Prototypes or just Variation of Type 3 Rinji?

[waljamada]

I've had this Rinji (type 3) gunto for a while signed by Torio Hiromasa dated 1943.  I've read this kind of type 3 koshirae with some brass fittings was a prototype via Ohmura's site and other random places on the internet but also heard that they are simply a variation of the Type 3.  Perhaps they were made early in manufacturing of the type 3...or perhaps throughout Type 3 production as an available option?  I read in the Type 3 Timeline forum that the Rinji model was thought up by 1941 and not kicked into full roll out until 1943.  I also read that blades dated early as 1941 in Rinji Type 3's (could have just used an older blade in a rinji koshirae though) in Bruce Pennington's records.  To me the Torio Hiromasa being a 1943 blade could potentially lean away from being a prototype as it's much closer to the 1943 roll out period than the 1941/42 "mock up" periods.  I bought mine thinking it was just a variation.  Wondering if anyone knows the consensus on these or perhaps seen or come across any other information? 

 

First pics are of my Hiromasa and second sword is from a listing a long time ago for a Nagamitsu with type 98 tsuba, likely re-wrapped tsuba and the fittings do look a bit more like painted rather than brass.  Last one is from an NMB post in 2013 where it was said it's a variation rather than from a prototype production round.

 

Thanks in advance for any insights!

[mecox]

Adam, does your sword have any stamps on the nakago mune?

[Brian]

I have at least 2 swords in the same mounts as the first one. Same wrap and menuki, and diagonal saya wrap. These mounts almost always contain fairly decent Gendaito from what I've seen. Definitely swords worth checking out if you see one.
Also love to know more about this style. It was clearly a pattern.

[PNSSHOGUN]

Given the simplification of fittings & reduction in quality, a last stage variant using less man hours seems most likely.

[waljamada]

7 hours ago, mecox said:

Adam, does your sword have any stamps on the nakago mune?

 

Yes, a double yama.  I'm gonna call this sword the "Two Mountain".

[Bruce Pennington]

Adam, that is a beautiful Hiromasa!

Looks like I should have read that old Rinji thread before posting on it.  It's got some outdated info that I'll have to update.  The Contingency model was designed in 1938 and production and sales began 22 August 1940.

Unveiling the Rinji-seishiki Sword in 1940 - Nick Komiya

 

It's taking me a while to find his post revealing the Uniform regulation change that allowed, even required, simplified fittings designs due to war shortages and Allied bombing damage to the industry.  I'll post when I find it (or maybe @Kiipu has the reference??)  My gut feel is this style was due to that relaxation of the mil specs and request to simplify weapons production.

 

Update: Found it!  From Rinji-seishiki to Daiyou-seishiki of Weapon Specs - Nick Komiya

It was 1943:

"The Daisei-Heiki Era

Then by 1943, this kind of choice would no longer be available, as the standard quality stocks ran out. By this time, even primary weapons like rifles were routinely produced in nonstandard specs.

Such symptoms were no longer of a "Rinji" nature but a chronic one, expected to get even worse in the future. So they officially coined a new phrase to describe these items of “compromised specs” and called them “Daiyo-Seishiki-Heiki” 代用制式兵器, (Substitute-Spec Weapons), which they abbreviated into the term, “Daisei-Heiki” 代制兵器."

"These downgraded spec standards were applied to items that had little impact on military performance, like weapon accessories such as muzzle lids, rifle oilers made of resin instead of brass, belts, holsters and ammo pouches made of rubberized canvass instead of leather, woolen uniform items replaced by cotton, felt or even silk mixed in wool."

[Bruce Pennington]

2 minutes ago, waljamada said:

double yama.

山(yama) Matsuyama Branch office of Kokura Arsenal

[waljamada]

The only thing about this variation that bucks the standard Rinji trend to me is that it uses some materials that they were switching out due to supply at that point.  Brass on the tsuka and aluminum for the seppa.  

[Bruce Pennington]

Here's another from the 3rd page of that Rinji Timeline thread:

 

[mecox]

Adam, that is a very nice blade from a good smith.  There is info on Torio Hiromasa in NMB Downloads:  (1) Showa/Ehime  and (2) Fukuoka/Kokura.

[PNSSHOGUN]

Kanehide: https://page.auction.../auction/q1157901121

 

 

 

[Conway S]

Another example on eBay right now:

 

- Signed Ki Masatsugu

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/306045414160

 

 

 

[vajo]

That term Rinji Seishiki (Special Contingency 臨時正式 ) from Nick Komiya who was neither a collector than an military expert, read that word in only one document and you all jump in that boat and call this nonsense name which doesn't refer to a sword type. 

Call it what ever but Rinji Seishiki is total worse. It sounds like an obsession 

You could search the whole wide net about this 臨時正式 and you will find nothing.

 

"Sweetheart? Yes, darling. Have you seen my "Special Contingency" sword? Yes, it's in the umbrella stand.  Could you tell me, why do all the other officers have Type98 and you have a makeshift sword?
Oh, darling, I'm just a sucker."

