Puzzling Type 95 Nco

[GuyC]

Thought I'd throw in another sword with puzzling characteristics for my 2nd post. On the face of it a standard Type 95 but with some strange issues. To start

 

Original catalogue entry from auction house:

Japanese NCO's Alloy Hilted Shin-Gunto Sword. 271/2 inch single edged blade with narrow rear fuller. Rear serial number ''8822''.Brass tsuba. Copper ferrule (fuchi)with armoury stamp. One piece alloy grip with false binding and pommel with floral decoration. Contained in its khaki brown painted steel scabbard with darkened brass floral decorated mounts. Minor dents to scabbard. Some service wear.

 

My stats:

Weight: sword only 2lb 4oz (1.02kg), with scabbard: 3lb 3oz (1.44kg)
Length overall: 36'' (92cm) Blade: 26.25'' (66.25cm) tip to mune-machi Sori about 0.6'' (1.6 cm)
POB: 5.5'' (14cm) from tsuba.
Profile taper 1.14'' (29.1mm) in front of habaki, 1.02'' (26mm)at mid blade, 0.81'' (20.7mm) 2 inches from tip.
Distal taper 0.27'' (6.9mm) in front of habaki, 0.23'' (5.9mm)at mid blade, 0.18'' (4.8mm) 2 inches from tip.

Tsuba 2.89'' (73.5mm) by 2.31''(58.6mm), 0.35'' (9mm) thick

  

No discernible hamon on blade which is machine made. Serial number 8822 at rear side of blade together with a stamp for Tokyo.  Nakago is unsigned and has no stamps only slight file marks. Copper Fuchi is marked with stamps Suya, Tokyo and Kokura.  The tsuka is worn , false same is painted a faded dirty white while some dark brown paint remains on the false ito but mostly it has worn down to a paler undercoat or to bare metal.

 

1st puzzle; look at the saya... it is an officer pattern but fitted to receive the NCO pattern lock. The saya fits exactly and does not appear to be a latter lash up/replacement. In my research I found this information:

 

This article by Nick Komia

http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/deflating-another-myth-type-3-army-officer-s-sword-expanded-version-584796/

''1937 Officers had to make do with Type 95 NCO swords due to a worsening shortage

The only shortage problem that Ohmura-san’s site refers to is the long ago case of 1931/32 when shortages of officer swords required the arsenal to sell prototype type 91 NCO swords to officers. He failed to notice that by 1937 new officers found that they could not get hold of any swords to complete their outfits as per regulations. So in desperation, they turned to the arsenal, asking that they be allowed to purchase the Type 95 NCO swords as a substitute. On 29th July 1937, their request was granted and it was agreed to let them buy Type 95s at a price of 33 Yen a piece. They were to fill in the private purchase application forms as provided in the July 1937 memo and apply to Kokura or the Tokyo Arsenal directly with the money. Not only officers in the field, but also vets back home were allowed to buy these NCO swords. The army thus ended up with many officers equipped with the wrong swords. '' 

 

Would the the serial number would seem to fit a sword produced around 1937-8?

 

2nd puzzle

The ha and mune machi do not line up. I know this is often the sign of a Chinese fake which allows the use of a cheap habaki. However, the habaki on this sword is properly constructed with a machigane for the ha-machi to but up against, something not normally seen on a Chinese fake. ( I have tried to photograph it but not too successfully) 

 

So fake or real?, NCO or Officer making do with an NCO pattern sword? All suggestions and opinions gratefully received.

 

[Stephen]

Fake

[raaay]

sorry I have to agree with Stephen , and not a very good a fake IMHO

[vajo]

I think some parts are genuine.

[Shamsy]

Better picture of the fuchi please, and that general area when the sword is assembled.

[GuyC]

Steve

I hope these help. Obviously, I will be disappointed if it is an out and out fake. The Chinese know what a Type 95 saya looks like so why create an Officer hybrid, and add doubt to what would otherwise have been a pretty convincing forgery? It is also the only Chinese fake habaki I have seenthat seems to have been properly constructed and fitted to the blade.

