Hand forged blade in 95 mounts on eBay

[drb 1643]

Since the auction has ended I wanted to post the eBay number 374139642890, and hear what the members think about this item.

 Thank you all for any information,

Tom

[Kiipu]

Are you referring to this sword or to some other?  The blade was made by 紀政次 in April 1945.

*MINTY AND RARE* WWII Japanese Samurai Sword SHIN GUNTO WW2 KATANA GENDAITO NCO

 

[Shamsy]

A topic already long debated. I'm sceptical, others aren't. I've already presented a logical argument covering the points I think most meritorious in a previous thread and won't repeat it here, unless someone can find that thread so it's a simple copy paste job.

 

I'm going to say it as clearly as I can here. There was a shortage of swords. Some early NCO were privately sold due to this shortage. Most were issued equipment, owned by the Emperor, not owned by the officers. There is ZERO primary evidence of privately owned blades being fitted in NCO mounts. Not one account I've seen, nothing. No photo. Nothing in archives, accounts, period news papers etc. There are a number of such swords in existence. Some are crude hatchet jobs, other like this very good, though lacking a habaki. It's entirely a matter of opinion and in no way can anyone claim otherwise, UNLESS new evidence has been found to show it was common or even the rarest practice. Some would have you believe otherwise, but it's all conjecture. 

[Geraint]

These are really  not my field but I think the give away here are the nice shiny file marks where the new mekugi ana has been drilled.  Only shows in the one photo.

 

All the best.

[PNSSHOGUN]

Commiserations to the "winner" of the auction.

[drb 1643]

8 hours ago, Kiipu said:

Are you referring to this sword or to some other?  The blade was made by 紀政次 in April 1945.

*MINTY AND RARE* WWII Japanese Samurai Sword SHIN GUNTO WW2 KATANA GENDAITO NCO

 

Yes, that’s exactly the sword I am referring to.

 Thank you all very much for your help.

Tom

[mdiddy]

4 hours ago, PNSSHOGUN said:

Commiserations to the "winner" of the auction.

Hi, I'm the seller of this sword here. I'm all for educated debate amongst collectors and others learning from others in the community, but WTF is this? Just some nasty sarcasm from a sword troll. Thank you for your learned contributions to the field...

[Bruce Pennington]

7 minutes ago, mdiddy said:

I'm the seller of this sword

Hi Matt!  Appreciate you coming in to discuss this one, it's pretty perplexing.  Do you mind addressing a couple of questions?

 

If so,

1.  Did it have the coil spring under the latch when you acquired it, or was that added to make the latch tight?

2.  In hand, did the ana at the end of the nakago look newly drilled to you.  It seems to appear new in the photos.

3.  Where did you get the descriptive term "paratrooper gunto" and why would that term be linked to this rig?

4.  Your description: "The mountings are a very rare and high end Type 95 Shin Gunto" - how so?  On a 95 blade, these are normal and standard fittings.  The "ichi" stamp is less common, maybe 'rare' but the fittings are not.

 

Just pursuing clarity, not trying to be offensive in any way.

[vajo]

Why should an officer put his real gendaito into a NCO koshirae? And how should an NCO recieve a gendaito blade. Overall such a sword didn't make any sense. We all know how restrictet the Japanese ranks are. 

[mdiddy]

5 hours ago, Geraint said:

These are really  not my field but I think the give away here are the nice shiny file marks where the new mekugi ana has been drilled.  Only shows in the one photo.

 

All the best.

Hello Geraint - it is a fair point and observation. Yes, this NCO tsuka must have been repurposed for this sword. The nakago has an extra mekugi-ana placed in the position for normal usage in buke-zukuri type koshirae. However to my eye the lower mekugi-ana is not 'new', meaning not yesterday, not last year, and not in the past 70+ years. Attached is a picture of the kabutogane from another example of this type of sword I had. That blade was by Yoshichika and it did not have an earlier mekugi-ana from a former buke-zukuri koshirae, indicating it was purposefully made for a type of NCO koshirae.

