Chinese sword: Real or Fake?

[ariel]

This auction is over.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1
Is it real or a very good fake?

[Lew]

Ariel

This seller deals in repros but with this sword I tend to think it may be real.
The pattern I think is called Hairpin Folding. If it is fake then it's a real good one.


Lew

[Tim Simmons]

Without handling the sword, I tend to think it is a fake. I am suspitous of the red material round the scabbard mouth. There is something to me not quite right about the all over corrosion and the red stuff seems untouched and quite fresh. I would have to agree the blade is rather good. Tim
P.S , I also have worries about the brass ring on the pommel.

[Ian]

Ariel:

You know the rule my friend -- everything on eBay out that comes from China is not old until conclusively proven otherwise.

This is a recent Chinese version of a Tibetan sword IMO (I know, Tibet is part of China, but this one was not made in Tibet, Bhutan or anywhere else in that neighborhood). The blade is not the traditional hairpin laminated construction and the scabbard seems like it was made from a picture of a Tibetan sword -- just not quite right. It all looks too "new" and complete. A recent repro, I think.

Good luck to the anonymous buyer (another warning sign). At last the shipping seems reasonable.

Ian.

[Mark]

I find it very alarming that the fakers have gotten to the point of reproducing a hairpin blade pattern. It doesn't look etched either. Buuut ... there is so much about this one that says 'fake' to me. I think it more prudent to to go into detail, since all it does is educate the fakers. I do agree with Tim's assessment of the corrosion, however. Send me an e-mail, if you want my oh-so-insightful comments on why I think it is a repro .

[Tim Simmons]

I personelly feel there is a difference between repro, fantasy and fake. Some well made repros are exellent copies of weapons that can be rare or prohibitively exspensive and if sold honestly a good thing though not to my taste I might add. Fantasy well if you like that sort of thing. This particular piece I feel is very near a fake. Fakes which to my mind are sold with malice a forethought are rather unpleasant. Tim

[Mark]

Don't get me wrong -- I think it is a deliberate fake. I just got tired of writing "fake" so often.

[ariel]

Thanks, everyone!!!
The minute one sees shipment origin, dozens of red lights start flashing. But, as we discussed before, the sophistication of Chinese fakers is improving exponentially.
This is the reason why I decided to post this sword on the Forum: I thought that for a blatant fake, this one was unusually well-made and could serve as a test case for the Forumites. I am glad that my gut feeling was supported by the majority, but I am very disturbed by the higher than usual level of professionalism on the part of the "Dark Side".....
In a couple of years, nothing will prevent them from churning out Kilijes, Shamshirs or Shashkas in whatever steel pattern the market values the most.

[Rivkin]

Well, I've already seen chinese tsubas of rather exceptional quality, very good copies of chinese ancient bronze, crude folding does not seem to be something outside of their league.

However I have to disagree with many things said: I don't think that fakers "learn" or "educate" themselves on how to make good fakes. Faking in China is a mass-production, therefore number one symptom of being fake - it looks like 100 other swords on ebay at the moment (not this one). Second things that are big no for serious collectos: swastikas on scabbards (btw there were gendais that were given to nazi raider and boat commanders who visited Japan, with swastikas on scabbards, but they are more than rare), crude "horimono" etchings of dragons, crude characters on the scabbard, etched wild "damascus", red rust all around the place, but they work for your average shmo (or should I say shmoizaki, ninja in training ?). Obviously they will continue to make their fakes for the "big market" (btw how many of "us"-collectors are out there ?).

Is this one fake - most likely it is. It is sad, as I for example can not see myself collecting anything chinese ever - the market is so flooded with stupid fakers, I simply don't want to touch it.

However I still think that someone who is capable to make a really classy shashka for example does not need to make fakes - the price of a modern made quality shashka is well above 1500$, with no "faking", with demand being much greater than supply. I've regularly seen 10,000$ being paid for fine modern damascus swords, while similar antique item would barely fetch 3000$ max on ebay. Just like with japanese swords, where something new of gendai quality will cost you 4000-6000$ vs. 1200$ for quality mumei gendai.

So I think as soon as they start making something really good, they will realize that "antique" is not the most profitable market. They will find a marketing department in Dagestan or Colorado , and start making repros instead of fakes.

[RSWORD]

I am going to step out on a limb here and say that I do not think this piece is a fake. I do not think it is terribly old but may have been made traditionally in Tibet and found its way to this particular seller. I have noticed a number of this sellers swords with remounted Tibetan blades and the blades look OK. The blade on this example looks OK and the mountings do not look bad. They look to be stylistically correct just utilizing materials that one would find more recently. Although not of the level of workmanship one finds in earlier Tibetan arms it lacks the total disregard to most levels of quality and more importantly historical style to be an out and out Chinese Tibetan sword knock off. This is a piece I would like to see in person to make a better assessment and given that, I would not be confident in purchasing online. The red on the scabbard is probably some type of leather and not out of place. I have a Tibetan sword in my collection that led a nomadic life and has 3 or 4 different scabbard coverings from "working" life repairs. So, my guess is sword made in Tibet, probably in the last 50 years, which through the various bazaars or trade networks found it's way to this particular sellers shop.

[fearn]

Hi,

I tend to agree with RSword. If it's genuiune, I suspect that parts of the scabbard have been replaced.

It comes close to passing the "profit margin" test. Basically, was it worth a faker's time to make a sword of this quality and sell it at this price? My answer is "maybe." Labor costs would have to be pretty cheap for a talented smith, if it was hand made....

Does it pass the mass production test? Dunno. If 50 others show up, then no. If it's the only one, then why did someone waste the time making the one?