 

[Shamsy]

Beyond doubt, the sword is a genuine.

 

As to the saya. My OPINION is that it too is genuine. I cannot definitively prove that, because the saya falls within the realm of what we call ‘prototype’ or unique. My main concern is the crude nature of the fittings. They are not very well made. However, everything is standard pattern and the throat matches many well known patterns on Japanese swords.

 

Your hypothesis of this being a private purchase is a good one. I can see no better explanation.

 

Of course I have to state that if you ever consider selling or trading the sword, I would happily add it to my collection. Well done in an unusual find.

[BANGBANGSAN]

Looks genuine to me.The type 98 scabbard has add a  type 95 throat .

[lonely panet]

IMHO 

 

a type 95 nco with a after market type 98 saya made to fit.

 

at what point who knows, easy way to tell is to shake the whole thing sidways. the blade shouldnt rattle in the saya. if it does i may point toward post war replacemants.

 

NOTE, the koiguchi dosent seem to match the whole piece for age and wear, also the fitting is poor. so the blade will rub against it during drawing, (esp the blade as its worn from the belt HA facing downwards)

 

but hey what would i know, im talking out my ass.

thanks to dav, thats my new NMB handle

[Bruce Pennington]

I agree with Shamsy & Hamfish! Blade and its fittings legit (lucky you with such a low serial number!!!)

 

The saya and its fittings are a puzzle. The paint quality on the saya is crappy, unusual for a 94/98. The ashi and semegane look great while the koiguchi and ishizuke look worse than a Chinese fake! The Chinese fakes are better than this work! HA! All I can imagine is that with the shortage, and suppliers scrambling to meet production demands, mabye this custom koshirae guy couldn't get all the fittings for this, and had a local guy craft the odd ones for him on the "hurry-up".

 

Guy, I think your theory is right-on.

[GuyC]

 easy way to tell is to shake the whole thing sidways. the blade shouldnt rattle in the saya. if it does i may point toward post war replacemants.

 

 

No rattle at all, everything is tight and well fitted. That is what lead me down the road of looking to see if genuine Type 95s were ever put in mismatched saya. I think we have to say that opinion is divided on this sword. I have handled obvious Chinese fakes and this doesn't seem to be one of those, but I agree it does have issues. Whether you think those issues add to the story of the sword or detract from it is an issue for debate. Thank you to all who have replied so far.

[Shamsy]

As stated, there is absolutely no question whatsoever that the sword is genuine. The only question is the saya, so the good part is you are half way there!

 

Buuuuuut, if you are not sure, I will happily buy it and provide you with an alternative to purchase that conforms to typical pattern ;D

[paul griff]

Hello Guy,

The last time I got into a debate over real or fake it nearly caused an internet fight...but here we go...FAKE...! That applied patina to the fittings always gets my alarm bells ringing...The brass alloy is typical of the modern material and it just isn't right..Look at the safety retaining clip it still has the applied finish,no wear from use at all...Poor casting on some parts mixed with good casting on others ( tsuba had good definition as does hilt ) ..Sarute poor casting especially seen on the barrel locating lugs...Screws are wrong...It's a Chinese made "Frankenstein"... That said at the right price these things are handy to learn and compare...No insult's meant and only my opinion of course....

Regards,

Paul...

[Shamsy]

Heavy sigh.

 

The sword is an early example by Suya. They are the only contractor that produced swords in the 6500-8000 range. These swords are readily apparent by not only their low serial numbers, but by the unique tsuka-ito pattern which is a direct copy of the copper handle series. You with this find that both sides do NOT mirror each ither, but in fact reflect the true pattern of a real ito wrap. The tsuka style was later changed to be a mirror image on either side, with one exception that's off topic.

 

These swords also exhibit a different screw variety to the later patterns. You will note that one side peirces the middle of a raised band of ito, while the other is centered in a diamond of ito. This was not a consideration on copper handle for obvious reasons, but seems to have been unsatisfactory once the second screw was added within the handle.

