![](http://varshavskycollection.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/kamakura-butterfield-66-392x400.jpeg)
Butterfield & Butterfield, 1979. Sale # 3063, lot № 66.
Butterfield & Butterfield, 1979. Sale # 3063, lot № 66.
Iron tsuba of oval form with a shakudō fukurin and rough surface decorated by low relief carving and brass inlay with a centipede emerging from under the rock on both sides.
Edo period.Size: 78.9 x 73.6 x 3.8 mm
Unsigned. However, this tsuba may be (though with reservation) attributed to Misumi Kōji school. There is some information regarding this master(s) in Tsuba. An aesthetic study by Kazutaro Torigoye and Robert E. Haynes (from the Tsuba Geijutsu-kō of Kazataro Torigoye. Edited and published by Alan L. Harvie for the Nothern California Japanese Sword Club, 1994-1997) on pages 163-4, though I was not able to locate the tsuba in the original publication. Possibly, this fragment of the book was added by Robert Haynes. Markus Sesko speculates about Misumi in his The Japanese toso-kinko Schools.// Lulu Inc., 2012 on pages 374-5: "Misumi Kōjo Tsuba. Iron plate, elliptical shape, shakudō takabori suemon, yamagane fukurin. Centipede." But of course, visual similarity does not prove anything. I was not able to find any traces of signature or a triangle on the seppa-dai.Misumi Kōji Tsuba on p. 163.
Iron tsuba of circular form with design of pine trees (matsu) and monkey toys (kukurizaru) in openwork (ko-sukashi). Ko-Katchushi school.
Raised rim (mimi) with iron bones (tekkotsu). Size: Diameter: 99.5 mm; Thickness: 2.1 mm at centre; 4.3 mm at the rim.Early Muromachi period: 15th century (Kakitsu - Bun'an era, 1441 - 1449).
![]() Kiri-mon |
![]() Katakura-mon |
TSU-0353: Tōshō tsuba, Muromachi period.
A kamakura-bori tsuba. Momoyama period. Freeman & Sharpe Memorial Collections.
Tsuba of oval form decorated with clematis six-petal flowers, tendrils, and leaves in cast brass with details carved in kebori, inlaid on iron plate carved in low relief (kebori and sukidashi-bori). Hitsu-ana plugged with shakudō. Copper sekigane.
Heianjō (or Ōnin) school. Unsigned. Mid Muromachi period (1454-1513). Dimensions: 87.2 x 84.3 x 4.3 mm. Tsuba is illustrated and described in Gary D. Murtha's "Onin-Heianjo-Yoshiro" book on pages 38-39. Mid-Muromachi is the age attribution by Gary. “A picture book of Japanese sword guards. Victoria & Albert Museum“, published in 1927 presents us with a somewhat similar tsuba: "Floral ornament. Iron, with brass incrustation". V&A attributes the tsuba to Ōnin style, 16th century.Iron tsuba with chrysanthemum design in openwork (sukashi). Copper sekigane.
Late Heian through Kamakura period (ca. 1150 - 1200's).
Size: 78.4 x 60.9 x 3.5 mm; weight: 45.7 g
Provenance: Boris Markhasin Message from Boris Markhasin (13-AUG-2019): It is a very rudimentary tachi tsuba, and the iron is old and really nothing to draw attention. However, this is a very old tsuba, and that is what makes it very special and an important study piece. This tsuba likely dates to the late Heian through Kamakura (ca. 1150 - 1200's) -- by consensus, since such examples are extremely rare, and none are mounted to my knowledge, so few direct analogues. The form is interesting for a variety of reasons. The smaller size, an oval form is associated more with 12th/13th c styles. The sukashi kiku motif is very interesting as it clearly pushes back the dating of large scale sukashi far back in time. This shouldn't be surprising, but for some reason, we (really mainly westerners) naively tend to associate sukashi with the Muromachi and younger. The two missing spokes are by consensus likely later removals to accommodate kozuka and kogai -- but this is not certain, and it could be an original styling. A key kantei point is the elongate, narrow, slightly squared seppa dai. This is a characteristic of early koshirae, which were much thinner and more delicate than the types we are used to seeing that date pretty much to the late Muromachi and later. I am always amazed when I have a chance to interrogate early koshirae at how thin they are - I want to call them fragile, but they were actually quite resilient. The walls were super thin, but the top and bottom edges were a bit thicker, providing a bit of structural support... but this is another thread topic. Of all the tsuba I have owned, this is the tsuba that has most clearly reflected the shape of the old style of saya / tsuka.