Oh well, in the fabled age of Nanotechnology (yet to come, of course ), they'll be making molecule-perfect replicas of our favorite heirlooms, and this board will be out of the "is it fake" debate.

F

[dennee]

The blade looks pretty darn good. If they are faking those now, then it is going to be pretty much impossible to buy Tibetan swords online.

I agree that the brass ring looks suspicious.

The red leather throat piece is recent, but they were often lost or destroyed.

The decoration on the pommel may be authentic, but it is indistinct in the photos.

And I'll agree that some of the corrosion may be a little suspicious in its character (and Tibet is fortunately pretty dry).

Corals are common on Tibetan swords, of course, but the lack of them, particularly on commoner swords is almost getting to be a mark of authenticity as, while repros and fantasy swords are gaudy, Tibetans often remove turquoise and coral from swords they are selling in order to reuse on rings, headdresses, gaus, etc.

And I am not sure if the scabbard is covered with leather or velvet or ?

But the forms of the scabbard, guard, pommel, and the grip section all look pretty good. This sword definitely deserves closer inspection. I guess we'll all
keep an eye out. If there are fakes of this quality coming out, then Tibet collectors have a problem.

[pbleed]

I have to agree with Dennee. I think this is a real "Tibetan" sword albeit one that may have been flashed up a bit recently. My opinion is based on the old rust pitting and generally look of the blade. As a Japanese collector, I have acquired a number of "Tibetan" swords since they look so elemental and "primitive." This sword looks a lot more like the old ones I've seen than the new stuff that is being produced.
Don't think I'll bet on it, but if I did, I'd bet "good".
Is it good or bad that the world seems to be getting more complicated?
PBleed

[ariel]

I am absolutely delighted: this argument is exactly what I wanted to provoke.
With all the knowledge, sophistication and collector's savvy, we cannot reach an agreement anymore whether a particular Chinese item sold by a known "replica" dealer ( I am being facetious!) is a fake or not....

[Tim Simmons]

I will bet one of my knives it is a fake. Tim

[fearn]

Hi Tim,

I've got a knife like that too. It was made in Pakistan. Recently....

There are a couple of important points here (at least to me). One is that fakery is about making money. If there's a good profit margin in people making fakes that are so good that we couldn't tell without sophisticated scientific tests, then they're going to do it.

This is what I call the "profit margin" test. As others have pointed out, this makes sense in cases where the market has gone in for irrational exuberance. With a Tibetan sword, possibly one-of-a-kind?.....

The other, bigger, problem is that we're trying to tell fake from real using a couple of poor-quality digital images. Even if the images are real, they may not show the details we need, and it is certainly easier to manipulate an image than to fake a sword.

The amazing thing is how often we can spot the fakes. Given the quality of the evidence, we're going to miss things occasionally and argue perhaps more often. What's wrong with that?

F

[M ELEY]

www.tomahawks.info/id72.htm
www.tomahawks.info/id77.htm

I'm getting worried that the fakers are becoming more skilled than many are giving them credit for. As you can see, its not just fakes from China.

[chris]

hello
I am new to the site.
I colect weapons and particularly those from china, vietnam,...
for a little time
happy china is a strange ebay dealer : 100% of is japanese blades are fake, ther is no doubt about it. he also makes DIY on old original blades. recently his fees have raised to a previously unknown level of price
he also use of anothe ID that I don't remember yet
I have bought several weapons from him, all of chinese origin. one appeared to be a fake. another went through a ridiculous improvement (a hook was added to a real blade). otherwise 8 out of 10 of the sword I bought from him where real one
he know few if any on weapons he sell. I made my "improved" sword restored by a traditional smith specialised in sword near my house and a light etching revealed a laminated pattern ! for 45$, that's an acceptable deal !!!!
well, regarding what I see from that blade, despite the recent "improvement" I would bet one of my sword that the blade is a real one !
(I should add that I went several time in china and went through all shanghai in flee market, hence knowing what chinese are able to do or not)
chris

[Lee]

Oh dear! It looks OK to me.

[dennee]

Here's a report from Lhasa, since I have been there the past week. The Chinese are getting pretty darn good at faking Tibetan helmets (many are obvious fakes, but they are getting the techniques right), but I have seen no swords that are the least convincing in decoration, let alone blade lamination (although I have had the opportunity to examine several in museums and monasteries--and most of those have lost the ring on the back of the pommel, suggesting that such a fragile looking part is not necessarily inauthentic ). I wouldn't trust armor or spears much, although I saw no spears that reproduced the partucular Tibetan style of head.

I saw one reproduction sword in the Tibetan Museum gift shop that made no attempt to pass itself off as the real thing, although it tried to convey the spirit. With a simple round guard and a scabbard covered in tan leather, the sword had the right weight, form and balance. The lamination was represented by creating an oxidized pattern around some sort of resist. The oixidized areas appeared to be iron oxide, although the particle appeared small and uniform in size and color (something like paprika, frankly)--and it was selling for 3000 yuan, more than I have bought most of my real ones for.

The absolute scarcity of reproduction laminated blades where you might most expect to see them--and compared with the number of knives and helmets suggests to me that no one (or almost no one) is producing them. If anyone is prodcing good copies, then $200 might be a reasonable price.

Of course, for the purpose of an eBay auction photo, the effect of the lamination, at least as seen in a raking light, could be produced in a number of ways.

I wouldn't worry about the red fabric around the throat, because it could be replacing a piece of leather that was easily lost. To get such a detail wrong when everything else looks right seems illogical. If someone had an original sword to copy, it wouldn't make sense to not copy the leather band. And, if the original no longer had a leather band, then the copyist would presumably have omitted the detail. This suggests simply an inauthentic replacement of an riginal piece.