 

What I want to point out from this photo though is the wooden insert from the tsuka that extended into the kabutogane. What is not evident in the sword I am selling is that there were wooden pieces similar to this in the bottom of the tsuka when I first removed it. They were shaped similar but broken. It was clear they were old and had been carefully put in place long ago to keep the nakago stabilized within the tsuka as there was not a full wooden core. I hope this makes sense and I wish I had photos of this feature to share. Point being, those wooden inserts that were not photographed for the listing, were old, of the correct age, and clearly not done by a westerner who was unfamiliar with these swords. 

 

Also, I would request in general to not make hasty presumptions of guilt (e.g. 'give away here') without a little more inquiry and investigation. Making determinations from one photo - taken under dynamic photographic constraints (i.e. with a flash) is really distant from assessing the sword in hand. I realize not everyone can have the sword in hand and we all want something to talk about, but I'm imploring to be careful with comments that have negative insinuations. As the seller, I don't have to be here, but I want to be and I want to be helpful too. 

[mdiddy]

41 minutes ago, vajo said:

Why should an officer put his real gendaito into a NCO koshirae? And how should an NCO recieve a gendaito blade. Overall such a sword didn't make any sense. We all know how restrictet the Japanese ranks are. 

Hello Chris,

 

Good questions and fair points. I would add that we see nihonto in all kinds of configurations of military mounts - early court swords, police wakizashis, naval patrol sabers, etc. There are also other examples of gendaito in NCO type mounts (see reply to Bruce below). 

 

As in any large organization, there are always those that go their own way. We see 99.5% of menuki on Type 98 koshirae are the same, but 0.5% are not, usually on swords belonging to higher ranks. Also, what were the rules - or were there any rules - on application of kamon to kabutogane, menuki, even habaki? Why no standard uniformity on habaki? What about lengths of nihonto in military koshirae, those are not uniform either? With a little more time, I can rattle off a hundred other inconsistencies. The Japanese military was made of people not machines, so there is some variance (however small) and edge cases that have to be considered within that context.

 

Hope that helps and happy to discuss.
 

[mdiddy]

56 minutes ago, Bruce Pennington said:

Hi Matt!  Appreciate you coming in to discuss this one, it's pretty perplexing.  Do you mind addressing a couple of questions?

 

If so,

1.  Did it have the coil spring under the latch when you acquired it, or was that added to make the latch tight?

2.  In hand, did the ana at the end of the nakago look newly drilled to you.  It seems to appear new in the photos.

3.  Where did you get the descriptive term "paratrooper gunto" and why would that term be linked to this rig?

4.  Your description: "The mountings are a very rare and high end Type 95 Shin Gunto" - how so?  On a 95 blade, these are normal and standard fittings.  The "ichi" stamp is less common, maybe 'rare' but the fittings are not.

 

Just pursuing clarity, not trying to be offensive in any way.

 

Hello Bruce,

 

I greatly appreciate your detailed and objective request for more information. I am not offended and would be more than happy to share what I can about this perplexing sword.

 

Here are answers to your questions to the best of my abilities:

 

1. Yes, it had the coil spring under the latch when I acquired it. In fact the sword would not function properly without it - the spring is tight and went flying when I initially disassembled the tsuka (doh!). I found it after a fitful search of my floor. Without the spring, the latch does not work at all.

 

2. No, to my eye the lower mekugi-ana at the end of the nakago did not look old and there were extra wood inserts at the bottom of the tsuka that were clearly in place for many years that were stabilizing the nakago (see answer to Geraint above for more info).

