Bruce Pennington

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.

I don’t know if I should laugh or cry!

That's a "that depends" kind of question! You will find collectors on both sides of that question. Some prefer to preserve gunto in their current condition, especially if it appears it's condition came from the war and not from a post-war Bubba. Some try to restore gunto to as much of their original glory as possible. I did that with my dad's Mantetsu, but I've left most of my others "as is." Ok, I've added a missing seppa here and there, but nothing more (ok, yes I've added missing sarute and tassels on them all, but nothing more!!!).(Dang, ok, I stripped 2 95s that had horrible post-war paint, and repainted one of them). So it depends upon what you plan to do with yours - sell or keep and preserve. If selling, don't change anything! If keeping, it's your call. A handle re-wrap can run around $200 and a blade polish from $700 to $2,400 depending upon who does it.

Both appear legit. First one made by the Seki Token Co., inspected by Nagoya Inspector, under Kokura Arsenal administration. Second one very late war. Both Type 95s. Prices are all over the place in U.S.A. You can find them for $600, many in the $1,200 range, and crazy ones over $2,000. I haven't been pricing the late war ones, so disregard what I said for that one, I don't know. On the 95's I wouldn't remove the handles. There's nothing there (except an occacional "W" stamp) and the handles often loosen up after re-assembling. I take all mine apart, but I'm the owner. I wouldn't do it as a seller.

Damascus steel and serial numbers on the habaki are classic signs of Chinese fakes. The tsuba, from what I can see, might be legit. I honestly don’t know when Damascus steel first cake into use. The rig as a whole looks to have age, so maybe it was made by the Chinese even during the war? But that would depend on knowing the history of Damascus steel use.

Ohmura's website is a vast free resource: http://ohmura-study.net/900.html As to the girlfriend's inability to translate the kanji - the kanji used during the war were much simpler than the ones used today. When I first started out, with my dad's Mantetsu, I asked an older Japanese lady to translate the Koa Isshin slogan. She got most of the individual sounds right, but not being familiar with the wartime slogan, she had no idea what it said or it's meaning.

Fittings are of the Type 98 style with leather-covered combat saya (scabbard). Rank tassel is Company Grade, meaning for Lt's and Capt's.

Bob, That's a legit Type 94 Officer gunto! They sometimes had fullered blades too. Hope someone can translate the kanji, they look quite unique!

Ditto on all the above. Stamps are upside-down on the fuchi, wrong place on the blade. Brass is almost always a giveaway (though there are some oxidized Nagoya tsukas that have a brassy tint). They are getting better on that Gifu stamp, but not there yet.

A Good Day, February, 1938.