Are Gimei blades worth collecting?

[Gabriel L]

Edited by mod:

My apologies - I tried to split off this discussion regarding Gimei from the original thread and found out that it doesn't work as anticipated with topics that have more than one page - only the posts from page one were split, page two is now lost in cyberspace.

At least that had one positive side-effect: some very heated posts that were getting kind of personal are now gone . Again, I'm very sorry for deleting valuable contributions, please feel free to re-post (after taking a deep breath).

Guido Schiller

 

 

Posted by Gabriel Lebec:

 

Hi Markus,

 

Just for your information, it is not "bad" for a sword to be gimei (false signature). There are plenty of good swords with no signatures, false signatures, etc. Yours at least looks like a good sword although that is not an official appraisal, it would take a closer look to tell more. Sometimes professional sword polishers can remove the gimei if you wish, although I personally don't feel strongly about it so long as the sword is advertised truthfully if it is ever sold.

 

It is important that you do nothing to the sword yourself; do not clean the nakago (tang), do not attempt restoration on your own. Andreas posted a good link for you to read.

 

Congrats on your new sword,

-Gabriel

[Marius]

 

Just for your information, it is not "bad" for a sword to be gimei (false signature).

 

I agree with Gabriel, just look at my signature

 

However, just to brief you on a long-lasting debate: gimei is bad for the sword's value, some will a gimei sword as something as bad as a fake work of art. In fact most of great-name signature are gimei. If a sword has a great mei and no reliable papers attributing it to the signature author, it is almost certainly gimei. See a signed sword with a good mei? Assume it is gimei. Buy it if you like it, not because of the mei, but because of the blade. Japanese collectors dislike gimei blades, they sell them yo us, the less discriminating gaijin. Some really good swords which have been gimei, had their signature removed (tricky, expensive, to be done by a specialist only). I own a gimei Kamakura tanto, I like it for what it is, and will not spend $$$$ to remove the false mei.

 

Just my tuppence. Hope that encourages you to research the problem.

[reinhard]

Japanese collectors dislike gimei blades, they sell them yo us, the less discriminating gaijin.

 

You may speak on behalf of yourself, but believe it or not: There are many "discriminating gaijin" in the west trying to make a difference, i.e. trying to learn about quality levels and not just accepting any Japanese blade as some kind of miracle. Statements like yours (and Gabriel's) are setting the learning process on this board back to field 1. Gimei were put there for a reason and these blades never live up to the expectations their false mei rise. Serious Japanese judges have good reasons to ignore gimei swords and these are the reasons why these blades should be avoided by collectors. All gimei blades I've come across during the last 20 years or so were not worth any further investigation. - I know, some of you get excited about any ugly cluster of mura-nie somewhere on a blade, hollering "nice hataraki!" and so on, but this is actually far from serious appreciation of NihonTo.

 

Some really good swords which have been gimei, had their signature removed I own a gimei Kamakura tanto, I like it for what it is, and will not spend $$$$ to remove the false mei.

 

As long as you let the gimei stay and will not put it to Shinsa, it's just a blade, neither Kamakura nor anything else, for your judgement just doesn't matter.

 

reinhard

[paulb]

Dear Reinhard,

WHile I agree with your comments in principal there are a couple of other points to consider:

1.Were Gimei always aimed at the uneducated? in some instances a school work or at least one that closely follows the originals style and quality might be used. If this is the case it would be true as you say that the blade does not live up to the mei but it could still be a good quality sword.

2. A good example of this was the most valuable blade in the A.Z. Freeman collection which when he bought it had the mei "Rai Kunitoshi" on it. The Mei was removed and it attained Juyo papers as a Ko-Senjuin piece and was/is a very fine blade.

 

3. More rcently a story( unconfirmed) of a Hizen Masahiro being rejected as gimei by the NBTHK and when the attribution was questioned the owner was told it was in fact an early work of the nidai Tadahiro. So the quality would have been at least comparable.

 

I agree with you that if a blade is determended to be gimei there is little or no value in keeping the mei there and that the quality rarely lives up to the mei (if it did there would be no point in putting a false signature on it) But there are some good quality blades which have had gimei applied at some point in their history. These should not be discounted just because they are gimei, at least not in the first instance.

