Bruce Pennington

Interesting. I do recall seeing others where the number on the blade matches the numbers on the fittings. That could mean they were assembly numbers, or it could mean that the fitters simply stamped the number already on the blade to the fittings, and the blade number was originally there for other reasons.

Bojan, I haven't studied this particular numbering system that closely. George Trotter has looked at it more deeply and says in another thread: "George, regarding "contract numbers" - does this mean each number was tied to a custom contract with an individual, or does it refer to the smith's contract with the army; and/or are the numbers representative of how many blades he's made for the army under contract? That is what we don't really know clearly Bruce. I think every customer who walked in the door and asked for a sword got a number, but maybe also the brothers just numbered each sword they produced before sending it to the polisher-mounter-retailer in Tokyo who then sold it in the Army Officer's Store on their behalf. The later type of number system may have been introduced by the RJT to identify contract makers working from their own shops in the various prefectures. "ta" may have identified Niigata Pref. and "o" may have meant Aoyama Pref. (I have a number "o"154 on a tang by Aoyama RJT Nagao Kunishiro dated 19/2). We just don't know yet." At first glance, it does seem to be tied to RJT blades, but from my vague memory, I don't think all RJT blades were numbered, though I could be wrong about that. Sounds like more study is needed on this!

Nice pic Dave! Too bad they’re all wrapped! Would be nice to see the sarute.

Dan, don’t know how I duplicated those links, but here’s the other one I meant to post: http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/ija-type-95-nco-sword-info-228172/

Agreed. Looks normal. Just be ready to do some filing to get a good fit, if necessary. It doesn't detract from the originality of the piece. These were filed and fitted to make them fit correctly on every blade produced, and damaged gunto received re-shaped tsuba/seppa in repair groups.

Ok, Scott, that baby is really stamped up, isn't it! Red - Gifu Blue - Seki (probably) Yellow - Gifu (probably) Orange - Some smiths numbered their blades, reason unknown Yellow circle - Too lightly struck to tell.

I saw how you quietly slipped that in Steve! Do we have a rough time-frame?!?! Dan - yes, I think you're right, it's just patina. Nice example, I'm glad you've returned it to some of it's glory.

I bet the overall size is pretty uniform. You’ll likely have to do a little file work in the slit for a good fit.

The tsuba looks like the large circular one in this picture:

Scott, The two are circled in the pic I'm attaching. Just a straight-on, focused picture of those, if you can. As to replacement, I would personally do it if I could find one. The small seppa (spacers either side of the larger one) look original, so all you'd need is the tsuba. Try Crimson Mist: http://www.cmmilitaryantiques.com/search.php?pcat=3, or Gunto Art Swords http://www.guntoartswords.com for starters. And I would simply email them to ask about it. They both respond quickly to emails.

Thanks Chuck! That fits nicely with the order permitting NCOs to carry privately owned swords.

Thanks Dan! Tokyo 1st Arsenal (star), Tokyo Arsenal Inspector stamp (center one), Suya Shoten Co contractor. I'm amazed the stamps are so clear, as these fuchi with the steel plate tsuka are steel also. Can you test it with a magnet and see if it's steel or just a copper fuchi painted black? Shamsy or Stegel might correct me, but the Tokyo 1st star should put the manufacture date at or after 1941, as the Kokura arsenal (stacked cannonballs) ceased administering these after that date.

Somebody correct me if wrong, but the Smith could be: 義近 (Yoshichika) Hard to say about the tsuba, without knowing more of it’s story. In my opinion it’s more likely a post-war effort to replace a missing original. The original was a flat disc:

Ray is amazing! Do you know the year or battle he captured it? NCOs were permitted to carry privately owned swords, officially, late in the war. Though we know from pictures that some carried them earlier, too. Here’s a screenshot of the smith and year timeframe from Ray’s link:

Ha! I’ll get Nick Komiya to investage! Ha! Yes, an amazing number in that last year, and I agree, likely the poorest of the late war version. A fascinating spin off subject is the rental/purchase of NCO gunto by officers because of shortages.

Scott, This model has no official designation, though most people call I t a type 44, or contingency model. Yours is dated January 19 45. It’s not really accurate to call them “late war” because they were commissioned in 1938 and started seeing production around 1941. They were designed to be a cheaper yet more hearty version of the type 98 officers sword. Someone else can give you the Smith name, as I’m not good at that.

Dan, The topics you brushed across cover pages and pages, both in books and on our forums! A couple you'll clearly enjoy: http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/short-development-history-type-95-gunto-676112/ and http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/short-development-history-type-95-gunto-676112/ I don't know the metulurgy that you've already touched on with the tsukas, but a large majority of them seem to be completely devoid of paint, so you are probably onto something there. I can't swear the NCO's did it as often as officers, but it was common to wrap white cloth arount the tsukas to protect them during the war. Guys with money could outfit them in leather, and there are a couple of NCO examples of this. Here's a fascinating chart on Type 95 production found by Nick Komiya at Warrelics;

Great work Dan! I love returning an old war beast to it's original beauty, especially when it's obvious the rust and deterioration are a result of neglect. Sounds like you're done with the inside of the saya, but if you do more, keep in mind it's lined with a wood liner, just like the officer saya. You can remove the single screw on the top, side, of the saya and the endcap comes off, freeing the liner to slide out. If you try this, do it gingerly as sometimes they are in pieces (one of mine was, the others came out intact) I'd love to see focused pics of the fuchi stamps and serial number.

Peter, Many of us are more interested in WWII militaria than the ancient arts, so you will find enough of us here that would enjoy seeing his pictures! It was also a good refresher that caused some of us to get back into the books (yes, Dawson's is fabulous!).

Forgive my ignorance on the topic, but could you give a picture of what you mean? I'm aware the Otsu model of the Type 32 was considered for infantry and artillery personnel, but I don't recall other types that were called "artillery swords." But it's not an area I've studied at depth. And the 32 was not made of brass.

The pig-shaped stamp confirms the Kanezane smith. It was his personal mark. Interesting to see the very plain kabutogane (end-cap of the handle). It was clearly made to be permanently covered with leather. You can see the leather was worn off or torn off at some time in the past.

Yes, sorry, never had that terminology down. The first pic made me think it was hira-mune.

Hopefully some of the guys who specialize in tsubas will comment. My gut feel is simply a lower-grade tsuba, but legit. It's got the double hole - one for a button latch and the large whole for a leather retainer strap. That's not something you normally see on a fake, but there are a few of these in the hands of collectors. A bit of an oddity in their own right.

Sorry Trev, that turned out to be a trick of the original picture. I can see in the last picture that the mune is beveled normally. Pictures and lighting sometimes play tricks on us on the forums.

Have you had this translated? This is quite a unique sword! It has a flat mune.