The Kabuki Actor Ichikawa Danjûrô I

This series is a tribute to the various generations of the renowned Ichikawa Danjuro acting family or tradition, which dominated Edo kabuki theatres from the late 17th century onwards. It is tempting to date the commission of the first seven designs in this series to 1824, when exactly two full cycles of 60 years had passed since the death of the founder of the Ichikawa tradition, Ichikawa Danjuro I, on 19/II/1704. It is quite likely that the series was commissioned by Danjuro’s fan club or possibly even by Ichikawa Danjuro VII himself. Certainly, Danjuro VII had a great influence on the publication and may well have chosen the poets - all poets and writers of great fame - as well as the designer, Toyokuni (1769-1825), undoubtedly the foremost portraitist of actors for several decades at the time. Danjuro VII wrote the names of his ancestors on each of the prints in his own characteristic handwriting, adding a sign of his approval, kiwame, his name Sansho VII, shichidaime Sansho, and his seal: Yau (short for ‘Yauan’, one of his pen-names). The series was scheduled for publication in Bunsei 8 (1825) probably to be distributed at the beginning of the kyoka season in the second or third month, but the designer, Toyokuni, died unexpectedly on the 7th Day of the First Month of that year. His signature was therefore changed into ‘the late Toyokuni’, ko Toyokuni hitsu. Coincidentally, this confirms - as also becomes apparent from other examples (see the Introduction) - that it was, indeed, highly unlikely that surimono were issued on the 1st Day of the First Month. This series may well have been scheduled for release on the 19th Day of the Second Month, coinciding with a ceremony commemorating the late Danjuro I. It seems most likely that the issue was only meant for members of the Danjuro fan club - probably in a much smaller edition than would have been the case had a prestigious poetry club issued it. As for the printing, this series more resembles commercial prints with an occasional touch of luxury, such as the application of tsuyazuri.

Later, probably in 1832, when Ichikawa Ebizo VI was given the name Danjuro VIII - having acted as Ebizo VI from III/1825 until III/1832 - the Danjuro fan club decided to add one more design to the group, this time commissioned from Utagawa Toyokuni II (1777-1835), signing ‘Toyokuni II’, nidaime Toyokuni. This design was probably issued for the New Year of 1833 and represents the then ten-year-old Ichikawa Ebizo VI as the medicine seller, uirouri, in the play Sukeroku yoroku Edo sakura, performed at the Ichimura Theatre in Edo from III/1832.² Danjuro VII naturally also agreed with the design of the successor of his name, writing both his name and adding, as he had done before, his signature and sign of approval on the design.³;⁴;⁵;⁶ It is also possible that the complete series of previously issued designs was reprinted again, with the eighth design. A wrapper was apparently also issued at the time, with a text by Santoan Kyozan (1767-1858) and incorporating a poem by Toyokuni II (see Ukiyoe New Collection News (22), 47, Kyoto: Art Shop Ezoshi; Shichidaime Danjuro to Kunisada, Kuniyoshi - Shibai, nishikie, Nakasendo, Gifuken Hakubutsukan 2001, 1).

Sometime later - though probably still in the early 1830s and before Toyokuni II died on 1/XI/1835 - the Gogawa poetry club wanted to reissue the set, now comprising eight designs. This was quite surprising, as the Gogawa had never actively published series of surimono, certainly not during the late 1820s and early 1830s, focusing instead on kyoka albums. However, the Danjuro fan club, or maybe even Danjuro VII himself, did not agree with a straightforward reissue of the set. An agreement must have been reached, because the Gogawa came to possess the original blocks and proceed anyway.

All the designs were reprinted from the original blocks, now with metal pigments, as an edition Issued by the Gogawa, its emblem figuring as a repeated motif on the border. It seems quite likely that metal pigments were used on this reissue at the explicit request of members of the poetry club, who, quite understandably, had a different conception of surimono than members of Danjuro fan club. Moreover, this reissue has several more changes, possibly resulting from the agreement. All the poems were replaced with new ones by members of the Gogawa, and Danjuro VII’s approval was omitted. Another modification was that the signature was changed into the simple ‘Toyokuni hitsu’, omitting the prefix ko on the first seven designs and the prefix nidaime on the last design in the group (two copies of the Gogawa reissue of the print of Danjuro VIII are in the collection of the National Museum of Ethnology, Leiden, 1327-168 and 1353-1453). This was probably a considerably larger edition than the original one.

