba, but it is definitely not a tanto tsuba.

The far most likely reason you might end at this sort of ratio is if you are creating a tsuba for display that is not meant to be mounted, free of mounted aesthetics, .....----or is for a massively thick non-Momoyama/Edo saya and tsuka.

 

Therefore:  either it is a very eccentric late Edo or Meiji era tsuba, or it is a 20th century work.

Those are my thoughts.

 

 

 

 

Very interesting explanation and I can see what you are saying. It is quite a large seppa, very large, thick and gives off late Edo or Meiji era Kabuki vibes.

[Curran]

19 hours ago, Dan tsuba said:

Curran, 

A great post! 

You stated that “with each school and each maker, there are _SOFT_ rules about size, shape, finish, and %_percentage of seppa dai vs total volume displacement of the tsuba.”  

Also was stated “At least amongst the Higo schools, certain schools and certain generation had specific rules.” 

I am very interested in what you stated. 

Can you provide pictures or references that I can refer to about these rules? 

Thanks! 

 

 

For starter's you can get Ito-san's books and the translations available.

At times, groups have hired translators to do various Japanese texts. I have some of those translations, but not the rights to publicly share them.

And I am in no rush to give up competitive advantage to AI. 

 

A simple example that many people know is the koban shape of the Hayashi tsuba seppa dai, especially nidai and sandai.

Some like the Nishigaki and Hayashi had no problem intruding the design onto the seppa dai (hidden by seppa or tsuka).

Pics attached. 

   These are some of the largest seppa dai you will see in Higo, and the Kamiyoshi followed their Hayashi forebearers with some large seppa dai in late edo. Saya had gotten thicker n thicker by then.

A Kamiyoshi pic attached, though it seems to have been spun 90 degrees. Kamiyoshi mostly lost the koban shape of the Hayashi, though sometimes did a darn good utsushi.

 

Others like shodai Akasaka Tadamasa had rather pointy egg shaped seppa dai.

I don't own or have an example of that.