 

The patina is a near perfect match for these swords. Of the three examples I have studied in hand, they all seem to be in similar state.

 

You may also find that the tsuba is thicker, in line with the copper handles. Presumably width was reduced shortly after the change to aluminum to save on both materials and weight.

 

Sorry folks, but any assertion this is fake, repro or modern is simply, unequivocally wrong. I'm talking about the sword only... But I'd suggest the saya is genuine too.

 

You can observe what I have described in the attached photos.

[Dave R]

 I did wonder at Shamsy's eagerness to buy this one.... good on him for coming clean at the end. I have no real knowledge or real interest in the NCO patterns, but have seen enough from Shamsy to go with his judgment on them.

[Shamsy]

I'm not taking offense Dave, but I will add that I never stated it was fake, quite the opposite. The offers to buy were and are completely genuine, if a little tongue-in-cheek. I'm not in the business of ripping people off, or I would have said from the start it was fake and simply made a low offer from there. It's an interesting sword due to the saya and I would happily add to my collection.

[GuyC]

Shamsy

You will certainly have first option , but I'm afraid I don't often sell swords, my wife says I'm too much of a hoarder. I prefer discerning collector myself. Thank you for some really interesting information.. I had no idea about the arrangement of the ito. I am putting up some more pictures to further illustrate what you have pointed out. If I still had the brains I was born with I would have posted these straight away and given everybody a fighting chance of identifying the peculiarities of this sword.

[Shamsy]

You're very welcome Guy. I only collect the Type 95s and while I'm interested in other swords and still get a little carried away, I've managed to steer myself back on track each time... Okay, the Mantetsu was an exception... Anyway...

 

The best part of NCO collecting are the many, many variations across time, makers and patterns. I find it fascinating and always seem to find exceptions and interesting oddities... Like your sword. I've become leery of quick conclusions, because there really is so much depth to the subject the books don't touch. It's out there, for the most part, if you dig deep enough.

[paul griff]

Hello,

And with not such a heavy sigh ! As stated,there is no question whatsoever that the sword is genuine " ... That's a very opinionated response..!..I'm here to learn and obtain useful and interesting information and at the same time pass on anything that could be useful to fellow collectors.So far,and when applying the "laws" of collecting to the sword it fails on every count..! The comparison swords to me only solidify my suspicions that the sword is a fake...Prototype ? No...! Not even for the saya... If it was a prototype surely it would have a serial number or some form of identifying mark..? As for the 'patina'...I cannot agree !! Just look at the Kuchi-gane...patinated on the outside but unblemished where it meets the hilt...As if painted whilst blade is in the saya... And finally,as I mentioned previously ...the brass alloy just doesn't look right and to me that's highlighted in the kuchi-game and ishizuke...!

Here to learn and only to happy to be corrected but not dictated too...

Paul..

[Shamsy]

I'm really rather confused at this point. I've only stated the sword is genuine beyond doubt. Never the saya? You only seem to be providing a rebuttal on the saya in the second post? Now my opinion on the saya is only that, an opinion (which has been acknowledged how many times already?), though it seems to fit in with the period of private purchase that occured, so that theory is as valid as any. Here, let me quote myself;

“the saya falls within the realm of what we call ‘prototype’ or unique. My main concern is the crude nature of the fittings. They are not very well made. However, everything is standard pattern and the throat matches many well known patterns on Japanese swords.”

 

So...... That's really no different than what you later say. Is it a prototype? Well if not it is certainly unique! So I guess I'm probably covered there too.

 

Now I've carefully read the rest of my posts and can find no point at which I state the saya is guaranteed genuine, only that my opinion is that it is period.

“The only question is the saya, so the good part is you are half way there!”

 

The post with the photo too, not even a mention of the saya?

 

Anyway, I've provided a bit of information for folks to take away on early production, aluminum hilted Suya. Not many of these old girls left, so if you see one and can't decide if it is real or not, do let me know!

