Kagamishi Book Translation

[Curran]

8 hours ago, Brian said:

You are likely uploading directly from a phone?
Edit the pics, and without doing anything to them, save them again. That will "lock in" the orientation. It's the cellphone that is saving the incorrect orientation, and servers can't read that info.
Just edit..save. Done. 

 

I've been sending from phone to a computer and using a photoeditor to trim them down. Then saved them.

So, it isn't that unless it is the photoeditor. I can try a different photoeditor.

 

[Brian]

Check the top of the forum, there is a menu for image resizers.

[Tim Evans]

On 12/1/2025 at 2:41 PM, Iekatsu said:

Much appreciated Tim. Concerning your Tsuba, I don't really see the similarities to #10 in the Sasano book. Given the shape, motif and style I think it might be Edo period, not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

For similarities there is the oval seppadai and some similarities in the details of the dragons, which admittedly is hard to see in the pictures. Also, these two are a rare examples of a figural presentation rather than repetitive design elements. Based on Sasano's research presented in Tosogu no Kigen the hitsuana on mine looks like a period 2 rounded oval. The hitsu also appears to be cast in the plate, so would date to early Muromachi. the hitsuana for #10 in the book looks more like mid Muromachi, however, I cannot tell if the hitsu is original to the plate or cut in later. Robert Burowoy in The Picture Book of Old Tsuba relates a theory that decoration some of these cast tsuba resemble cast Buddhist votive objects and could have been made by the same craftsmen. I think with the rise of the professional tsuba smiths in the Edo period, these rather naïve tsuba probably were no longer desirable.  

 

Does anyone have thoughts on the English descriptions? I find the dates a bit ambitious. 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 11:11 PM by Tim Evans

[Iekatsu]

I am still skeptical, there are a couple of reasons that I think it might not pre-date the Edo period.
 

On 12/3/2025 at 10:10 AM, Tim Evans said:

For similarities there is the oval seppadai and some similarities in the details of the dragons, which admittedly is hard to see in the pictures. Also, these two are a rare examples of a figural presentation rather than repetitive design elements. Based on Sasano's research presented in Tosogu no Kigen the hitsuana on mine looks like a period 2 rounded oval. The hitsu also appears to be cast in the plate, so would date to early Muromachi.

I think your dating is rather optimistic, looking at extant examples, we do not start seeing defined Seppa-dai until the late Muromachi period, and they only become common place from the Momoyama period onward. While the shape of Hitsu-ana can be useful in determining relative age, there are many variables at play, particularly with an oval shaped example, which could have been reshaped and adjusted many times. If the Hitsu-ana is indeed cast into the design, that would also generally indicate later dating.

Concerning the motif, while animal and creature motifs are not uncommon, the way the dragon has been rendered does not align with any other examples I have seen, I also still do not think that the way the design is rendered aligns with Sasano's #10, but perhaps some additional photos from different angles might help with this. The shape being being Kaku-gata is interesting, not something typically seen with Kagami-shi, but something that is common in Namban style Tsuba, as are squarish Seppa-dai and and flat faced rims.
 

On 12/3/2025 at 10:10 AM, Tim Evans said:

I think with the rise of the professional tsuba smiths in the Edo period, these rather naïve tsuba probably were no longer desirable.

Cast bronze Tsuba were definitely produced in the Edo period, they are usually pretty easy to spot because they follow Edo period trends and styles, some Namban Tsuba were also cast in bronze. 
 

On 12/3/2025 at 10:10 AM, Tim Evans said:

Does anyone have thoughts on the English descriptions? I find the dates a bit ambitious. 

The dates for Tsuba of this type are all over the place, there is a lot of "vibes" based dating for early Tsuba in general, not just in the Kagamishi book and Tosogu no Kigen, but many other publications. There is very little evidence to support how the date attributions are made. We are all guilty of accepting these at face value and a lot more research needs to be done in this area.

[Iekatsu]

On 12/2/2025 at 2:51 PM, Curran said:

I believe it was (i) cast, then (ii) polished, and (iii) worked by a ko-kinko style artisan. They definitely had a punch, though they were not 100% skilled in using it.

As in cast into water as a blank, like Ford demonstrated, or cast in a mold and then the design and details added by hand?

Edited 22 hours ago by Iekatsu

[Curran]

4 hours ago, Iekatsu said:

As in cast into water as a blank, like Ford demonstrated, or cast in a mold and then the design and details added by hand?

 

Given:    [1]  the height of the birds, the bridge, the treasure bag design elements on the front,

               [2]  the high sheen polish on all the design highpoints

               [3]  lack of evidence of any carving other that that achieved by the madman using the punch for the nanako

               [4]  the details on the birds, the bridge, the treasure bag, etc... were all finely done into the high sheen polish, probably at the end of production

 

My opinion was:   cast into a mold, endured some sort of super polishing, and the finishing details added by hand.

 

Yet... I've never seen another like it. So either it proved too labor intensive to do it this way, OR it is a one off by some ko-kinko worker.

I would add that the nanako puncher feels like a different person's work than whomever added the fine details to the birds, bridges, etc. Much gentler work.