Need help with a sword I found

[samr]

A friend of mine found bought a Japanese sword from a storage unit in New England from someone who had passed away and knew that I had interest in Japanese swords and asked me if I wanted to buy it. I did buy it and now I'm trying to figure out exactly what I have. I have no intention of selling this or gaining anything commercially from it I just really want to know what it is because it's beautiful. I had a friend who speaks Japanese do some rough translation for me. I will give a description. The swords blade is about 72 cm long. It has the appearance of Damascus steal with multiple folds 20 or more on each side. It appears to be signed on the tang with the name yokoyama daijo. The handle and the scabbard appear to be something that were made later. On the blade itself forged into the steel on one side there is a man's name and on the other side there is a year. The year is translated as the 5th year of showa which appears to be 1317. The entire name cannot be made out on the other side but the first two characters are kameda and ichiro

[samr]

I can also post more pictures if need be. The hilt appears to be very old and very worn but you can make out a faint scene that was etched into it it appears to be bronze. The habaki appears to be very new added within the century and stamped with a western number 345

[Ian B3HR2UH]

Unfortunately it is a modern Chinese fake

Ian Brooks

[samr]

If that's the truth I have no problem with it I didn't pay much for it but could you elaborate

[David Flynn]

What do you want elaborated?    It is what it is, A Chinese Repro (Fake).

[samr]

No I meant how can one tell. I mean I knew that was a possibility but I was trying to figure out how to make that determination. 

[Ian B3HR2UH]

Hi Sam ,  go to the Nihonto information section on this site and then go to research and then to to Fake Japanese swords . You will find all the information that you need there .

Ian Brooks

[Larason2]

The fifth year of Showa was actually 1931. The forging on this blade is very basic, and the pattern is acid etched. The characters on the blade look applied on, maybe with solder? and some of the strokes have fallen off. There doesn't seem to be any evidence the blade is differentially hardened, no hamon or even a difference in the metal (Japanese swords are traditionally laminated). The nakago (tang) is not filed, as it would be traditionally, and the edges on it are not straight, and it is not straight. The characters on the nakago are crudely carved, and don't follow proper stroke order and direction. There are large forging defects in the nakago as well. I can't see much of the habaki, but it looks like it is of uneven thickness, poor quality metal, and poorly worked. So overall, likely a Chinese reproduction.

[samr]

Thank you that's exactly what I was looking for. I had read the articles but there were a lot of things that didn't make sense with this piece. I knew the rust didn't look appropriate on the tang but it had also been obviously cleaned at some point and filed. Also I just couldn't get over how well weighted the blade is and how nice it looks in person being that it is steel and not aluminum. The pictures don't do it a lot of justice.  It's just so strange to me that someone would waste that much time making an obscure fake. Also my friend whose did the translation must have just been wrong about the showa period. he suggested the kanji was more consistent with the first showa period starting in 1312 rather than the second.  Starting in the 1900s. Also had a blacksmith look at it and he suggested the kanji on the blade could not have been soldered on but rather appeared to have been created when the metal was forged which is a technically challenging feat. But in the end it appears I just have an interesting fake. Thank you for your help. 

[GeorgeLuucas]

Unfortunately, I’ve seen many nearly identical fakes
 

That rough and bold Damascus pattern is one of many giveaways 

 

Here’s a link with some helpful info

http://www.jssus.org...japanese_swords.html

 

Cheers, and best of luck

[Larason2]

It's actually not a lot of work to make this compared to a Nihonto. A Japanese smith only produces one or two swords per year of full time work. The rough damascus type here wouldn't require a lot of work, since they would have been able to start with plate steel and only fold it a handful of times. Given that the added on bits almost all fell off, they probably just laid them on, heated up the blade, then hammered them on. None of them are properly forge welded. All of that being said, the Chinese smiths are actually pretty good smiths, even now. Their work is not as appreciated as traditional Japanese work, because there is a different magnitude of work and skill necessary to make a nihonto. 

[Brian]

There is nothing here that looks Japanese unfortunately. Instead of asking what looks fake, it is easier to ask what looks Japanese.
You will never see a damascus pattern like this so bold on any real Japanese sword. If you see layers, run. Etched symbols? Run. A tang with skew lines? Run.
Next one will be better I am sure. Stick with it.