[Bruce Pennington]

Hello,

And with not such a heavy sigh ! As stated,there is no question whatsoever that the sword is genuine " ... That's a very opinionated response..!..I'm here to learn and obtain useful and interesting information and at the same time pass on anything that could be useful to fellow collectors.So far,and when applying the "laws" of collecting to the sword it fails on every count..! The comparison swords to me only solidify my suspicions that the sword is a fake...Prototype ? No...! Not even for the saya... If it was a prototype surely it would have a serial number or some form of identifying mark..? As for the 'patina'...I cannot agree !! Just look at the Kuchi-gane...patinated on the outside but unblemished where it meets the hilt...As if painted whilst blade is in the saya... And finally,as I mentioned previously ...the brass alloy just doesn't look right and to me that's highlighted in the kuchi-game and ishizuke...!

Here to learn and only to happy to be corrected but not dictated too...

Paul..

Paul, you state you are "...here to learn..." yet disregard the expertise of one of the most knowledgable Type 95 experts that exist in the community. He states that it is "undeniably" legit, and you complain that it's a "ver opinionated" statement - well of course it's opinionated - it's his opinion! If you are interested in learning you might spend some time asking what it is about the gunto that seems so legit.

 

Well you didn't ask, but here's a few points:

1. The fuller groove is accurate, even down to the proper shape at the kisaki, which fakes (to my knowledge) haven't gotten right yet.

2. The Tokyo inspector stamp on the blade is completely accurate, which is so far beyond the fakers to get right.

3. The nakago is completely accurate, well made, with proper patina. The fakers have yet to successfully reproduce a beautiful nakago like this.

4. The barrel screws are perfect.

5. The base of the ito design is perfect.

6. The precision of the ito wrapping is perfect, not the "sand-blasted" look the fakers produce.

7. The serial numbers are legit.

8. The seppa and tsuba are completely accurate.

 

And I'm nowhere near the expert on 95's that Steve is. There is NOTHING about the gunto that looks fake.

 

NOW, as to the saya, I agree about the bright aluminum screws. I don't like them. As I stated above, I don't like the paint job on the saya. I find it odd that the saya has legit semegane and ashi, but horrific ishigane and koiguchi. Weird. So is the saya a piece-together contraption? If so, the possibilities are by 1. A foriegn post-war dealer, or 2. a post-war collector. Or is the saya something done by a early war Japanese shop, grabbing what he could get and throwing poorly made make-shift other stuff in to complete the job? We know that hacks existed out there during the war because Nick Komiya has provided articles and Tech orders complaining of their poor products.

 

So, the origin of the saya is any mans' guess. Yours is just as good as mine, and both have been stated. Guy is the owner and gets to roll with his own take on the matter.

[Stegel]

Hello to all,
You have an interesting sword here Guy, and it's sparked a lively conversation about it aswell!

I thought i'd offer my opinion for what it's worth....

1- The sword is genuine, albeit it has the original sarute loop missing and a type94/98 one fitted instead.
 

 

Would the the serial number would seem to fit a sword produced around 1937-8?

         Yes, the serial number is from the 1938 production run. The Handle is also the correct 'early' casting which was used for a short time only before being altered to better accommodate the mounting screw so that it didn't protrude into the palm of the hand.


2- The Saya appears to be genuine, in that the textured paint finish is correct for the type 94/98 scabbard. I think it would be the heavier steel type construction, and not the lighter versions or even the Aluminium version which was also made.
   The fittings are somewhat cruder than what i would expect, particularly the end cap and the scabbard throat itself, which has been modified or purposely made, to allow the original locking mechanism of the sword to function properly.

Now, the speculation as to the history of the sword and how it came about to be the way it is.
For your sake, i would love for it to be a period piece made exactly the way it is now, but i have some reservations based on things i've seen during my time as a collector of type 95 swords.
Firstly,I do not believe that this is a "chinese" fake at all.
The best case scenario i can see is that it was some sort of field repair/replacement, but i think this might be stretching it a bit.

