Introduction

What Meizan did excel at, however, was establishing a strategic artistic direction for the studio. He developed designs of high aesthetic quality that resonated strongly with Western tastes, rather than following the trend of commercially driven ceramics of the time. He quickly proved himself not only a gifted designer but also a shrewd entrepreneur. As the studio expanded rapidly, in 1888 he relocated to Dōjima in Osaka and begin selling directly to foreign clients.

A key factor in his success was his partnership with Yoichiro Hirase, a Christian dealer in Satsuma ware with ties to American Board missionaries. Hirase’s values of honesty and sincerity aligned with Meizan’s own, and their collaboration opened new international channels for high-end Satsuma ware—beyond the traditional framework of exhibitions. Meizan himself converted to Christianity and deliberately sought a partner who embodied trust, transparency, and global reach.

In 1895, Meizan adopted Tsuneo, born into the Nakanishi family in Tsuyama, as his heir. Tsuneo inherited both the Yabu family name and the studio, becoming Yabu Tsuneo. It is likely that, as successor-in-training, Tsuneo played a role in both the artistic and commercial sides of the studio. Meizan’s early acclaim allowed him to pursue broader ambitions, and his biography includes an impressive list of national and international exhibitions where he served as promoter, advisor, or committee member. Meizan was a key figure in Osaka’s industrial, educational, and cultural development during the Meiji era, and his frequent travels made shared leadership of the studio a practical necessity.

Meizan drew inspiration from copperplate engravings sold to tourists in Kyoto and Osaka, and he experimented with copperplate transfer techniques to reproduce designs quickly and consistently. This allowed him to repeat floral and ornamental motifs with remarkable precision, creating a sense of visual balance reminiscent of European wallpaper design.

As previously noted, Tomoko Nakano has argued that Yabu Meizan may not have possessed the technical skills required to execute overglaze decorations himself. Nonetheless, Yabu Meizan fully deserves recognition as the artistic director and innovator behind the studio’s output. The creations produced under his leadership represent some of the finest achievements in the history of Satsuma ware, reflecting a rare blend of technical mastery, cultural depth, and international appeal. More than a studio, the Yabu Meizan workshop became a center of artistic innovation that embodied the spirit of the Meiji era. He retired in 1926, passing the studio to Yabu Tsuneo, and died on May 2, 1934. His funeral was held at the Naniwa Church in Osaka.

Marks and Seals

The article Satsuma Yaki and the Satsuma Pottery Dealer Hirase Yoichiro (Osaka Historical Museum) highlights Yabu Meizan as a smart entrepreneur. From the outset, his studio was envisioned as a high-end brand that fused artistic excellence with strategic branding and commercial foresight, where corporate identity played a crucial role and a consistent signature can help to establish this.  The name “Yabu Meizan” became synonymous with quality Satsuma ware, marked by consistent stylistic traits and a limited set of signatures: “Yabu Meizan” in a cartouche, “Meizan sei” in a cartouche, and “Meizan” alone. The last one however was only used by his successor Yabi Tsuneo.  Most distinctive is the rendering of the left radical in the kanji 明 as a circle with a dot—except for one known exception, which, as Louis Lawrence notes, was reserved for works of exceptional quality. 

Yabu Tsuneo (藪恒夫,1868–1941) or Meizan II (明山二代)

Heir to the Meizan Legacy

We believe that Yabu Tsuneo, upon taking on the title of Meizan II, made a genuine effort to revive production at the Meizan Studio after a long period of inactivity. Unfortunately, this renewed attempt was quickly overshadowed by the economic downturn of the Great Depression and the rising tensions of an approaching war—circumstances that posed serious challenges for any ceramic workshop. The closure of the much larger Kinkozan Studio in 1932 clearly illustrates the broader difficulties of the time.

In that context, comparing Yabu Meizan and Yabu Tsuneo directly isn’t easy—and perhaps not entirely fair. Meizan founded the studio and developed its artistic identity during the vibrant Meiji era, a time of cultural growth and international recognition. Tsuneo, by contrast, inherited a studio whose production had already ceased, and was tasked with its leadership during a time defined by socio-economic constraints and looming conflict.

Although history has understandably placed Tsuneo in the shadow of his illustrious predecessor, he remains a vital part of the Meizan Studio’s legacy and deserves greater recognition within its historical narrative. For that reason, his role is emphasized here more explicitly than is typically the case in reviews of the Meizan Studio.

