Bruce Pennington

Blade looks nice, but the rest seems to be Franken-gunto. That kabutogane is really icky, like a bad reproduction.

Here’s an enlarged pic:

I have never seen this before! Beautiful Ko, by the way!

And I have seen both old fullered blades and blades made during the war with them. I'd say they're aren't "common", but you see them here and there. I have one that is chromed and light-weight, so probably made as a dress sword, factory made.

This one seems legit. Stamps are right. Tsuka is just painted brown, and I’ve seen this before on real 95s. Serial number is quite early, so a real find if it checks out. All the pics are lousy, so that can hide othe telltale signs. I’d ask the seller for a clear pic of the blade tip, scabbard tip and serial number with inspector stamp.

Neil, the govt should give you a grant to establish a museum with your collection! You have things that put Dawson’s work to shame!

Thanks Steve! That would open the possibility of Ohmura's theory being true. Since my last posting, I've reviewed my data to date, and have 3 '43s with Koa Isshin and 2 '44s with Koa Isshin. It would beg the question of "why would SMR Mantetsu be making blades with 2 different mei?" Of could Ohmura be right and the Koa's were from Mantetsu and the non-koa with Nan/Ren are from Nanman?

Okaaaayyy. Just found a '43 Nan stamped blade with a "W" stamp and a '44 Ren stamp with a "W" stamp! With the current understanding that the unfinished blades sent to Tokyo Arsenal recieved the W stamp, that throws out the idea that the Ren stamp came from the Nanman Arsenal. Of the two theories, the W theory at least has single piece of evidence pointing to it, sooooo ... back to square 1 on the Nan and Ren stamps. Of course other options could explain this: 1)As of '43, The SMR Mantetsu factory began useing the Nan, and '44 Ren stamps, 2) The Nanman factory was making Mantetsu blades and sent a supply of "unfinnished" blades to the Tokyo Factory, or 3) We are still way offbase about the W, Nan, and Ren stamps! To confuse the matter more, I have 4 '43s with Koa Issin and 2 '44s with Koa Isshin. So either the Rens and Nans are Nanman products and the Koa's are SMR Mantetsu, OR Mantetsu was putting both mei out simultaneously!

Okaaaayyy. Just found a '44 Mantetsu with Ren stamp AND a "W" stamp! With the current understanding that the unfinished blades sent to Tokyo Arsenal recieved the W stamp, that throws out the idea that the Ren stamp came from the Nanman Arsenal. Of the two theories, the W theory at least has single piece of evidence pointing to it, sooooo ... back to square 1 on the Nan and Ren stamps.

Mantetsu blades made in '43 and '44 were: 満鉄鍛造之 I've been told it means Mantetsu forged this. But one site I read, with the angle that Mantetsu taught the Nanman (Mukden) factory to make blades the Mantetsu way, proposed it means more: "Forged the Mantetsu way". Ohmura had speculated that Mantetsu taught the arsenal to make blades and that the "Ren" and "Nan" stamps were from the Nanman Arsenal. If the mei could be read the alternate way, this may support the idea that blades with this mei were from the Nanman arsenal. We know that in '43, the Mantetsu factory was ordered to supply several thousand "unfinished" blades to the Tokyo arsenal, so there seems a possibility that this was done for Nanman too, but I'm looking for any possible corroberation of this. What say you?

Best Gifu stamp I've seen on a fake so far. That's sad to see that they are getting better. Hope you didn't pay too much (these sell as reproductions for $150 USD). We've all been there my fellow learner! I still have my bad fake I bought when I first started! If you plan to collect, start by spending some time looking over these pages: http://ohmura-study.net/900.html. It's got fabulous examples of all the types, and best of all - it's free!

Andrei, That's definitely some precision-looking file marks! I still have much to learn about the WWII swordmaking business, and there is very little historical information to glean from. All I am aware of for machine work during the war was hydraulic hammers for pounding out the steel and rollers for one-piece blades like the Type 95s. It's certainly possible the smith who made your blade used some sort of mechanical guide for his file, but I haven't heard nor seen info on a machine that was doing it. There is a video out there of a smith filing a nakago, but I did a quick search and couldn't find it. It is my impression that these guys were just that good! I'll defer to the nihonto/gendaito collectors on the traditional or not question. There were 9 different ways blades were made, and a few of them, non-traditional, still produced nice hamon. Like John said, the lack of stamps COULD mean it was traditionally made, however, most blades made before approx 1940 weren't stamped (the law requiring stamps on non-traditionally made blades came out in '38 but it wasn't widely practiced until '40ish). So it could simply mean your blade was made before '40, but still non-traditionally made.