Personally, i would put my money on a post-war construction.
I also doubt that it is any kind of 'prototype' aswell, although the possibility exists that it may have been intentionally made to appear like one.
Those of you who have Dawson's book, would be aware of the possible prototype for the type 95 sword which is mentioned. Well, it so happens, that the best example i can think of, was in fact a prototype (type-95) all aluminium construction, in very rough condition, complete, except for the scabbard throat which was missing along with the locking mechanism in the handle.
I came across it in the possession of a rather small dealer who didn't advertise and wasn't well known. About one year later, the EXACT same sword was offered for sale by a different dealer as the RARE Prototype as per Dawson's book, but it now had a scabbard throat and locking mechanism !!
I must also admit that it was reasonably well made, and could of passed as a period piece for all intensive purposes, (as it no doubt did with the sale).... but i KNEW better!!  I've added pictures for you to see.

Dawson's entry on the prototype from his book-

The rough sword with no scabbard throat-

One year later, the same sword, now for sale-

Now Guy, getting back to your sword, i didn't mean to muddy the waters, or take your thread off on a tangent, i just wanted you to understand why i have come to the 'opinion' that i have.
 

Cheers

[Dave R]

I'm not taking offense Dave, but I will add that I never stated it was fake, quite the opposite. The offers to buy were and are completely genuine, if a little tongue-in-cheek. I'm not in the business of ripping people off, or I would have said from the start it was fake and simply made a low offer from there. It's an interesting sword due to the saya and I would happily add to my collection.

 I am sorry if you got the wrong impression here.I got the point from the start that you thought the sword was legit, and that your offer to buy was based on that judgment. The "coming clean" bit was more about you sharing your opinion in detail. Perhaps it's a problem with internet communication, without facial expression or vocal cues what is meant to be light-hearted comes over as something else.

[GuyC]

Just to point out that the Kuchi-gane is not painted at all. False colour  given by my trying to make the pictures as clear as possible I think.   Apologies if that has been misleading people. It is unpainted patinated brass with a lot of dirt in the crevices. I agree the screws do look bright although steel not aluminium. 

[Shamsy]

Dave; That was why I added I did not take offense, as I did not think that it was your intent to insinuate anything at all. But I did want to put a reply, on the off chance someone thinks that was the case. It really is hard to communicate online, as you can read all sorts of tones into something that may or may not be intended.

 

Bruce; That's very flattering mate, but undeserved. There's no way I'd call myself an expert on anything! I just happen to enjoy 95s and try to absorb as much about them as possible. Occasionally I can provide a snippet of useful information, not much more.

 

Paul; Not trying to have an argument (though I think it's been rather pleasantly civil so far), so I will include some more provenance for the sword. This has once again come from Nick and his work translating old documents -

"Changes from 24th June 1939, in which the most notable change was the change in the cord wrap pattern of the grip, but the Mekugi hole position, Mekugi screw configuration, wood inlay size for the grip were also changed at the same time."

Here is the spec change document from the Japanese National Archives that details these changes -

 

Stegel; Good to see you, I was hoping you'd arrive! No point discussing the sword, we know what we have there. I'm of two minds on the saya myself. To me it seems to be a reasonably genuine, if slightly unusual piece. I've seen pictures from a private collection of nery similar saya throats attached to officer swords, so to me the configuration is correct enough. I've really said it all already, but the fitting quality does not sit well with me, though the rest of the saya seems okay. I had assumed that no one would manufacture a part, and I still think it's unlikely really. This is not on the level of the prototype aluminium sword, so it seems hardly worth the bother really. But it could be anything.

 

Guy; The sword along is worth hanging onto. I think that the saya is ever an issue of contention. I know there were all sorts of questions I have had over odd swords, not to mention one I have with weird filing marks. Of course later, thanks to the tenacity of Bruce with his 'need to know' attitude, we found out that it was a roman numeral system, and my sword actually matched! So what seemed like a hodge-podge of pieces was, in my mind, verified as an original matched piece.

 

At the end of the day, I think Guy, holding the sword is the one best placed to make a call on the saya. We each have an opinion, but it's probably not something we'll be able to definitively determine.

