Help identifying NCO Katana

[Martin Boniface]

Hello all!  I’m sure this is a routine topic on this forum but I was hoping to get some opinions on a sword i acquired recently.  Im a novice when it comes to antique weapons (I hope you’ll forgive any failures of terminology or forum etiquette) but  from what I’ve read it seems to match up well with the type 94 and 98 NCO Shin Gunto i have seen online.  Any opinions or information would be greatly appreciated!

The blade is in decent shape, some rust and nicks, has no stamps or markings of any kind save for a small area near the yokote that looks almost like a worn stamp but given the placement seems more likely to be an irregularity from use or manufacture.

 I know that removing the handle to examine the Tang is key to proper identification, but I am reluctant to do so as the bamboo peg looks fragile and might not survive the process.  The saya is extremely simple, lacquered rosewood with zero ornamentation.

 I know some of the recent history of this weapon, if that is helpful - it was brought back to America from Japan by a USN Lt. Commander whose vessel was assigned to occupation duty in Tokyo from 1945 into 1946.  I’m guessing it was leaned up in the corner behind the enormous Panasonic television where i found it for most of the intervening ~80 years. Thanks in advance for your thoughts and feedback!  I feel like i overdid it with the photos but i can provide more if necessary.  

Martin

[robinalexander]

Hi Martin, welcome.

 

Hmmmmm.... posted 23 hrs ago and no one has chimed in.  That's unusual. There are many (most in fact) more learned than me but I will let you know what 'I' see.  I can assure you I will be corrected as is necessary.

 

On this occassion and as you own the sword, I will use the correct terminology (without corresponding English explanation) ...this way, it may encourage you to look up the Glossary on this NMB site or just google the translation. Not wishing to be smart or nasty 

 

Firstly, no apology necessary for being a beginner and you can never have too many pictures, thanks, they are all relevant and helpful.

 

NCO's didn't carry Type 94's (earlier) or Type 98's ... they were purchased/provided by officers only.  Generally, NCO's were issued Type 95's. 

 

I think the blade is genuine albeit in slightly rough condition  the shinogi looks a little 'bent' to me and if that's correct it could mean a previous poor polish.

 

The saya may have had a leather combat cover over it but I tend to think it's a later replacement.  Does the habaki fit snuggly into the throat of the saya or is it a little loose? Either way originally, the sword would have been held in the saya by way of a leather press stud/clip that went through the hole in the tsuba, to clip onto the leather combat cover.

 

The fuchi (not military) looks typical of the type that you find on late war blades/mounts, so that is ok.

 

Confused about  leather seppa under the tsuba....doesn't look 'period' to me and a little larger than is necessary or, in my view, desirable.  But if everything is tight, then its done its job.

 

Ito binding, associated wear and kabutogane look authentic.

 

Now you really need to remove the tsuka in order to expose the tang if you want to know more about the sword. The mekugi peg is disposable and if it's that fragile, then the sooner it's replaced the better.  It's the ONLY thing holding the blade in the tsuka. Please post pics when/if you do.

 

Mekugi pegs are so easy to make and dress up (age).

 

Get some oil on that rust on the blade.

 

There's only 1/2 dozen words or so to look up and just ask if anything is not clear.

 

Rob

 

PS...have a look here....

 

Military Swords of Imperial Japan (Guntō) (ohmura-study.net)

Here is his page on swords with leather covered saya:

九八式軍刀略式外装 Informality mounting (ohmura-study.net)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bruce Pennington]

It's an interesting item, Martin, and Welcome to NMB!

 

Rob summed up the sword, so not much I can add.  I like the hamon (temper pattern).  Nice work by the smith.  I'm no expert on WWII wood-working materials, but I agree with Rob, that this saya (scabbard) doesn't seem to be something that would have been made during the war.  Many swords were grabbed and brought home by G.I.s without their saya.  It's possible someone, after returning home, made this really nice saya for the bare blade.  But maybe someone with more knowledge of saya wood-working (like @Grey Doffin) might be able to say.

 

I agree with Rob, that you will possibly gain more knowledge of your blade by removing the tsuka.  If the mekugi (peg) dissentigrates, it is easily replaced.  I have ordered them online for just a few dollars.  Many guys simply use a nice bamboo chopstick and cut an appropriate piece for a replacement.  There is always a chance the blade wasn't signed, but if you don't look, you will never know!

[DTM72]

1 hour ago, robinalexander said:

Confused about  leather seppa under the tsuba....doesn't look 'period' to me and a little larger than is necessary or, in my view, desirable.  But if everything is tight, then its done its job.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would guess that the leather seppa once had a short strip on it with a snap that engaged the leather covering that was once on the saya. Over time, the strap broke away, leaving only the seppa part...which was put onto the incorrect side of the tsuba at some point.

[John C]

I wouldn't surprise me to see a Kanemoto signature based on the style of hamon (pic is an example of one).

John C.

