nanban

[peter]

Hello gents.

I have only 2 tsuba which i chose 'carefully' or more that they caught my eye and atracted me. The reason for this thread is to ask what is Nanban, and why is it not held in the same regard as other tsuba although on some i have seen have taken a craftman clearly as long to do as other Tsuba held in higher regard ? :

[John A Stuart]

Hi Peter, I moved this to the appropriate section. A couple of reasons, 'some' may prefer other tsuba is; foreign context to Japan and the craftmanship. John

[peter]

Sorry John for posting in the wrong place. Could you paste a link to where you moved it for convenience of others?

Many thanks

[John A Stuart]

I'm sure the audience you wish to address re; namban tsuba, shall not fail to see it. John

[Soshin]

Dear Peter C.,

 

The term Namban is a generic term used by the Japanese in pre modern times to label anything coming from foreign lands outside of Japan. Term literally means "southern barbarian" in Japanese. For example a pre-modern term for the Christian Church in Japan was "Namban-Ji". Another term sometime used was "Namban-tetsu" foreign iron used to make Hizen Nihonto as well as some Namban other types of tsuba. I remember a Shoami tsuba with the inscription saying it was made with Namban-tetsu. Hope this additional information is helpful. I love Namban tsuba and after read a few passed issue of NBTHK monthly magazine freaturing fine Namban tsuba I can say there are many fine ones just like any other school.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[Gunome]

Hello,

 

Some Nanban are well done as this example :

 

[peter]

Thank you all for replys.

I have seen that tsuba before 100 monkeys i think? But i didn't know it was Nanban. How can one tell Nanban, as a newby to tsuba i thought they where quite different and came in openwork. Can a Nanban tsuba be atributed to a perticular school?

PETER

[docliss]

Sebastien’s tsuba is indeed very fine, but this raises the recurring question regarding the nomenclature of tsuba as ‘Namban’. This tsuba, of which only the ura side is illustrated, is inscribed SENTOKU KANE WO MOTTE SAKU KORE (Made with sentoku kane). Doubtless the omote side is signed by Noda Mitsuhiro (H 05200.0 – H 5202.0), one of three artists of this name, working in Yagami in the Hizen province between the second halves of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

 

This tsuba I would therefore label not as Namban but as Yagami (or Mitsuhiro) work.

 

In reply to Peter’s enquiry, it is my personal conviction that the Namban label should only be attached to tsuba demonstrating the openwork and undercutting typical of the group. Where possible, other tsuba should be labelled according to their own school characteristics and noted as ‘demonstrating a namban influence’

 

John L.

[Soshin]

This tsuba I would therefore label not as Namban but as Yagami (or Mitsuhiro) work.

 

In reply to Peter’s enquiry, it is my personal conviction that the Namban label should only be attached to tsuba demonstrating the openwork and undercutting typical of the group. Where possible, other tsuba should be labelled according to their own school characteristics and noted as ‘demonstrating a namban influence’

 

John L.

 

Hi Peter,

 

Keep in mind that some groups like the NBTHK often group the works of the Yagami school of Hizen into the large group of Namban tsuba even when they can give a tsuba made by that group a more specific attribution. I think Namban is a broad classification not a specific one when it comes to tsuba. This is just my opinion.

 

 

 

Yours truly,

David Stiles

[Gunome]

This tsuba, of which only the ura side is illustrated, is inscribed SENTOKU KANE WO MOTTE SAKU KORE (Made with sentoku kane). Doubtless the omote side is signed by Noda Mitsuhiro (H 05200.0 – H 5202.0), one of three artists of this name, working in Yagami in the Hizen province between the second halves of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

 

You are right, the omote side is signed Hizen Yagami no ju Mitsuhiro

For my understanding, Nanban is more a style than a school.

 

Sebastien

[Peter Bleed]

Please allow me to mention as a part of this thread that I just published an article in the summer 2012 issue of "Man At Arms" on biloded or auriculate Namban tsuba. It is entitled "Small-swords in Japan?" Man at Arms may not be on the radar of most Japanese collectors, but I wanted to discuss the relationship between European small-swords and Namban guards because I think we should encourage broad interest. In my opinion, "Namban" is a mish-mash of exotic objects and motifs 1) that some 18th century Japanese sword wearers found interestingly decorative, and 2) that fittings makers could add to their merchandise.

Peter

[mdiddy]

Peter Bleed,

 

Is your article available online? I myself am curious if Namban tsuba are more of Chinese origin, Dutch origin, or both. I particularly like the examples with VOC logo which I think were previously discussed in a former thread...