 

Btw. The first "makeshift" special contingency rinji seishiki swords with high quality gendai-to blades came out 1942. And why the IJA produce low quality showa-to blades from medium range smiths equipped with your so called "high quality " Type98 mounts?

They put scrappy showa-to blades into a bling bling koshirae and expensive tamahagene forged gendai blades in a special contingency koshirae for what? Blaming their officers?

 

Is that really that what you belive?

 

The type 3 has iron fittings. The type 98 is equipped with brass fittings. Did you think the ancient samurai walk into a war with brass fittings? 

[RobCarter3]

I don’t think this nomenclature debate will ever be resolved. FWIW, I like “Type 100” or “Type 0” for this pattern. We now know that the prior belief in a 1943 adoption date is incorrect, so “Type 3” is wrong (but not as wrong as “SNLF/NLF,” “marine,” or “Type 44”).  “Type 3” is the prevailing term outside this and a handful of other collector forums, so it’s likely here to stay. 
 

Technically, none of the Showa officer sword patterns had official “Type,” designations, because their requirements were promulgated with the uniform regulations.  But, there’s a longstanding practice among both Western and Japanese collectors of referring to officer swords as “Type 94,” “Type 98,” etc. 
 

@vajo, I don’t think the takeaway from Nick Komiya’s articles on this pattern should be that it’s just a lesser, ersatz version of the Type 98. The Type 0 is a superior fighting sword mount. High and low quality blades exist in both Type 98 mounts and Type 0 mounts. The high-quality Type 0 mounts with ishime-lacquered wood saya were undoubtedly more time and labor intensive to produce than painted steel Type 98 saya. 
 

Several things can be simultaneously true: 

- this pattern incorporated improvements and addressed common points of failure based on feedback from the field;

- this pattern reduced the use of war-critical materials and was intended to help alleviate the sword availability/cost shortage;

- high-quality gendaito were sold to officers at artificially low prices thanks to heavy subsidization by the army through the RJT program. 

[george trotter]

To quote Robert C

Several things can be simultaneously true: 

- this pattern incorporated improvements and addressed common points of failure based on feedback from the field;

- this pattern reduced the use of war-critical materials and was intended to help alleviate the sword availability/cost shortage;

- high-quality gendaito were sold to officers at artificially low prices thanks to heavy subsidization by the army through the RJT program. 

 

Absolutely correct.

Also, based on what I have read on this subject, especially from Nick Komiya's research, is that the term Rinji Seishiki seems the correct 'Type' name for these mounts. The purpose was to ease demand on alloys/brass/ aluminium etc and also to be a battlefield mounting that did not have the faults of the Type 98. The lack of an official 'Type' name/number was because it was not intended as a new Type, but as an alternative mount for those officers who wished/needed to have a 'cheaper' costing mount, thus reducing the overall cost of a service use sword. 

 

Just on another point, the variations seen in the mountings of these Rinji swords may just be an example of the usual cost/quality/personal preference variations seen in items of private purchase by officers.

 

Interesting discussion,

Regards...

 

[Bruce Pennington]

@SteveM @Kiipu @george trotter what do you say about this mei?  It appears the Masa and Tsugu were crammed together side by side.  If so, what is that last kanji?  It doesn't look like Saku.  Sorry about the blurry photo, it is the one posted by the seller.  And is the first one "Ki" as the seller states?  I don't see a KI Masatsugu in the RJT list or in Sesko's list.

[Bruce Pennington]

7 hours ago, vajo said:

That term Rinji Seishiki (Special Contingency 臨時正式 ) from Nick Komiya who was neither a collector than an military expert, read that word in only one document and you all jump in that boat and call this nonsense name which doesn't refer to a sword type. 

Call it what ever but Rinji Seishiki is total worse. It sounds like an obsession 

You could search the whole wide net about this 臨時正式 and you will find nothing.

Hi Chris,

I really don't understand your concern.  The term wasn't brought up until 2015 when Nick did his research on the Type 3 terminology.  Collectors have been calling them Type 3, Type 44, NLF sword, Marine landing sword for 80 years.  The contingency model, or rinji seishiki, term is only 9 years old and only seen by those who frequent Warrelics and NMB.  So, it is quite understandable that the contingency label isn't seen 'out there' hardly at all.

 

And it's not true that the term isn't seen anywhere else.  I haven't gone back to re-read his posts, but he sites a shovel, I think, that was referred to as a contingency version in their official documents.

[george trotter]

Hi Bruce,

I think it is as stated, KI MASATSUGU...there is a listing under this name for this smith working in Buzen dated 1912 in Hawley 1981 MAS 1115

and it is followed by the next smith of this name also working in Buzen (son?) dated 1926 MAS 1116.

[Conway S]

Bruce, 

 

[Bruce Pennington]

Just now, george trotter said:

Hi Bruce,

I think it is as stated, KI MASATSUGU...there is a listing under this name for this smith working in Buzen dated 1912 in Hawley 1981 MAS 1115

and it is followed by the next smith of this name also working in Buzen (son?) dated 1926 MAS 1116.