 

I also like to think there is an increasingly large group of people in the west that are attempting to make a difference in the level of understanding and knowledge on the subject and I think this is being recognised increasingly in Japan

[Guido]

@ Paul, as to 3.: that happened at the recent NTHK Shinsa in Australia as told to me by the owner. And to add one more story: I once was present when a Tachi was shown to Mr. Tanobe that was inscribed Moriie. Mr. Tanobe said that if the Mei was removed the sword would probably receive Jûyô papers to Hatakeda Moriie - the very same smith who's signature was faked on the Nakago.

 

***

 

@ all:

Although I agree that sometimes fine swords bear bad Mei, those cases are few and far between. That's why we remember the exceptions so well. The vast majority of Gimei, however, are of sub-standard quality, made for one purpose only: to deceive. What we see frequently presented on this board are unfortunately the latter swords.

 

I agree with Reinhard that newbies shouldn't be told "it's o.k." to collect Gimei, and - what we also hear often on NMB - that the fake signature "is part of the sword's history". It's not o.k. to keep a rotting tooth because it's part of my body's history, I'll have a root canal instead, thank you very much. It's not o.k. if someone fakes my signature on a check, I'll have it cancelled, even if it's only a small amount, instead of accepting it as part of my financial history.

 

No one in his right mind would buy a cheap painting of a bugeling elk that is signed Rembrandt and call it a collectible, so why should it be different when it comes to Japanese swords? It also doesn't matter that it's "still a fine weapon" since there are a gazillion of other phantastic killing implements out there that would do a better job for less money.

[paulb]

Guido,

Sorry if I wasnt clear, but I agree absolutely that the concept that "gimei is ok" is wrong and not something we should encourage or endorse.

Also many (probably the majority) of swords I have seen have been gimei. The only point I was trying to make was that one should not automatically dismiss a blade as being bad because it is gimei (again yes the vast majority are, and even those that arent are not of an equivalent quality to the original work of the copied artist). It may have some merit in its own right (without the mei).

It is the same as dismissing all blades in gunto mounts because the vast majority are machine made. yes they are but occassionally something good appears. regrettably not to me!

 

Best Regards

Paul

[Marius]

Japanese collectors dislike gimei blades, they sell them yo us, the less discriminating gaijin.

 

As long as you let the gimei stay and will not put it to Shinsa, it's just a blade, neither Kamakura nor anything else, for your judgement just doesn't matter.

 

Not MY judgement, Reinhard. You have particpated in the discussion about this particular sword, but the opinions are Ted's and Darcy's (who were not a shinsa of course and who have judged by pictures only).

 

Here is the post:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2392&hilit=kuniyuki+rai

 

Sorry for this intermission. One more word about gimei:

 

I would disagree that gimei precludes a sword from study.

I agree that gimei is a bad thing in itself

I understand why the NBTHK and NTHK policies exclude gimei blades from certfication

 

 

And I would love to see a gimei removed by a specialist, so if you have pics showing the effects, I shall be grateful.

[reinhard]

Not MY judgement, Reinhard, but the opinions are Ted's and Darcy's (who are not shinsa of course and who have judged by pictures only).

 

Mariusz, I didn't intend to pick up this (silly) thread one more time, but since there seems to be a deeper misunderstanding I will. It is not only that YOUR judgement doesn't matter. Neither yours nor mine nor Ted's nor Darcy's judgements really matter when it comes to authentification, for neither of us is an expert in the true sense of the word. For my part I never claimed to be one. At least I can tell who is. What bothers me is that some people feel competent enough to make final statements about unpapered blades/tosogu within their very limited range of knowledge. Nobody and I do mean NOBODY on this board is/was ever competent enough to finally attribute blade/tosugu to a particular artist, neither with the object in hand nor on the basis of pictures. There's no real expert here nor was there one in the past. This might be disappointing for some of you. All we can do here (good infos provided) is to seclude obvious fakes from possible genuine examples. - By claiming to possess an "Owari"-tsuba or a "Kamakura"-tanto ("Kamakura"what? time? location?) without serious expertise you are undermining your own credibility.

