Chinese forgeries?

[george trotter]

Hi all,

A matter regarding Chinese forged blades arose in Morita san's thread ""Pic of Miyamoto Kanenori" page 3

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12812&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=30

The matter concerned a shinsa panel determining that a 1892 dated blade signed by Kanenori was a Chinese gimei based on the strangeness of the mei inscription (including the odd untranslatable kanji) and also the workmanship was considered inferior to Kanenori's known works.

 

I note this shinsa "Chinese" comment because I also had similar comment from the 2011 Sydney shinsa panel...I showed them pics of my blade by unknown gendai smith "Seisui". They said that the style of writing (reisho script) and the anomaly in the date which is Showa 19 year 12th kichi sho jitsu ie. 12th lucky propitious day of 1944...Jan 12th (or was the month left out making it really 12th month of 1944) tended them to consider it might be signed by a Chinese....please see pics of mei and date.

 

I raise this because nmb members I showed pics to had no problems reading the mei and apart from "Seisui" being a gago, the inscription is pretty normal.

Regarding reisho script I add that it is reasonably common in late Edo period meis (see Sokan) and when I pointed it out they said, oh yes...hmmmm...and left the matter hanging. Later correspondence remained with no real outcome. I emphasise that the comment was based solely on pics of mei/date. Fittings are Type 3 private order.

While I pointed to Sokan for the script, for the date anomaly I point to a number in Slough oshigata:

p.132 Takahashi Nobuhide...Showa 3 nen Gappi (gatsu hi...a day in a month in Sho 3).

p.20 Igarashi Akimitsu...Sho 17 Seimei getsu hi (Aug 15).

p.55 Niwa Kanenobu...ShoSho 17 Chushu (mid autumn).

p.157 Wakabayashi Shigefusa Sho 14 nen kichi nichi (lucky day in 1939).

I also recall Chris B mentioned an unusual date on a RJT blade as the smith left out the "gatsu"...but I can't recall the thread now.

 

So, my question to (mainly gendaito) collectors is...is there really a number of blades appearing now that are being written off by shinsa as Chinese fakes, Chinese signed, made in China etc...are these "strange" meis and date anomalies and the presence of a kanji that may not follow the norma be a real cause for concern? Is their presence on a totally unknown smith blade an indication that they are "making up" smith names and works?...if so, in this case they have made a very good copy of a sengoku jidai Zenjo work (someone over there must know his stuff)...or are the shinsa members making questionable calls (this was just an opinion, not a judgement).

 

Personally I find the reisho script and the date anomaly pretty normal but I'd like to hear comments from members who have experienced this or know of examples.

Regards,

[kusunokimasahige]

George, would you mind also posting images of the blade itself ?

 

I have looked at many oshigata and mei, also on this forum, and the text on your nakago does not look Japanese to me.

It looks as if somehow the person who signed it saw a few mei and thought every character needed to be chiseled with separate v-shaped notches, which on Japanese mei you do not always see. The characters and date numbers also look stretched to me and very new.

 

Might be wrong here, but to me the writing at least looks more Chinese in style than Japanese in style (gut feeling).

 

Would it be an option to have the nakago's text removed by a Togishi and resubmit it to shinsa to see what ?

the judges then come up with ?

 

What I mean by that is that the sword still might be a real Gunto only some Chinese forger decided to "enhance" it by

chiseling text on it.

 

KM

[ROKUJURO]

In my understanding, the easiest parts in copying a handmade blade are the signature and the ageing. I am not an expert, but the Chinese fakes I have had in hand did not really look close to Japanese blades and could not have been mistaken for those. However, making intentionally a copy would mean some effort, and I don't believe that even Chinese smiths can forge blades 'the cheap way' if they want them to look so Japanese that they could deceive the experts.

 

So at the end, I cannot imagine a truly nice blade being made in China, and if there was really any question as to the origins of a blade, it could be easily ascertained by spectroscopy or other reliable methods.

[cabowen]

George-

 

I have seen reisho style writing on several occasions. It is indeed rare but it hardly implies that the blade must be of Chinese manufacture.

 

Let me be blunt: shinsa teams have little, comparatively speaking, experience with WWII era blades. I would bet you have seen more WWII era blades than all the shinsa team members that came to Australia combined. As I have said before, this is just not their thing. In the past, people very rarely submitted a WWII era blade to shinsa and outside of a handful of famous WWII era smiths, they have little experience or knowledge of these blades. I know this for a fact because I have talked with shinsa team members from NBTHK, NTHK-Yoshikawa, and NTHK-NPO and I have heard repeatedly, privately, that WWII era blades are not their strong suit and that they are behind the curve.

 

This is a major reason why I have not seen cause to submit WWII era gendaito to shinsa. The other is there have been few fakes.