You can see some different file styles here: http://www.japaneseswordindex.com/terms/terms2.htm

Andrei, Hamons come in many shapes and styles. This was be is a straight one, often considered harder to produce.

Updates: Over 140 blades documented. Still less than .5% of the total number of blades made, so analysis is almost silly at this point. But, still almost half of the katakana used were in the "A's". Over 110 of them were "Spring" which might mean they were putting "spring" on regardless of actual season (although there are several "autumns" in '42). The earliest '38s and '39s had a "winter" and several "autumn", so it seems they began using actual seasons. The "lines" of serial numbers in each year: 39 - 4 40 - 9 41 - 11 42 - 7 43 - 18 44 - 5 45 - two kanji on 1 blade 4-digit serial numbers are found in '42,'43, and '44. "Nan" stamps start appearing on '43. "Ren" stamps are mostly '44, with 1 known in '43 (so probably began late '43). Ohmura specualates these come from the Nanman Arsenal (Japanese name for the Mukden factory). It is my theory that these indidate that Mantetsu was supplying unfinished blades to Nanman just as they were supplying them to the Tokyo arsenal (as revealed by Nick Komiya). The dates line up perfectly as the order Nick found was dated 1943. Another interesting tidbit on these, is there are a couple of them (I only have picture of 1) with a "I" below the Ren. It seems to be the "rail" emblem from the center of the SMR raliway stamp, missing the circular "M" normally around the "I". Pure speculation, but could this be indicating the blade came from SMR but not made or finished by Mantetsu? Ohmura believes Mantetsu taught Nanman how to make blades the Mantetsu way, but he states that he doesn't know if Nanman was actually making them. More work to do. Latest version 1,5 attached.mantetsu serial numbers (1).docx

Neil, On the '44 Mantetsu, thanks for the number, I've added the stamp to my file on it. No word yet on the "I", but I did discover that the Ren stamps are, so far, appearing on '44 model Mantetsu's (only 1 Ren on a '43). I have several '43's with "Nan" stamps. So the Nan began appearing in '43,and the Ren late '43, but mostly '44. Interesting! Ohmura's discussion of these is confusing, and he admits he is not certain about them, but it is his opinion that these were coming from the Nanman Arsenal (Japanese name for Mukden factory). It's my current theory that Mantetsu was supplying unfinished blades to them, like they were to Tokyo. The dates perfectly match Nick Komiya's revelation about the practice.

Neil, Chris nailed it. There's another discussion of these on Warrelics ( http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/imagination-runs-wild-shin-gunto-attributed-paratrooper-718072/.) Dawson has better pics, but he's quoting Fuller, pages 103-5. Fuller doesn't state how he knew this was on a paratrooper's gunto, but he goes into a moderate amount of detail, so he's clearly had a source for it. He states that these were "personalizations" and not an official badge. He does state that this particaular one (out of 3 patterns found on gunto) was for an officer. I originally thought it was a unique custom pattern, but several of them are showing up lately, so there might have been a supplier making them for a whole unit.

Sure I understand. I got my money’s worth though.

It cost me $2,300.

Neil, what serial number is that one? I'd like to keep the picture of the stamps with it in my files.

These sell around $900-1,200 USD.

Thanks Stephen, that’s a beauty and one I didn’t have! The fittings look original to me but I think the blade was recently professionally polished.

Called a Type 98 Officer sword. Lucky to still have the original fabric tassel loop on the handle! You can read a great deal about them here: http://ohmura-study.net/900.html Sorry but I cannot read smith names either. Someone will.

Can anyone translate the kanji on that button?

Neil, I have seen that combination once or twice. I don’t know the significance of the rail minus the “M”, (I have to admit I never realized the broken circle around the rail WAS an M until now!!!). I’m doing some research to educate myself about the difference between the Ren and Nan stamps, the Mukden vs Nanman arsenals. I believe the Mantetsu factory was supplying unfinished blades to these arsenals, so maybe the stamp is in recognition of the source (Mantetsu) but the missing “M” indicates it was finished by another location (like me Mukden or Nanman). Ohmura believed the Mantetsu people may have taught these other two locations to make blades the Mantetsu way, but he wasn’t sure. After what we’ve learned about Mantetsu sharing unfinished blades, I think it’s more likely this is what we’re seeing.