 

Matt

[Brian]

Dr John L. literally wrote the book on Namban tsuba, so together with Prof Bleed, I think we are in very capable hands with Namban info here.

 

Brian

[peter]

great information Gents, these are the tsuba that has sparked my interest in the Nanban work so hopefully i will get some help as to who when and where on them,

thanks a lot

Peter

[Ron STL]

So-called Namban tsuba have gotten my interest since my as Peter can attest to. (I need to find a copy of Man at Arms and read the article!) A couple years ago I bought a new form of Namban work that was new to me. Then another example was purchased and internet searching put me into contact with an Australia collector who actually collected these. The style of tsuba is called "kagonami," according to what was learned. I'll attach a couple photos of these. I ended up writing an article about kagonami tsuba which appeared in the September 2010 JSS/US Newsletter. It was interesting to realize that Nagasaki was the only entry into Japan for foreigners in the mid-1500s and that was where the Namban (foreign things) were introduced into Japan. I'm sure Peter's article covers all of this quite thoroughly.

 

Ron H.

[docliss]

This may be an opportunity to study Sebastian’s Mitsuhiro tsuba in more detail.

 

The detail of the ubu-zukashi is remarkable and, among other images, one can distinguish the three sambu-naru – monkeys that could speak, hear and see no evil – and a pair playing the game of strength known as kubi-kubi.

 

The attribution to sentoku is an interesting one. There are several tsuba of this type that have had the kanji for sentoku defaced, and one wonders at the reason for this. Sentoku was a valuable metal, the use of which was, at one time, confined to coinage – a fact that may explain this defacement.

 

Haynes, on p.1059 of his Index…, states that ‘it is sometimes difficult to separate the work [of the three generations], although one can learn the differences in their signatures.’ On pp.18-21, Vol.3, No1 of Bushido, Robert Burawoy further discusses some identifying characteristics in the tsuba of the three Mitsuhiro generations. He suggests the following pointers:

 

• The work of Mitsuhiro I is signed HISHU YAGAMI (NO)JU MITSUHIRO. The quality of the work is rather poor, and the mimi comprises repetitive, identical figures.

• That of the second master is signed HIZEN YAGAMI (NO)JU ….This is the work of a very skilled artist, and the mimi comprises a non-repetitive variety of figures.

• Like the first master, Mitsuhiro III signed HISHU YAGAMI (NO)JU …. His work is not a skilled as that of the second master, but his mimi are also of non-repetitive and varying figures.

 

Sebastrian’s tsuba is, in fact, inscribed HISHU YAGAMI (NO)JU and has a mimi of continuous, identical figures, thus suggesting an attribution to Mitsuhiro I. The marked left curvature of the second and third vertical strokes of the ‘shū’ kanji of Hishū further support this attribution.

John L.

[Curran]

Don't forget the monkey at 2 pm position carrying the banner.

Always one of them worked into the better pieces. I forget the significance.

 

Nice example of Mitsuhiro. As the Doctor hints, the Bushido article is one of the best on these tsubako.

 

___________________________________________________________________________________

 

As to Namban, there is a Japanese paperback book on them. Not incredibly informative. You'd do as well or better to read Dr. L's book or Peter Bleeds writing on them.

Many many are of low quality manufacture. Some are not. In the past 10 years I have seen many less of the higher end ones. Like WW2 swords, the good ones seem to be getting more respect during the last decade.

[docliss]

Peter’s two tsuba are both archetypal examples of the Nanban group, exhibiting as they do many of the defining characteristics of that group. The design of these two tsuba, with their affrontés dragons; the tama jewel; the crescentic-shaped ryō-hitsu; and the seigaiha diaper on the seppa-dai, is a very common one. But variations in the quality of these, with or without the ryō-hitsu, and with either nunome-zōgan, mercury fire-gilding or none at all, suggests a single maker or group of makers where customers could select – or even order – their requirement from a range of alternatives. They were made in Japan in the late C18 or early C19, inspired by guards imported from China in the late C16.

 

Ron’s two tsuba are very interesting and unusual. They are both Hizen tsuba, their chaotic, baroque design being copied from C17, Portuguese tooled and worked leather. Such intricate nunome-zōgan decoration is a feature of Hizen work. Such an origin probably merits a specific nomenclature, but

Kagonami …?

 

The term ‘Kagonami’ is found in a number of publications – (Hayashi (1894), Mène (1913), Joly (1914), Ponçetton (1929), Martin (1964) and Haynes (1984), to name but a few – but none of these succeeds in giving a clear definition of this group, the only agreement being that they are asymmetrical!