 

reinhard

[Gunome]

Hello,

 

And I would love to see a gimei removed by a specialist, so if you have pics showing the effects, I shall be grateful.

 

Just have a look on ebay's sword, sometimes you could see a removed mei on a nakago.

 

Sebastien

[pcfarrar]

And I would love to see a gimei removed by a specialist, so if you have pics showing the effects, I shall be grateful.

 

This tanto had a gimei recently removed, doesn't cost the earth as Darcy mentions:

 

http://www.c.farrar.btinternet.co.uk/tanto/DSC01223.JPG

[b.hennick]

I know of a blade that had a gimei signature to Kunihiro that was removed. The blade papered to Norishige. It is a great sword. So my words of advice are to look at the blade and buy the work. The signature should confirm the work. If it does not it is possible to send the blade to shinsa. After two rejections I would consider having the mei professionally removed and the tang restored. It then can be resubmitted. Why two rejections - people make mistakes.

Sometimes good unsigned swords are given signatures that are for the correct smith but gimei. These too can be removed and papered to the correct smith.

I personally do not knowingly own gimei blades.

[nagamaki - Franco]

The signature should confirm the work.

 

Hi Barry,

 

What has happened to: "the blade confirms the mei and not the other way around" - Arnold Frenzel

 

It is said that experience is the best teacher. Some collectors simply must learn things the hard way, which is doubly difficult when it comes to nihonto as there is no easy way to learn some of the lessons involved. To those contemplating finding a gimei sword that is a treasure, I sincerely hope that you do indeed someday find that hidden nihonto gem among all the 'bad gimei blades' out there. But, be prepared to pay your dues and repeat some of the same lessons over again.

[b.hennick]

Hi Franco:

I agree that the blade confirms the mei. But for this discussion focused on gimei blades I still suggested looking at the blade first and then the mei. So the work of the blade should confirm the mei but once the two agree one still must consider the possibility of the signature being gimei. Someone other than the maker or his student may have put the "correct name" on the blade but the blade would still be gimei.

My point was look first to the work then second to the mei then third see if the mei matches known examples i.e. gimei or shoshin.

As usual we agree and certainly we both agree with Arnold but I guess my focus was off...

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hi Barry,

 

I figured as much, and am glad to read your clarification.

[Jean]

Barry wrote : The signature should confirm the work

 

If not, what would kantei be all about? what of O suriage blades.

 

Barry is right

[Bugyotsuji]

I had a good experience with a katana, but have to agree that this was probably the exception.

 

The blade was inscribed with the Mei "Fujiwara Muneyoshi", which puzzled everyone, but I liked the Hamon and the overall feel and balance, and besides it was my first blade. I was advised by several people to either enjoy the Gimei, or have it erased. In retrospect I can imagine that they were probably imagining a more famous Muneyoshi, and that is why they figured it had to be Gimei.

 

Some sleuthing among less well-known sword literature produced a more likely and less-threatening, less earth-shattering Katana Kaji, and at Shinsa it passed for the first time with the attribution that I had suggested.

 

A learning experience with a fairly cheerful result. Of course the sword cannot now be passed off any more as something that it is not.

[Guido]

Of course the sword cannot now be passed off any more as something that it is not.

Hey, you still can throw away the papers!

[nagamaki - Franco]

Of course the sword cannot now be passed off any more as something that it is not.

Hey, you still can throw away the papers!

 

Hey, Guido, that's a great idea, and why stop there, have the sho shin mei removed too, then it can be passed off as a real Masamune!

 

.....

 

The blade was inscribed with the Mei "Fujiwara Muneyoshi", which puzzled everyone, but I liked the Hamon and the overall feel and balance, and besides it was my first blade. I was advised by several people to either enjoy the Gimei, or have it erased. In retrospect I can imagine that they were probably imagining a more famous Muneyoshi, and that is why they figured it had to be Gimei.

 

Pier's, this is a wonderful illustration of why the workmanship of the blade must be considered first. By reading the mei/gimei (or even 'being told' what the sword "is" or "is not") before the kantei is completed, will often result in being prejudice of how the sword is viewed from that point forward. Which more often than not leads to not believing what you're seeing and/or not seeing what you're believing, or simply put wrong conclusions.