[Stegel]

Hello,

And with not such a heavy sigh ! As stated,there is no question whatsoever that the sword is genuine " ... That's a very opinionated response..!..I'm here to learn and obtain useful and interesting information and at the same time pass on anything that could be useful to fellow collectors.So far,and when applying the "laws" of collecting to the sword it fails on every count..! The comparison swords to me only solidify my suspicions that the sword is a fake...Prototype ? No...! Not even for the saya... If it was a prototype surely it would have a serial number or some form of identifying mark..? As for the 'patina'...I cannot agree !! Just look at the Kuchi-gane...patinated on the outside but unblemished where it meets the hilt...As if painted whilst blade is in the saya... And finally,as I mentioned previously ...the brass alloy just doesn't look right and to me that's highlighted in the kuchi-game and ishizuke...!

Here to learn and only to happy to be corrected but not dictated too...

Paul..

Hi Paul,

Please don't take this the wrong way, but, could you please tell me what you mean by the "laws" of collecting??

I have been collecting these for over 20yrs and have been collecting overall since 1974, so i am not sure of what you mean and how these "laws" led you to the conclusion that the sword (not scabbard) is fake??

 

Hello,

And with not such a heavy sigh ! As stated,there is no question whatsoever that the sword is genuine " ... That's a very opinionated response..!..I'm here to learn and obtain useful and interesting information and at the same time pass on anything that could be useful to fellow collectors.So far,and when applying the "laws" of collecting to the sword it fails on every count..! The comparison swords to me only solidify my suspicions that the sword is a fake...Prototype ? No...! Not even for the saya... If it was a prototype surely it would have a serial number or some form of identifying mark..? As for the 'patina'...I cannot agree !! Just look at the Kuchi-gane...patinated on the outside but unblemished where it meets the hilt...As if painted whilst blade is in the saya... And finally,as I mentioned previously ...the brass alloy just doesn't look right and to me that's highlighted in the kuchi-game and ishizuke...!

Here to learn and only to happy to be corrected but not dictated too...

Paul..

 

I have a Prototype- as per Dawsons book, and exactly like the one i posted pictures of in my previous post. There are only three that i know of and none have any serial numbers or Arsenal stampings on them.

This is because they preceeded any production run and were in concept phase.

I have other prototypes which were made well into the production run, and these have serial numbers.

My point here is that-  No,- Prototypes do not necessarily have serial numbers/stampings and care should be taken before making such assumptions.

 

Cheers 

[Brian]

Awesome to see some of the best minds when it comes to these swords all discussing this on one thread. It is exceptionally educational for the rest of us, since all points are explained in detail.
If we can keep this civil, then it has potential to be extremely useful to other collectors. Thanks all for participating.

[Bruce Pennington]

Awesome to see some of the best minds when it comes to these swords all discussing this on one thread. It is exceptionally educational for the rest of us, since all points are explained in detail.

If we can keep this civil, then it has potential to be extremely useful to other collectors. Thanks all for participating.

Thanks Brian!

 

Paul - My apologies my good man! I was at the end of a LOOOONNNNG work day and had some adult beverages under my belt, so I got a bit emotional in my last post! Ironic, because I hate it when I read a thread where guys are going off on each other. Hugs and Kisses!

[paul griff]

Round two,ah ah..

No problem Bruce,pm sent...Great minds ? ( maybe not so great in my case ! )...got engrossed in the topic last night at the same time drinking everything I could get my paws on..! Back on the rum so here we go...Chris, Law used as a synonym so not literal...Advice given to me by a wise owl when I started out and funds were precious....If it doesn't look right...walk away..! That's number one...Cannot progress to number two...Does it feel right ? Maybe over cautious using this system but I've done o.k up until now....But venture out of the comfort zone...Bang...caught...It's a minefield out there...!

Steve ( Shamsy ) , Your extensive knowledge and detailed information is appreciated and valued..

With the meteoric rise in price of nco swords and subsequent investment potential of these swords topics like this are priceless so thanks for posting Guy...

Regards,

Paul.

[vajo]

Good morning.

These topic shows how important it is to share knowledge. A good network of teached collectors is the greatest value.