[Brian]

As mentioned a few times above, the bamboo mekugi is disposable. Go ahead and push it out, if it's damaged then no biggie. Replace it with one carved from a chopstick.
Seeing the tang is vital to knowing what you have.

[vajo]

I think its an older mino seki katana. Maybe Jumyo.

[mdiddy]

Based on the shape, hada, and what looks like 'lightbulbs' at the top of the gunome, I would surmise the blade is likely a showato

[Martin Boniface]

thanks for the input so far everyone!  I'm very excited to hear that the blade appears to be authenticI appreciate you using the proper terminology, seeing it in context is very helpful.

I'm relieved to hear that the peg can be disposed of.  Gave it a shot this evening and the peg fragmented immediately and took some coaxing with needle nose plyers but sure enough, signed/marked on both sides of the tang:

What do you think?

[vajo]

Seki swordsmith yoshiyasu 善康 ? 

 

I think Matt nailed it. It seems to be a showa-to. 

[Bencld]

Yoshikane ?

[mdiddy]

Agree with Yoshikane, Showa Jyu Roku Nen = 1941

[Bruce Pennington]

Sesko has a WWII Yoshikane:

 

YOSHIKANE (義兼), Shōwa (昭和, 1926-1989), Gifu – “Yoshikane” (義兼), real name “Mishina Yuichi” (三品由一)

 

Martin,

Thanks for taking a look "under the hood"!  Be sure to replace the mekugi ASAP.  Does the nakago have any small stamps near the top?  Might have to slide the tsuba/seppa set down to see them.  They could be on either side, and sometimes on the back edge.

 

And a couple great places to start learning about your sword:

 

THE Japanese SWORD GUIDE (japaneseswordindex.com)

 

and 

 

Military Swords of Imperial Japan (Guntō) (ohmura-study.net)

[Martin Boniface]

Again, many thanks for the translations and responses!  I found several similar weapons around the web, some with identical signatures.  If I may sum up briefly to make sure I've correctly understood - this is a fairly standard issue weapon made around 1941, the craftmanship is competent but not particularly special.  Am I right in assuming it was traditionally forged?  or was it a mass produced models?.  I will try to take a closer look at the nakago for any other marks.

 

Now regarding the saya - although I am not particularly well versed with shin-gunto or nihonto in general but I handle antiques with some frequency so I have a good instinct for age.  I'm not surprised to hear that the sword was made in the 20th century; it does not have the kind of wear I would associate with a century+ of use.  The saya on the other hand reads as possibly older to me.  I had considered that it was a standard issue version that lost its leather cover, but the wood has a patina that I often see in the oldest and most well loved furniture.  Is it possible this is older saya that was paired up with a contemporary blade?

[Bruce Pennington]

Martin,

Good summary.  I'm no fittings expert, so I would defer to your in-hand observations.  We see many WWII era blades in civil fittings, so it wouldn't surprise me if this had been fitted out in civil fittings and later re-fitted for the war.  The variety of war fittings never seem to end, so anything is possible.

[John C]

10 hours ago, Martin Boniface said:

Am I right in assuming it was traditionally forged?

I think probably semi-traditionally forged. This would not be a "gendaito" in the sense it was made from tamahagane steel, hand hammered and folded, then water quenched and tempered. But probably made from "puddled" or mill steel, air (machine) hammered, then possibly water quenched (I cannot see the typical oil quenching signs from the pics, however most blades of this type were oil quenched). That said, it is not a type 95 NCO blade, which was completely machine made, oil quenched, and unsigned. 

So, yes. Typical of the period but a decent part of military history. 

John C.

[Martin Boniface]

That's great to know John, thank you!  I'm curious - if the sword is not a Type 95, does it fall under any of the other typical era appropriate word categories?  And Bruce I greatly appreciate the translations and context.  I had a chance to take pictures of the fittings removed from the blade, figured I may as well post them and see if any further light can be shed:

one more small mark previously covered by the fittings:

closup of the tsuba and seppa, no marks I could locate.  The leather layer was at one point attached to the upper seppa with some kind of adhesive that left behind a greenish crust on one side of the upper seppa 

Again, thanks all being patient and helpful with a beginner's questions!  This has been very educational and I'm always excited to discover communities with knowhow and passion.  Hopefully I'll be back again someday soon.  One last question:  is there a particular type or brand of machine oil that you would recommend I wipe the blade with to prevent further rust?

[John C]

2 hours ago, Martin Boniface said:

does it fall under any of the other typical era appropriate word categories?

Yes. As noted by others, it would be called a showa-to; meaning a sword made in the showa era. But the community uses the term to describe a mass-produced blade made during the war period. The mark on the tang (seki) confirms the era.

John C.

[Bruce Pennington]

The whole rig is a Type 98 Japanese Army officer sword (gunto) in field, or combat saya.

 

I really love this site for learning all the various types:

http://ohmura-study.net/900.html

 

Look here for care and cleaning:

http://www.japaneseswordindex.com/care.htm