Unusual Swords

[Bruce Pennington]

I'd like to start an on-going thread where we post the unusual. After reading my Fuller & Gregory, where he has saya wrapped in white cane, or gunto without stamps or numbers missing.

 

I'll begin with my 1918 "Ko" Cavalry sword. It is unusual because there are no stamps on the hand-guard. Also, the serial number on the drag has been overstamped with an additional "1".

 

Dawson discusses the fact that even though production stopped in 1935, they were carried and used through WWII. Damaged ones were sent back to factories for refurbishment. I believe this was what happened to this one. The hand-guard was replaced and never stamped, and the serial number of another saya was filed off (you can see the marks) and the new number stamped oddly. Additionally, dates were normally in kanji on the guard. But this date is english, just like the assembly numbers of WWII shingunto (which would also explain why the date wasn't on the guard)

[Kai-Gunto]

Are You sure there isnt any stamps here?

[Bruce Pennington]

Thomas,

Right, no stamps! I've attached more pics.

[lonely panet]

I started off collecting type 32s as a focus at one point, I really liked them for some silly reason.

 

these were first issued in 1899, sometimes called the troopers sword or type 32 sword for NCO"s

 

as a standard, they all have date, inspection and arsenal stamps the knuckle guard, and the last three years of manufacture were from approx. 1932, 32 and 36. but were still iussed all the way up tp the end.

 

if your sword is dated 1918 it should have a taisho stamp followed by 7.

 

yours has been re-issued at some point and that is why your numbers have been over stamped, also check the knuckle guard. as these were sometimes sold to the chinese after the war, so they might have been removed .

 

sorry but I don't see anything unusual, but if you can try and get them with mint stamps, as its easer to read them

[Bruce Pennington]

Hamfish, Thanks for the info! It was sold to me as a Japanese cavalry sword, and while I don't know anything about the cavalry swords of other nations, this one appears to fit the look and dimensions of a "Ko". The missing knuckle-guard stamps bother me; but issuing to the Chinese, like you say, might explain that. This one is really worn, the wooden grip is very worn, the blade shows many sharpenings (a really bad one with a grinder - probably some dumb boob after the war!) and the blade is very old with much corrosion. Also, the leather finger-loop is so old, I broke it by sticking my finger in it a couple of times! In fact, I only bought this one because it still had the loop!

 

Here are the dates inside the backstrap and on the end of the hand-guard where nakago goes through the end of it:

[lonely panet]

morning Bruce, all type 32s were issued blunt, it was up to the solder to put a edge on them, (thus why some are neat and some s**t).

 

if you get right into them, you will notice that most KO versions will only have the top half sharp, due to use on horseback.

 

an easy way to tell the KO and OTSU apart is to look at the drag on the scabbard, (one will be small and one will be big and fat)

 

also the numbers you have  shown above are just that, Numbers. The only Date Stamping was on the Knuckle guard ( if you can find one with matching numbers under 10,000.. grab it fast as these are all pre taisho and hard to find. one possible reason is such high use during battle, as they had a good reputation for a machine made blade according to sources.