 

3. I 'acquired' the term 'paratrooper gunto' from my work on the Plimpton collection. I have seen three other variations of this type of sword before - two in other's collections and then the one I handled from Plimpton. The Plimpton sword was a Yoshichika and it only had the lower mekugi-ana. The blade was in a NCO tsuka but with a Type 98 saya (see attached photos below). Plimpton suggested these types of swords belonged to paratroopers. The Plimpton sword does have a little different configuration, in addition to the saya and lack of a second mekugi-ana, it also had a unique fuchi with spring clip and the blade had a habaki. Of the other two variations I saw, one did not have a habaki and the other did. I expect these NCO-hybrid swords are an area where there may be few examples and little data. Given Plimpton's experience, I anchored to his definition, understanding that the sword I am offering is a little different *and* late-war (check the date of the Masatsugu). Also, the saya on mine is not numbered so clearly the NCO saya was not previously housing a standard NCO arsenal blade. 

 

4. "The mountings are a very rare and high end Type 95 Shin Gunto": Yes, they are standard NCO type koshirae, but the point I would make is the same as last point from #3 above, there is no serial number on the saya so the koshirae did not previously house an arsenal blade. I have seen one other Type 95 without a serial number on the saya, from an older collection in the U.S. (I'll see if I can find the photos), and actually there was no serial number on that arsenal NCO blade either. This other NCO example is a separate topic, but point being it's rare to not have serial numbers on these types of koshirae. And, in my mind, that indicates that the mounts in question were used for the Masatsugu only, and not a prior arsenal blade.

 

Please let me know what you think. Happy to discuss.

[vajo]

It is a nice blade. So many ara nie. That blade would look amazing when its polished. 

 

 

unfortunatly it was polished by an untrained collector. The dark shadow in the shinogi shows it. But it is a beefy blade so its not a lot of los of material.

It is an interesting sword and i would really know the story behind that sword.

 

There where some Masatsugu swordsmith. The signature is not that from Taguchi Masatsugu.

 

[mdiddy]

13 minutes ago, vajo said:

It is a nice blade. So many ara nie. That blade would look amazing when its polished. 

 

 

unfortunatly it was polished by an untrained collector. The dark shadow in the shinogi shows it. But it is a beefy blade so its not a lot of los of material.

The koshirae shows no stamp or mark so it was not an arsenal sword. It is an interesting sword and i would really know the story behind that sword.

 

Thanks for the additional comments. I agree it is a good blade and would look great with a fresh polish.

 

I don't think it was polished by an untrained collector. Frankly, the current polish is still better than that from an untrained collector. Some nuanced attributes which can't be seen from the pictures - e.g. niku - are ok and not maligned like from an untrained polish. 

 

I agree with your points on the koshirae and agree it's an interesting sword. 

[vajo]

Matt the dark shadow comes wenn the line is not polished correct. 

[mdiddy]

6 minutes ago, vajo said:

Matt the dark shadow comes wenn the line is not polished correct. 

I'm not disagreeing the correctness of the polish. I'm saying it was not done by a post war Westerner because other attributes are correct like niku which you can not see from photos. I think it more likely this is wartime polish maybe by less trained wartime polishers (see photo). What do you see on other wartime swords like showato? Do you see Mukansa polish?

[vajo]

I can only speak from my experience Matt.

When it gets a fresh polish the line will be correct and the shadow is gone.

[Brian]

Guys....let's try and respect the fact that the seller is here, and it's an active auction. Not banning discussion, but theories and guesses don't help anyone.

 

[mdiddy]

4 minutes ago, vajo said:

I can only speak from my experience Matt.

When it gets a fresh polish the line will be correct and the shadow is gone.

Maybe we can just leave it at: 'when it gets a fresh polish the line will be correct and the shadow is gone."

 

The former about who polished it ventures into what I call 'negative insinuation' and as the seller, it is my imperative to make sure we have a direct and clear understanding on this. I hope you can understand.

 

Thank you Chris - I do appreciate and respect your comments and the healthy debate we can have. Happy to discuss more.

[mdiddy]

53 minutes ago, vajo said:

There where some Masatsugu swordsmith. The signature is not that from Taguchi Masatsugu.

This swordsmith is Kii Masatsugu. I think there are several extant examples from him. He was from Kyushu. 

 

Here is one reference from Stein's site, listed under 'JYUNGENRO' on left hand side.

[Bruce Pennington]

Thanks Matt, for the reply. 