Marks and Seals

It is highly unlikely that Tsuneo signed works as 'Meizan' before 1926, as 'Meizan' was the gō (art name) of Yabu Meizan, adopted in line with iemoto traditions. Tsuneo was only recognized as the second-generation Yabu Meizan in 1926 and was not authorized to use the name earlier. Notably, he never signed as 'Yabu Meizan II,' but simply as 'Meizan,' likely to capitalize on the brand’s prestige while downplaying the shift in leadership.

The question arises whether Yabu Meizan used the simple 'Meizan' mark during the founding years of his studio, prior to adopting the 'Yabu Meizan' seal. The two vases with raised gold decoration above bear the 'Meizan' signature attributed to Tsuneo, yet stylistically they could date to 1880–1888, before the studio relocated to Dōjima, Osaka. As no comparable early works are known, we currently believe Tsuneo experimented with several outdated styles to revive Meizan Studio production from 1926 onward, and therefore the specific 'Meizan' mark should be attributed to Yabu Tsuneo.

Closing Remarks and Discussion

When reading the above, it’s important to keep a few considerations in mind. Much of the information is drawn from the work of Nakano Tomoko, who has conducted extensive research on Yabu Meizan over many years and is one of the few scholars to use direct historical sources, including family archives and Tsuneo’s own notes on his father’s life. However, historical sources are often fragmentary and require personal interpretation. Several points warrant further clarification, especially given the limited availability of information on Yabu Meizan and his studio—particularly studies based on contemporary documentation. The following section addresses some of these issues that call for deeper discussion.

The artist Yabu Meizan

For decades, the Meizan Studio produced some of the finest Satsuma ceramics imaginable. Each artisan had a distinct role: master decorators rendered exquisite designs on surfaces barely a few square centimeters wide, while junior painters or apprentices focused on coloring or applying transfers. At the center stood Yabu Meizan himself, guiding the studio as art director, pioneering new decorative styles through copperplate etching, and establishing a network of international buyers—transforming Satsuma ceramics into a global art form.

The entrepreneur Yabu Meizan

Yabu Meizan was not only a true artist but also a shrewd entrepreneur. He skillfully leveraged the economic opportunities of the Meiji era without resorting to mass production. His commercial instincts even preceded his interest in ceramics—he began studying commerce in 1868 and was actively involved in business, as noted in both the Meizan Record and Business Summary. Though the nature of his early ventures remains unclear, he was likely a rice merchant and later held numerous advisory roles in industrial organizations, earning significant recognition.

In 1880, Meizan turned to ceramic painting and soon established his own studio. His strategic mindset was evident in the location of his workshops—first in Nakanoshima, then Dojima—chosen for their proximity to waterways and train stations. A master networker, he combined high-quality craftsmanship with sharp business acumen. His partnership with Yoichiro Hirase opened doors to international markets, and his organizational talent made him a key figure in national and global exhibitions. In doing so, he contributed significantly to the dissemination of Japanese art and culture—an important objective of the Meiji government. His efforts garnered considerable recognition and elevated his public profile, culminating in 1895 with the distinguished honor of a personal audience with Emperor Meiji during the latter’s visit to an exposition.

Yabu Meizan was, in many respects, a pioneer of his time. He ran his Satsuma workshop not merely as a traditional artisan, but as a true art producer—combining exceptional craftsmanship with a sharp focus on business and operational strategy. This dual approach directly influenced the quality and innovation of his work. He introduced new production techniques, such as specially developed copper plates for applying decorations onto glaze. These innovations enhanced quality control, enabled greater precision and standardization, and strengthened the studio’s operational stability. They also paved the way for intricate new styles, including the celebrated millefleur decoration.

Remarks on the production and continuity of the Meizan Studio

Literature suggests that production at the Yabu Meizan Studio came to a halt in the early Taishō period. From that point on, sales were made exclusively from existing stock—a situation that lasted until Tsuneo’s death in 1941. This is supported by a 2005 bulletin from the Osaka Museum of History, which notes: “Production at Meizan’s studio was coming to its end after the Japan-British exhibition held in London in 1910.” An interview with Meizan in The Studio (1910) further confirms this, stating: “He is a little over sixty and does not work so much at the present.” These sources reinforce the view that output had already declined by the early Taishō years. Yabu was a businessman who understood the economic realities of his time. He recognized that producing and retaining staff without sufficient demand was unsustainable—a reasonable assumption, all things considered.

However, this raises questions. It seems unlikely that the studio’s inventory was large enough to sustain operations for over two decades. If expert conclusions are accurate, we must consider what this implies—particularly how income may have been generated during that prolonged period of apparent inactivity.  