 

Perhaps it will shake your confidence and belief that shinsa teams are the be all, end all, but when it comes to WWII era blades, I don't consider them the first or last place to go for answers and opinions about WWII era blades.

[george trotter]

Thanks for the comments all.

I agree with your comments on shinsa teams and IMO this "Chinese" comment certainly suggests their need to catch up on WWII gendaito Chris.

BTW I do not submit WWII gendaito to shinsa as I know what they are...in this case I had pics of my mystery maker with me and just showed them informally to the panel...my distinct impression was the same as yours Chris, I don't think they had much idea when a bit of a mystery gunto came before them.

I was frankly amazed that they would opine this mei to a Chinese...the cutting of the mei is confident and correct (see Sokan and others) and I was disturbed that they would go to China without any reference to reisho mei such as in the shinshinto era. The date anomaly is not uncommon either, as Slough demonstrates.

In this case the blade is competently made and a good copy of a sengoku jidai Zensho Seki uchigatana (see Connoisseurs" p.122 #26 and p.220 #153)...this is not your Chinese blade unless the guy had a lot of knowledge on schools...also the fittings are excellent Type 3...best I have seen in fact (see pics). BTW, yes, mei is "clean" but so are some other RJT mei I have...depends on storage and usage conditions as to how much patina they acquire over 70 years.

I am sorry to post these pics again (have done so before) as I'm sure you are all tired of this blade...but the mystery of who he is still drives me and my concern at the emergence of "Chinese" comments as per Kanenori and this blade by shinsa members has prompted me to raise this matter. I would like to see some examples of blades that have been "pinked" as Chinese gimei or fake blades.

Regards,

[nagamaki - Franco]

Food for thought, how many Japanese swords were handed over at the end of the war in China? And let's say some of these swords still exist. What prevents any mumei of these examples from being altered and sold?

[Brian]

Franco,

The fact that any confiscated swords would be in govenment hands, and there is little to no chance of them selling them or them making their way into private hands where this would be done. My old boss was ex-Chinese Govt, and I sent him many times asking about any old Japanese swords in military warehouses etc, and the answers were repeatedly "none"

I think that is grasping at straws, and the opinions expressed about them being Gendaito that slipped past the shinsa teams (from pics mind you) are the most logical.

 

Brian

[nagamaki - Franco]

Brian, my brother in-law while in China asked his military host about swords, he was told there are Japanese swords still in possession of the military but not in the region where he was and unless you had a direct contact with those in control, you weren't going to get anywhere.

 

A number of years ago a fellow nihonto collector came across 3 swords at one of the shows that drew attention being Japanese swords in fact showato altered to be Yasakuni blades. Aside from the fact that the workmanship and mei gave them away, they had bo hi cut that ran into the nakago and stopped where one would have expected to see a military acceptance stamp. When the dealer was asked the story was that these swords came out of China.

[george trotter]

3 swords at one of the shows that drew attention being Japanese swords in fact showato altered to be Yasakuni blades. Aside from the fact that the workmanship and mei gave them away, they had bo hi cut that ran into the nakago and stopped where one would have expected to see a military acceptance stamp. When the dealer was asked the story was that these swords came out of China.

 

Franco raises an interesting point...these 3 swords are clearly re-worked showato, meaning they have had mei erased and recut and bo-hi cut to disguise markings....whether they truly came out of China is unknown. If so however, just from my own limited experience this indicates an awareness in China of collector demand for Yasukunito (but not a willingness to spend time/effort on making truer copies with forged mei). This sloppiness of effort suggests an unsophisticated group (even bo-hi on a Yasukunito should be a warning???).

 

I was wondering whether it likely one or more Japanese tosho are somehow involved in a forging business in China as the Kanenori is quite professional a copy (if shinsa are correct) and this unknown Seisui* is almost certainly (if Chinese), made from scratch by a knowledgeable tosho...why not put a known mei or his own on it?

I am not convinced yet that "something" is going on in China...for me the shinsa panel ID's to China is a bit hard to accept. With all our experience of gimei from Japan itself it suggests to me that any gimei if almost certainly from Japan.

 

*My own interpretation of this blade is that the maker was a practising tosho in Tokyo and was also a kejutsu practitioner...or was the friend of a kenjutsu practitioner. He was called up and made the sword for himself to suit his taste in swords and with his own "meaningful" name...OR he made the sword for the friend with his "personalised" name for him (it means calm clear pool - there is a sword Ryu called Seisui Ken)...the kenjutsu kata cut on the left says "one step forward stab, one step forward cut"...either a kata or a patriotic slogan IMHO.

I think the shinsa team have not seen such subtle hidden messages on swords before and are looking for Chinese "scolarship" to explain it.

Just my current (and only) theory.

Regards,