Type 95 with a hand forged blade

[drb 1643]

Hi All, I’m hoping for some information on this type 95. It appears to have a hand forged blade. Notice how there are no serial numbers, habaki or inspection stamps. Has anyone ever seen one like this? Any information will be greatly appreciated!

Thank you,

Tom

[BANGBANGSAN]

Tom

I saw a few 95 remount with none arsenal blade before, including a couple of sold in Japan.

[Shamsy]

There have been a number of these on eBay within the last few years. Some are very poorly constructed and obviously put together with a conveniently fitting blade. My opinion to date is that these are post war put together. I'll note up front that Stegal and I do not agree on that opinion. At least, he does not rhink they are all put together.

 

Logically, I cannot see any reason why a forged blade would be fitted in a mass produced koshirae.

 

But What about the officer private purchases? That was due to a shortage of swords, sure. But I think that was primarily the blades, not the koshirae. As far as I am aware, fittings were never an issue as a private purchase, so why have a good blade fitted to a mass produced koshirae? Why not get a koshirae made?

 

NCO upgrades? The Type 95 was issued equipment, not owned by the NCO. I imagine switching the blade would be frowned upon.

 

NCO bring your own sword program? In the photographs I've seen, the NCOs all carry civilian swords, some with leather covers. I again can't believe that the army would fit your own blade to military owned fittings.

 

I do think it is interesting that the fuchi and saya are unstamped, but that is not so rare as to convince me. The missing habaki is very suspicious to me. The habaki created the seal to the saya and could have easily been fitted. We know swords are shortened in the field, so I find the absence inconceivable.

 

I suspect that carrying around a sword that looked like issued NCO equipment would be considered very shameful. Nick has alluded to this with the rinji, saying that the army had to really sell it as 'superior' for officers to accept it, as it was considered the 'poor man's sword.

 

My thoughts are that these are all put together and sold as 'rare' to part the hopeful from their cash. This Is my own opinion, but I'd be pleased to discuss.

 

Edit:

More examples! They pretty much highlight exactly why I have issues with the suggestion they are anything but put together swords. I mean, those examples are all stamped, some have serial numbers on the saya. There is no consistency. Some look to be well fitting, others are missing core components like the habaki, probably because it would be too hard to fit one and the blade couldn't be modified without leaving evidence it was recently done.

[BANGBANGSAN]

Steve

I'm not sure if these remount 95 are all post-war put together either.

But there is plenty of post-war remount 98, even nowadays in US, Japan&China. Why not the dealer reuse 95 fittings and sell it to the customer like 95 mounts? Especially most of the blade of 95 got destroyed in Japan, it's a waste of resources, right?

 

There have been a number of these on eBay within the last few years. Some are very poorly constructed and obviously put together with a conveniently fitting blade. My opinion to date is that these are post war put together. I'll note up front that Stegal and I do not agree on that opinion. At least, he does not rhink they are all put together.

Logically, I cannot see any reason why a forged blade would be fitted in a mass produced koshirae.

But What about the officer private purchases? That was due to a shortage of swords, sure. But I think that was primarily the blades, not the koshirae. As far as I am aware, fittings were never an issue as a private purchase, so why have a good blade fitted to a mass produced koshirae? Why not get a koshirae made?

NCO upgrades? The Type 95 was issued equipment, not owned by the NCO. I imagine switching the blade would be frowned upon.

I do think it is interesting that the fuchi and saya are unstamped, but that is not so rare as to convince me. The missing habaki is very suspicious to me. The habaki created the seal to the saya and could have easily been fitted. We know swords are shortened in the field, so I find the absence inconceivable.

I suspect that carrying around a sword that looked like issued NCO equipment would be considered very shameful. Nick has alluded to this with the rinji, saying that the army had to really well it as 'superior' for officers to accept it as it was the 'poor man's sword.

My thoughts are that these are all put together and sold as 'rare' to part the hopeful from their cash. This Is my own opinion, but I'd be pleased to discuss.

Edit:
More examples! They pretty much highlight exactly why I have issues with the suggestion they are anything but put together swords. I mean, those examples are all stamped, some have serial numbers. There is no consistency.

[Shamsy]

I can't definitively prove it, it's only my opinion based on what I consider basic logic. I could probably make one of these myself if I had the spare NCO parts and an officer blade with a hole at least close to the needed fit. Or just stuff it in and don't add a habaki, then it's easy to fit a lot more sword blades.

 

Always an exception to the rule of course! One may be genuine, wartime fitted for whatever reason. However, this to me is much like the island sword issue. Unless the sword comes directly from veteran you trust, it's just another questionable 'who knows'.

 

I think the original sword Tom posted is a little more interesting because of the lack of stamping. We're it properly fitted with an NCO habaki I'd consider revising my opinion on THAT sword only. But I find the missing habaki such an obvious issue.

 

If monkey reads this I guarantee there will be a new influx of these 'rare' swords. That guy has bodged so many swords with mixed parts...

[Bruce Pennington]

I thought I saw something of a rubbed-out stamp on the fuchi, but after enlargement, I don't know what it is. Maybe just dings from assembly. Looks original though, not from Bubba. I was hoping it was the legendary “maru-Ai" (愛)” stamp. But it doesn't seem to be.

 

[Dave R]

Do you remember this one?.... Discussed on two different forums, aluminium hilt, traditional blade, and definitely a shotgun job.

[Stegel]

Over quite a few years of collecting, i have only come across 2 or 3 examples with non machine blades fitted.

One was a star stamped blade in Type 95 fittings, one was an old blade with custom scabbard but still type 95 fittings (Bang Bang's last photo), and more recently this example.

 

To me they are more of a curiosity and i have no particular interest to include them in my collection.

You can't walk safely on both sides of a barbed wire fence, but i think that arguments exist for both 'war' and 'post-war' construction.

In saying that, i won't side with one, while not fully convinced of the other, so i won't comment, make assumptions or any kind of generalisations. I will only make observations if i can.

 

Tom, 

What i find 'odd' with this example is that the blade tang has two mekugi holes, but only the end one 'appears' to be used.

The Aluminium handle is the last of the variants issued, and no mekugi mounting hole is drilled.

No Habiki present, but i think that has more to do with the blade dimensions (last hole to habiki notch, wider blade) and that may actually assist in keeping the handle on tightly. (i could see this becoming loose or sloppy with time)

A sarute has also been added to the handle.

 

Now for your info i have attached pictures of what i believe is the same sword some 4-5yrs ago when i first seen it.

It obviously has been played with since then, and who knows how many times before that. (to see smith signature no doubt)

 

If you're thinking of getting this sword for yourself, then i would advise to give it a miss.  This is my opinion as a collector of type 95 Gunto's.

 

Dave, the sword you've shown is obviously a type 98, with just an Aluminium handle added, not something that you would expect to be done really, and another to probably steer clear of.

[vajo]

Looks like a eyecandy combination. The Koshirae of the type 95 is very tough. So why not combine a real blade with a steel koshirae for war?

Maybe very heavy to carry it. 

 

I like it.

[Dave R]

 

Dave, the sword you've shown is obviously a type 98, with just an Aluminium handle added, not something that you would expeOct to be done really, and another to probably steer clear of.

tom3.jpg

 

 

 Exactly!  I bought it, sold the hilt fittings, and had the blade checked out. It turned out to be a nihonto, probably of Meiji/Taisho date and made for a Kyu-Gunto originally.

 

 I have since remounted it. A bargain blade, and an example of what you have to be aware of.

[drb 1643]

Thanks Stegel,

Yes, it does look like the same sword you pictured, and I noticed the famous grey blanket.

Tom