Ok, I don't have the Hawley, thanks!

 

2 minutes ago, Conway S said:

Bruce, 

 

 

Thanks Conway!  I had forgotten there was a Masa using "政".  And that post is exactly why I hate it when guys post links to photo on IMGUR rather than on the forum.  Those links are gone or the photos are.

[Bruce Pennington]

@george trotter

Chris Bowen said he was from Kyushu, but Sesko lists him from Fukuoka.  Do you know which is correct:

"MASATSUGU (政次), Shōwa (昭和, 1926-1989), Fukuoka – “Buzen Kokura-jū Ki Masatsugu saku” (備前小倉住 紀政次作), “Kokura-jū Ki Masatsugu” (小倉住紀政次), real name Tokunaga Yoshiomi (徳永義臣), born 1896, student of Ki Masahiro (紀政広), his name Masatsugu is also listed with the characters (正次), he worked as rikugun-jumei-tōshō, son of Tokunaga Masayuki (徳永政行), he died in 1965, kihin-jōi (Akihide) (see picture right)"

[george trotter]

Oh, my bad, I quoted Hawley using the wrong MASA kanji...

 

The correct MASATSUGU in Hawley 1981 is:

 

MASATSUGU Buzen/Bungo 1912-42 signed KI MASATSUGU MAS 1645

 

This is followed by (him again?) as Buzen Kokura ju MASATSUGU, Fukuoka,  1946  signed KI MASATSUGU MAS 1467

Sorry for the 'mis-strike.

 

Edit to add: Just saw your latest comment Bruce...the quote you give there for Kokura is the same details as this second  'corrected'  Hawley smith MAS 1465 and 1467.

Regards...

[Bruce Pennington]

2 minutes ago, george trotter said:

Buzen

Oh ineteresting.  Both were correct:

"Buzen Province
Buzen Province was a province of Japan in the area of northeastern Kyūshū, corresponding to part of southeastern Fukuoka Prefecture and northwestern Ōita Prefecture.Buzen bordered on Bungo to the south, and Chikuzen to the north and west. Its abbreviated form name was Hōshū,

 

Now I'll have to decide how to list him.  Might just say "Buzen".

[Conway S]

@Bruce Pennington Ki Masatsugu is mentioned in "Showa Period Swordsmiths of Fukuoka Prefecture, Kyushu and the Kokura Arsenal" by Mal Cox too. A few references to the smith. 

[Bruce Pennington]

Ha! So Mal didn't have an easy way to list him either!  Maybe "Fukuoka/Kyushu" then.

[george trotter]

1 minute ago, Bruce Pennington said:

Oh ineteresting.  Both were correct:

"Buzen Province
Buzen Province was a province of Japan in the area of northeastern Kyūshū, corresponding to part of southeastern Fukuoka Prefecture and northwestern Ōita Prefecture.Buzen bordered on Bungo to the south, and Chikuzen to the north and west. Its abbreviated form name was Hōshū,

 

Now I'll have to decide how to list him.  Might just say "Buzen".

Hi Bruce, I added an edit to my last post which confirms Kokura details etc...

[Bruce Pennington]

2 minutes ago, george trotter said:

Kokura

That narrows it down to Fukuoka, according to this:

"Kokura was the seat of government for Kokura Prefecture. When the municipal system of cities, towns and villages was introduced, Kokura Town was one of 25 towns in the prefecture, which later merged with Fukuoka Prefecture. Kokura was upgraded to city status in 1900.

[vajo]

I'll never get used to the term Rinji Seishiki. The term means Provisional Emergency Model. So derogatory in all respects. It sounds like someone quickly cobbled something together so that no one has to run around with a bare blade.

[vajo]

@Bruce Pennington a lot of people uses now that term. Mostly in a negative context because they favorite Type 98 or want to sell higher.

Thats my observe of the problem. I didn't know if everyone knows what the term means.

 

In Germany we called FIAT cars "Fehler In Allen Teilen" (failure in all parts). It was from the 70s up to the 90s a big problem for that company. 

 

Type 3 sounds neutral.

 

The NMB as an information board makes the music. If you rate here you make a vote up or down. It is not a closed community. 

 

 

[mecox]

@vajo   Chris, Nick Komiya located the original Japanese docs using "rinji seishiki"  which give the history and explanation. I have attempted to summarise that in my Kyushu paper on pages 16-17 to give correct historic context. 

The intro..."Rinji Seishiki Gunto 臨時 制式 軍刀
There is some confusion regarding the “name” of this sword and what it is. The first reference was in
Army Ordnance No. 5668 September, 1938 with a proposal for a “rinji seishiki” sword, meaning a
“temporary regulation” sword as a contingency measure. However, it was never formally approved as a
“Type” so does not have a name; therefore, terms such as “Type 3” are incorrect; “Type 100” is also
used as the design was approved in 1940, and “1940 Variant” has also been proposed. These terms are
labels for convenience.