Urgent question from complete newbie

[DK-Prof]

Sorry to barge in here with a technical question straight out of the gate, but I have an opportunity to buy what appears to be a nice blade. Despite being a novice at this, I am fortunate to have some very well-informed people that have advised me on this - since there obviously are a lot of fakes (some better than others) out there, as well as blades that may have been damaged in a number of ways. With such good advice, I have found a blade that seems in my price range (between $3K and $4K), and the seller appears legitimate (friends of mine have purchased items from him, including blades, in the past) and he provided a ridiculous number of very deatiled photos. To further alleviate my concerns, it has a NBTHK origami with it.

 

However, now the question has been raised (by the seller, interestingly enough) that he is not entirely sure that the NBTHK origami is "real" :?

 

Are any of you familiar with forged/faked NBTHK origami? Is that a common problem? Have you run across such things, or heard of it? Are there straight fakes, or do people take an existing origami and switch photos? What's the deal?

 

I have looked at this webpage (http://www.nihontocraft.com/japanese_sword_papers.html), which describes post 1982 NBTHK origami in great detail, as as far as I can tell, the origami for this blade looks similar in all the details - small marks, watermark locations, stamps, etc.

 

However, since I am obviously a beginner at this, I definitely do not want to get totally hosed on my first large purchase of this kind. What say you? Any advice or insight on fake NBTHK papers?

 

 

 

(I have pretty detailed photos of the origami - I should be able to host them tomorrow, if anyone is interested).

[Ichi]

Yes, I heard about the rumors of the fake NBTHK origamis. I think it occured sometime during the '70s when faked papers started to flow around the market. You should check with the NBTHK and make sure that X origami was issued to X blade.

[Martin]

Hi DK-Prof (?),

 

did the seller tell you why he is "not entirely sure" that the NBTHK origami is "real" and what leads him to this conclusion?

Sounds a bit strange.

If the seller trades in Nihonto as a business I would expect him to guarantee for the authenticity of authentication papers ( :lol: ) or at least to find it out for you...

 

cheers,

Martin

[Guest Simon Rowson]

Hi DK,

 

Despite my own recently aired opinions on origami, the only fake NBTHK examples I've heard of are at Juyo level.

 

I think this would exclude the kind of price range you were talking about so, hopefully, it's a genuine paper.

 

Simon

[Curran]

Peter Klein recently pointed to a set of the NBTHK "green papers" that were obviously wrong.

 

There was a problem in the late 70s with illegitimate papers being issued by a branch (or some of the branches) of the NBTHK. I do not recall the specifics, but am cautious of anything dated 1976 or later.

 

That cuts two ways: up till 1972 (?) the Green Papers were the highest non Juyo that the NBTHK issued.

But so many people are OH MY - THE QUESTIONABLE GREEN PAPERS !!

and that is all they know.... that it is often easy to check the date (I love the old pre-1972 green papers) and hem and hawh about "dubious" green papers to get the price down. I confess- I have done it.

Occassionally the item (usually a tsuba in my case) comes back with Kanteisho or Hozon papers to something other what the green papers said. But that can happen with some items submitted more than once for Hozon (different shinsa, different paper).

 

Is the sword signed?

[DK-Prof]

Thanks for all of the responses! I really appreciate it!!

 

The origami is certainly for Hozon, and not Juyo or anything fancy like that. So I also wondered why a forger would spend all the time to make a regular Hozen, and not even Tokubetsu Hozen fake.

 

The origami is dated 2006 (you can tell from the photos below) - so it's purportedly not from the 70s or anything like that. As you can also tell from the photo in the origami, it is not signed/inscribed on the nakago.

 

The seller did NOT tell me why he was suspicious, and I am definitely wondering about that. :|

 

 

 

 

 

[/img]

[DK-Prof]

Apologies about the really big images - but I figure that the detail was important.

 

(These are images that the seller sent to me - I do not have the origami in hand, so I cannot hold it up the light to look for watermarks or anything)

[Bungo]

DK.

 

well, do the Curran maneuver ( hem and hawh about "dubious" green papers to get the price down )..........and we might make you a honorary Scotman.

 

milt the ronin

[Mark]

The papers look ok to me. I would compare the length of the sword to the length sited in the papers, check the actaul tang and make sure it matches the picture, make sure the picture has not been changed (there is a seal stamped there). If everyting matches i would have no problam with the papers

 

Mark

[DK-Prof]

Thanks mark!

 

The nakago definitely matches, so I'm not concerned about the blade not matching the picture.

 

I really am confused about why the seller indicated it might not be "real" - the embossed stamp clearly indicates that the picture hasn't been swapped(in an attempt to fool a dumb non-Japanese like myself by perhaps using a "real" origami, but switching in a different photo) - and that would obviously be a pretty transparent fake, because like you said, the length wouldn't match.

 

If anyone can tell me what the origami says about length, I can tell you that the blade should be 67.4cm (just over 26 inches) - which is a bit over two shaku, right?

[DK-Prof]

DK.

 

well, do the Curran maneuver ( hem and hawh about "dubious" green papers to get the price down )..........and we might make you a honorary Scotman.

 

milt the ronin

 

:lol: Thanks bungo.

 

If I go through with the deal, I am definitely going to try to beat him down a little in price, because of the "questionable" origami that I am generously accepting.

[Mark]

length approximatly 26.5" or 67.25cm