"Fake" japanese swords

David R · 25th March 2013, 02:50 PM

You get a similar problem with European Medieval stuff. Very well made 19thC fakes, and the modern made for reenactment reproductions...not deliberately made to deceive, but after a little wear and tear all but indistinguishable from the originals.
Similar problem at present with Indian made copies of the 1897 Brit. Inf. sword. The giveaway with them is the grip covering and the poorly shaped blade. I regularly see them turning up at Arms Fairs masquerading as originals.
Re the interchange of parts, where do you draw the line between fake and restoration?
In the end, all you can do is get to know the subject better than the fakers do! The real trouble with Gunto is that being machine made in the first place they are easier to fake with modern industrial methods.

laEspadaAncha · 25th March 2013, 06:56 PM

Great resource, Peter, and thank you for posting it... it provides a good primer for differentiating between the major styling cues of real versus fake nihonto and koshirae, with enough detail to keep (most) novice collectors aout of trouble. IMO an overwhelming number of knock-offs (90+%) can be identified using this guide.

Regarding the Type 95 NCO swords, there is still, IMO, an unmistakable difference between the fakes/repros and the originals the fakers have yet to bridge. This might sound odd, but I find the originals tend to have a smell about them lacking in the fakes.

I am, however, in David's camp that hands-on experience is of equal (and of considerable complimentary) value to reference volumes... gunto aside, there are plenty of affordable nihonto out there that give the aspiring collector a reference point by which they can study features of legitimate examples (e.g., hada, hamon, yasurime, etc.) in the hand.

25th March 2013, 02:50 PM	#1
David R Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 1,138	You get a similar problem with European Medieval stuff. Very well made 19thC fakes, and the modern made for reenactment reproductions...not deliberately made to deceive, but after a little wear and tear all but indistinguishable from the originals. Similar problem at present with Indian made copies of the 1897 Brit. Inf. sword. The giveaway with them is the grip covering and the poorly shaped blade. I regularly see them turning up at Arms Fairs masquerading as originals. Re the interchange of parts, where do you draw the line between fake and restoration? In the end, all you can do is get to know the subject better than the fakers do! The real trouble with Gunto is that being machine made in the first place they are easier to fake with modern industrial methods.

25th March 2013, 06:56 PM	#2
laEspadaAncha Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 608	Great resource, Peter, and thank you for posting it... it provides a good primer for differentiating between the major styling cues of real versus fake nihonto and koshirae, with enough detail to keep (most) novice collectors aout of trouble. IMO an overwhelming number of knock-offs (90+%) can be identified using this guide. Regarding the Type 95 NCO swords, there is still, IMO, an unmistakable difference between the fakes/repros and the originals the fakers have yet to bridge. This might sound odd, but I find the originals tend to have a smell about them lacking in the fakes. I am, however, in David's camp that hands-on experience is of equal (and of considerable complimentary) value to reference volumes... gunto aside, there are plenty of affordable nihonto out there that give the aspiring collector a reference point by which they can study features of legitimate examples (e.g., hada, hamon, yasurime, etc.) in the hand.