 

Your discussion of the Plimpton example, along with the other from memory, adds a deeper layer to the issue.  Like Steve said above, these are just going to have to remain a mystery.  I have learned, over the years, some things I had initially written off as Bubba-work, later turned out more likely to be WWII period legit.  So, I'll hold on the cautious approach and stay on the fence!

 

Mr. Plimpton has had much more experience with swords than I, so I'll have to defer to him on this.  But for discussion's sake, I must say I do not know of any Army Paratroopers that existed in the war.  If anyone knows of them, please fill us in.  I've posted a discussion asking for knowledge on the subject over at Warrelics HERE.  As I state there, I am aware of the Navy's special landing force.  Austin Adachi has written an excellent book on them - https://books.google.com/books/about/Rikusentai.html?id=U-OszgEACAAJ

 

He doesn't discuss their swords (that I recall).  There are some excellent pics, one with several officers with what appear to be Army Type 94s!  The rest lack enough deal to tell what they are actually carrying.

[mdiddy]

34 minutes ago, Bruce Pennington said:

But for discussion's sake, I must say I do not know of any Army Paratroopers that existed in the war.  If anyone knows of them, please fill us in.

I'm not about to claim to be the most learned on the topic but there is some info out there:

 

1. From wikipedia of all places

2. Interesting source on the topic

3. Book available on amazon

 

[Ontario_Archaeology]

I belive the attack covered in this video was conducted by Japanese army paratroopers

 

[Kiipu]

6 hours ago, mdiddy said:

That blade was by Yoshichika and it did not have an earlier mekugi-ana from a former buke-zukuri koshirae, indicating it was purposefully made for a type of NCO koshirae.

 

I am familiar with that sword via private messaging.  It is known that Minamoto Yoshichika 源良近 was associated with Suya or at the least did contract work for them.  This is based upon a discovery by PNSSHOGUN via the link below.  I was of the opinion then and now that this sword was custom made by Suya.  An interesting sword to say the least.

Murata Swords 村田刀, Page 2

[Dave R]

Personal opinion, I think the date of the blade is a clue here. The bombing campaign had  obliterated most of the factories in Japan by this time with the result that production was dispersed to the extreme, and handwork was replacing machine production.

 Someone got a very nice (replacement) blade almost by accident, because that was all that was available.

Regarding the polish, another signed and dated gendai field pickup from the Pacific campaign was found to have been finished on a buffer during production in Japan. Desperate times, desperate measures.

[Bruce Pennington]

18 hours ago, mdiddy said:

 

1. From wikipedia of all places

2. Interesting source on the topic

3. Book available on amazon

Quite interesting reading, thanks Matt! 

 

This is one of the things I love about this forum.  We went from tossing around thoughts on a 'questionable' sword....to learning some great history (at least I learned a lot that I had never known!).

[mdiddy]

7 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

We went from tossing around thoughts on a 'questionable' sword....

I like ending on a happy note, but before we do I want to take one more turn on this thing. I don’t know how we define ‘tossing around thoughts’, but comments like ‘Commiserations to the "winner" of the auction’ seem pretty far from that intent. Jumping to a conclusion before any real ideas were actually tossed around doesn’t help either.

 

I won’t belabor the point, but I would make a simple request. If you are going to discuss items in the middle of someone’s sale, it would at least show courtesy to the seller to inquire and invite their input before reaching a half-baked conclusion and publicly passing judgement.

[drb 1643]

Hi All, the reason I started this thread was because I have a very similar sword by the same smith in duplicate mounts. I just wanted to find out more information about it. To have two swords fabricated by the same smith during the same time frame in duplicate mounts I think is more than a coincidence. I’ll have to attach  pictures in separate posts.

Thanks 

Tom

[drb 1643]

And some more.

Tom

[Stegel]

14 minutes ago, drb 1643 said:

To have two swords fabricated by the same smith during the same time frame in duplicate mounts I think is more than a coincidence.

 

I agree, and as Matt previously stated, there have been at least another 3 very similar configurations seen previously.