Several possibilities may explain the studio’s prolonged activity. One is that it held a substantial inventory. While Meizan’s workshop was much smaller than Kinkozan’s—whose grandson cited an annual output of 400,000 pieces—a sizeable stock is plausible. Nakano suggests that production under the “Yabu Meizan” name may have extended beyond Meizan’s own studio, with some works outsourced to Kinkozan’s Kyoto ateliers, which supplied blanks and employed skilled decorators.

Another possibility concerns Nakano’s use of the term 完成品 (“finished product”), which refers to a completed item ready for sale but does not indicate its origin. This opens the possibility that Meizan sold not only his own work but also pieces made by other producers, potentially on commission and not necessarily signed by him.

Finally, it is likely that Yabu Meizan had additional sources of income. Throughout his life, he was active in various commercial, industrial, and cultural ventures—some officially registered at his residence. He was also a sought-after advisor, and records show he continued receiving honors into the 1920s and 1930s, including invitations to present his work to Japanese and foreign royalty, some of whom became his patrons.

This offers little clarity on how Yabu Tsuneo managed to keep the studio open during the economically difficult years leading up to World War II. Although he attempted to restart production, the small number of known works suggests output was limited—likely only in the early years after Meizan’s retirement. The studio’s reputation was largely tied to Yabu Meizan himself, and Tsuneo is not known to have had the same network, advisory roles, or honors that his predecessor enjoyed and may have capitalized on. Nakano emphasizes that after Tsuneo’s death, both Yabu Meizan—once a celebrated figure in prewar Osaka—and the ‘Yabu Meizan’ brand largely faded from memory in Japan. It was not until 1991, through the efforts of his descendants, that his legacy was rediscovered and regained prominence through major exhibitions.

Notes on the studio’s signature marks

Conclusion

The legacy of Yabu Meizan and the continuity of his studio under Tsuneo raise complex questions that remain partially unresolved due to the fragmentary nature of historical sources. While Meizan’s role as a visionary designer and strategic entrepreneur is well established, the exact dynamics of production, authorship, and studio operations—particularly in its later years—invite further scrutiny. The possibility of extended inventory sales, outsourced production, and alternative income streams offers plausible explanations for the studio’s longevity, yet lacks definitive evidence. Similarly, the evolution of Meizan’s signature—from the early, possibly plain 'Meizan' mark to the later gold seals—adds another layer of ambiguity, especially in light of Tsuneo’s use of the original mark.

While not all questions can be answered, there is ample evidence to confirm that the history of the Meizan Studio is remarkably compelling. It captures both the brilliance and the ambiguity of a transitional era in Japanese ceramic art—from the Meiji to the early Shōwa period—an age shaped by innovation, commerce, and the enduring mystery of artistic identity. The studio’s masterpieces were conceived by an exceptionally talented and celebrated designer, yet brought to life by anonymous artisans whose collective craftsmanship resulted in works of extraordinary beauty that are still admired and collected by many today.

Main references:

Nakano Tomoko: “Ceramic Painter” Yabu Meizan and His Artistic Practice: A Preliminary Study on the Transfer Technique Using Copper Plates for Underdrawings- Osaka Museum of History Research Bulletin Volume 19, Pages 19-38, March 2021

Nakano Tomoko: Yabu Meizan in March 1880 -  Osaka Museum of History Research Bulletin Volume 23, Pages 27-42, March 2025

Nakano Tomoko: Yabu Masashichi / Meizan Personal Record  - Osaka Museum of History Research Bulletin Volume 17, Pages 61-72, March 2019

Nakano Tomoko: Yabu Meizan and  the Distinguished Satsuma Ware Dealer Yoichiro Hirase - Osaka Museum of History Research Bulletin Volume 20,  pages 1-19,  March 2022

Yoshie Itani: The Design Philosophy of Yabu Meizan: Landscapes of Western Japan in Copperplate - The Journal of the Conference of Design History and Theory, paper/ 2019, 8, p. 72-78

Yoshie Itani: The Glorious World of Yabu Meizan : Comparing the Heisei Memorial Art Gallery and Khalili Collections - The Journal of the Asian Conference of Design History and Theory, paper/ 2022, 4, p. 32-40 

Louis Lawrence: Satsuma: The Romance of Japan - Meiji Satsuma Publications 2011

Oliver Impey, Malcolm Fairley: Treasures of Imperial Japan. Ceramics from the Khalili Collection, Kibo Foudation 1994

Kinkozan Kazuo: New Discoveries & Insights on Osaka Satsuma: Yabu Meizan -Awata-yaki & Kyoto Satsuma Blog 16-04-2021