Further evidence for this order in the two issues of the series can be found in the fame of the poets involved. Comparing the poets represented on the first Danjuro fan-club edition with those on the Gogawa reissue clearly shows that those on the latter edition were definitely less famous than those selected for the Danjuro edition, Rokudaen Futaba, a judge of the Gogawa, probably being the most well known:

Ichikawa Danjuro I: [Yomo Utagaki] Kyokado [Magao, 1753-1829]⁷ - with Rokujuen undoubtedly the most renowned kyoka poet of the day]; Gogawa edition with a poem by Kaigairo Kudazumi.

Danjuro II: Rokujuen [Yadoya no Meshimori, 1753-1830]⁸ - see comments under Kyokado above]; Gogawa edition with a poem by Ryueishi [Itonaga].⁹

Danjuro III: Kyokutei Chinjin [better known as the famous novelist Takizawa Bakin, 1767-1848]¹⁰ - author of numerous bestsellers in the early 19th century)]; Gogawa edition with a poem by ?gairo?(?).

Danjuro IV: Shinratei Manzo [II, 1763-183]¹¹; Gogawa edition with a poem by ? Nakanushi.

Danjuro V: Sakuragawa Jihinari [I, 1761-1837?]¹² - a long-standing friend of Danjuro VII; Gogawa edition with a poem by Ryokujuen.

Danjuro VI: a haiku by [Ryutei] Tanehiko [1783-1842]¹³ - the bestselling writer of the day; Gogawa edition with a poem by Mantei (II).

Danjuro VII: a haiku by Danjuro VII [1791-1859]¹⁴; Gogawa edition with a poem by Rokudaen Futaba [d. 1858]¹⁵ - judge of the Gogawa.

Danjuro VIII: a haiku by [Utagawa] Toyokuni II [1777-1835]¹⁶; Gogawa edition with a poem by Hachibaen.

It should be noted, however, that there are several other theories as well. Ward¹⁷, Bowie¹⁸, Kruml¹⁹ and several others mistakenly reverse the order, i.e., the edition with the Gogawa emblem precedes the one without its emblem. Bowie and, after him, Schmidt & Kuwabara²⁰, even suggest that the state without the Gogawa emblem consists of faithful copies - not reprints - after the originals, made by Toyokuni II. They then suggest a date of c. 1820/1821 for the Gogawa issue and ‘some time after Toyokuni’s death in 1825’ (Bowie), ‘late 1820s’ (Ward) or ‘c. 1830’ (Kruml) for the reissue. Krumls adopts the date of c. 1830 for the reissue to coincide with the addition of an eighth design, whereas Bowie dates this design to ‘around 1832’. It is therefore remarkable that Kruml accepts the reissue of the design featuring Danjuro VII, while denying the existence of an original Gogawa issue. Of course, none of this explains why Danjuro only added his sign of approval to the reprint edition. It does not explain why the poets in the ‘first’ edition were all minor poets, whereas those on the ‘reprint’ were the leading poets of the day, including Danjuro VII. Nor does it account for the fact that the reprint of ‘the late 1820s/ c. 1830’ would suddenly be signed ‘the late’ Toyokuni, unless it refers to Toyokuni II, and that the series should actually be considered to have been issued even after 1835.

Also, it ignores a considerable break in the block in the Gogawa issue of the print of Danjuro II - just above the fifth line of the poetry - which has been filled in with ink in most copies seen. This break should, however, easily serve as definite proof of the sequence of the two issues.

More recently, Japanese scholars have started showing an interest in surimono, including the series of prints discussed here. According to Sato Satoru, the first group of seven prints was first issued in 1828 on the occasion of the Sukeroku performance in which Danjuro VII is represented. This, of course, is as plausible as any valid theory, but it does not account for the fact that the printing quality does not conform to the sumptuousness of the late 1820s. Another more recent theory proposed by Asano Shugo assumes that Toyokuni designed the first group during his lifetime.²¹ However, the blocks for his design were cut and the prints issued only much later, in 1832, the reissue appearing circa 1833. Again, the printing quality does not correspond with what we might expect in the early 1830s. Moreover, this date is also quite unlikely in view of the dates of several of the poets - Yomo Utagaki Magao died in 1829, Rokujuen in 1830 and Shinratei Manzo in 1831. This would mean that the publication of seven Toyokuni designs as well as the publication of poems by at least three of the poets were postponed until well after their deaths - posing a severe threat to our principles of dating.

References to copies of the reprinted edition are included in the discussion of each design.