6 Kanji Signature And A Newbie

[Moijwall]

Hi,

 

Short story long: I have played with a bokken for many years. A couple of years ago I got myself an Iaito. And last week I bought a katana, nothing fancy or expensive but hopefully not a Chinese copy.

 

The old man I bought it from had owned it for 30 years and according to him a person with some insight in Katanas had dated it to late 1800 or early 1900. He himself knew nothing about Katanas but he had collected weapons in general and bought it as it was beautiful.

 

The thing is that he claimed that it wasn’t signed which I thought was sad but accepted. When I got it home I disassembled it and to my surprise I did find a 6 kanji signature.

 

Maybe this is ridicules easy but I seem to get nowhere.
Assuming that the 2 first Kanji is the province I have tried some internet sites to decipher it without success.
Then I tried some of the Kanji translators to decode some of the other. Especially the 4:th one looked simple but I failed there as well. (Most likely my incompetence but a fail nevertheless.)

 

Can I even assume 1-2 to province, 3-4 date and 5-6 smith?

 

Any help is highly appreciated!

[Gordon Sanders]

it looks like something has been done to the surface around the signatures... like it has been scratched

[John A Stuart]

Kurihara Kenji Nobuhide 栗原謙司信秀 John

[Geraint]

Dear Michael.

 

(Please add your name to your posts)  John has supplied you with the translation, now comes the rest.  Big names are often faked but this looks worrying from a number of viewpoints.  More pictures of the overall shape of the nakago, (tang) would help as would more pictures of the sword.  As Gordon suggests there is something not good about the surface of the nakago and the style in which the mei is cut is a worry.  Have a look at this one to compare and do  post more pictures if you have them.  http://www.aoijapan.com/img/sword/2016/16208-2.jpg

 

All the best.

[Gakusee]

Guys, without being too forthright here, I shall enedeavour to be objective and constructive to our fellow member as this to me appears gimei without a doubt.

So, Michael, while this is not my area of collecting and I am not familair with the smith, below are some thoughts and suggestions:

- look at the execution of the chiselstrokes of your mei / signature and compare it to the one posted by Geraint. Analyse the confidence and smoothness of execution of both signatures

- look at the yasurime (filing marks) strokes on the nakago of a genuine nakago/mei (the one from Geraint or the Juyo image which I have attached) and compare them to the left hand side of your omote nakago

- look at the spacing between the different kanji (characters ) - do you notice how your forth one is almost dangling lonely, separated from the ones above by too big a gap? Compare to the genuine ones.

- do we think the makura of the mei (the raised edges of the signature) would not be affected by subsequent scratching (ie one would have difficulty scratching or cleaning just around the mei and chiselstrokes)

[raaay]

 

obviously not a good photo, but it looks like a fresh drilled hole with the burr's still around the rim , not a good feeling about the tang , Japanese ??

better and more photographs to be certain and showing all the tang + blade.

 

maybe well off the mark , but not convinced with the current pic's it is genuine .

[Brian]

Terrible photo. Try some real pics. A few of them. That one is misleading in every way.

[Moijwall]

Hi and thanks a lot!

 

You are amazingly fast! And accurate!

I know the photo isn't the best but its only purpose was to show 6 kanji for translation.

We are in the mid of the winter here in Sweden which means that it is kind of dark 24/7 (it might be some light while I'm at work).

And I don't have a clue on how to take photos of Katanas

So I´m afraid the photos I just took wont be much better, sorry for that.

 

But measures you can get with some accurancy:
Length (cutting part): 73.5 cm

Curvature: 1.7 cm

Nakago:19.5 cm

Kissaki: 4.0cm

 

If I understand your reaction correctly Nobuhide is not a swordsmith you would expect from a cheap sword found in Sweden by accident?

So it might be a gimei, I paid $350 for it so it is no big deal and I like it.

 

But there is something that I do not understand with the translation as such that seems obvious to all of you:

Kurihara   - Is an old Japanese province - fine with that

Kenji        - Is a Japanese era 1275-1278 - does not match the smith nor the blade

Nobuhide - Lived between 1814-1880 - to good

So I guess that "Kenji" means something else to you?

 

Here are some new bad photos of the whole sword.

I will follow up with some photos of the other stuff.

And again, thanks for your interest!

 

BR
Michael

 

 

 

 

[Moijwall]

Hi again,

 

Forget my question, I just found out with the help of Mr. Google that Nobuhide was born Kurihara Kenji.

So all 6 Kanji is translated "Kurihara Kenji Nobuhide" and is his full name and signature.

 

I'm learning, although not fast!

 

BR
Michael

[Stephen]

dont make any difference what it says its a chinese knock off

 

 

cruel joke it is. 

[Moijwall]

Here are some more pictures, chinese or not

 

If there is any interest I can try to take some better photos of the blade in daylight on Saturday.

But even for that I need some advice: What is the best background?

Quote

So, Michael, while this is not my area of collecting and I am not familair with the smith, below are some thoughts and suggestions:
- look at the execution of the chiselstrokes of your mei / signature and compare it to the one posted by Geraint. Analyse the confidence and smoothness of execution of both signatures
- look at the yasurime (filing marks) strokes on the nakago of a genuine nakago/mei (the one from Geraint or the Juyo image which I have attached) and compare them to the left hand side of your omote nakago
- look at the spacing between the different kanji (characters ) - do you notice how your forth one is almost dangling lonely, separated from the ones above by too big a gap? Compare to the genuine ones.
- do we think the makura of the mei (the raised edges of the signature) would not be affected by subsequent scratching (ie one would have difficulty scratching or cleaning just around the mei and chiselstrokes)

 

I will follow your advice Gakusee!

 

All the best!

Michael

[Gakusee]

Please do. It helps with learning.

Regrettably, I am with Stephen on this one - it looks like a Chinese fake to me.

[mywei]

Unfortunately not even gimei. Fake

[PNSSHOGUN]

Poor chinese fake, hang it on the wall as a reminder to always do your research before buying

 

Or get a refund and use the money to buy a book on Nihonto.

[lonely panet]

the Chinese making fakes would evan say that's a fake.

 

so sorry to say its a fake, faked from a fake

[Brian]

Michael,
Get your money back. There is zero chance this is a real Japanese sword unfortunately.
Even if he had it for 50 years...it is still a Chinese fake, and a poor one at that. Sorry. But if any consolation, there are MANY members here who started out the same way, and today are collectors. Don't give up, but ask before laying out funds.
We have Swedish members. See if you can visit one and examine some real swords.

[raaay]

 

new photo's now confirm - a genuine fake Chinese copy .

 

sorry, as said get your money back if possible .

[Moijwall]

Guys,

 

Thanks a lot for the translation and all the good advice!

 

I completly understand that it is a chinese fake but I will keep it.

As it then actually isn't worth anything I might even use it for some tamashageri.

 

All the best!

Michael

[John A Stuart]

Michael. As you can never be sure of the blade's integrity it might be safer to not use it for tameshi. One small flaw could be dangerous if not fatal. Just a word of caution. John

[PNSSHOGUN]

Michael I wouldn't even swing it around, cheap fakes like this are not only dangerous to the user, but anyone nearby as well.