 

What are Ron’s defining s characteristics of a Kagonami tsuba, I wonder?

 

John L.

[peter]

Thank you John .

Although I will haveto look up some of the terms you used in your discription that's a great help. I like my tsubas a lot only the 3 and. 4 in my new interest . I think I posted my 'teapot ' tsuba on the board a while back.

Peter

[Gunome]

Hello,

 

A nice tsuba, unfortunatly not mine

These are the only pics I got from it. Nevertheless these close up allow to see the detail.

Please clic on photo to enlarge it and enjoy.

 

Sébastien

[Ron STL]

Hi John -

 

You asked what my defining characterists were for kagonami tsuba. Most of my information came from “Tsuba, an Aesthetic Study” by Kazuatro Torigoye and Robert E. Haynes, page 239, under Kyūshū District (Hizen). The first paragraph reads, “A type of tsuba to be seen to this day in great quantities was originally made in this area. They are known collectively as Namban tsuba, but this is too broad a term and includes several different types. It is better to divide this single category into sub-categories: Namban, Kanton and Kagonami design styles.”

 

I then wrote that if my understanding was corrected, true Namban tsuba were made outside of Japan and brought into the country by the Portuguese, Dutch, Chinese and Korean. Kanton tsuba on the other hand, were actually made in Japan and copied early Namban (Chinese) works. They are typically of a very symmetrical design. The third sub-category, Kagonami, had a dote-mimi (raised, flattened rims) and instead of having symmetrical motif, they are made asymmetrical, with a more scattered and very busy look to them (as seen in by the tsuba illustrated here). I had to job my memory about all this but it does seem to make sense to have these three sub-categories.

 

Ron H.

[docliss]

Dear Ron

 

The deeper one delves into the subject of Kagonami tsuba the more confused one becomes. The Hayashi (1894), Mène (1913) and Ponçetton (1929) catalogues all include illustrations of ‘Kagonami’ tsuba, but these are openwork tsuba, and most are indistinguishable from those that we now label as ‘Namban’ apart, in some cases, from their complexity.

 

Haynes’ translation of TAS is equally confusing, but I understand it to imply that tsuba of the Namban group originating in China in the C16 should be labelled as ‘true Namban’; copies of these made in Japan in the C18-C19 as ‘Kanton’; and all other locally made tsuba demonstrating a European influence as ‘Kagonami’.

 

He further confuses this in his sale catalogue #9 (1984), where he states ‘To be a true Namban tsuba, it must have the design motif taken from European design or style. The others are Kanton (Chinese style) or Kagonami (Japanese copies of the original Canton tsuba)’, thus reinforcing the impression given by the earlier collectors.

 

Do you see my problem? If you accept the statement in JAS, then your tsuba may indeed be labelled as Kagonami, along with numerous others demonstrating a European influence. But it is far from clear, and I still prefer to call them Hizen.

 

Kind regards, John L.

[Ron STL]

Hi John - This is a confusing area and I agree, Hizen is a safe call. When I first researched this tsuba I went to Fukunaga’s 2-volume set of books, “Hizen no Katana to tsuba," one volume showing tsuba. I was surprised to find an almost identical tsuba as mine signed by a Chinese maker working in Nagasaki. This started my search for more information. I think today, most collectors will call these kind of things Hizen with namban influence. Whether this is correct or not, it gives an accurate tag to the tsuba. Maybe we all try to get too specific in labeling our study pieces when in reality, a lot of it remains simply educated guess-work. Whatever it takes to keep us happy, I say.

 

Ron H.

[docliss]

That is interesting. The MFA in Boston also has a Namban tsuba (#19.291) signed by a Chinese worker - Ch'ang Lo-chiao - working in Nanking. John L.

[christianmalterre]

John,

 

is there an picture available?

(P.M. or Board..)

had an look but can not find it...

 

Christian

[docliss]

Christian, unfortunately the MFA catalogue is very difficult to scan due to its weight and size. The tsuba in question is #354, on pp.354-5. Is that any help? John L.

[christianmalterre]

Unfortunately i do not have this catalogue John.

Saw it in past-did but not think so to need it-which finally(like such ofthen) certainly is(was) an error-minding..!

I would ben glad if you could send me an scan or picture anyways-no need so to be in best quality...!

Just want to see...

 

Christian

[Brian]

Could always try a photograph if scanning is a problem.

 

Brian

[docliss]

Attached is a scan from the MFA web site. John L.

[christianmalterre]

Hmmmh?

IT looks... "Difficile"... here...LOL!

Indeed!... difficile...-Laugh!

(Thank You!) :D

 

Christian