Tang Translation of WW2 Katana

[Nickelodeon]

Hi, New to the site. Just bought this WW2 relic at auction and would ask for assistance in the translation on the tang. The marks seem very simple, but I after research on the net I cannot find a comparative. This blade and the rest of its components are marked/ stamped 333, there are two holes in the tang, ray skin is not used - it looks like thin white leather and the Tsuka-Ito appears to be a webbing type material. I expect it to be a Shin-Gunto massed produced. I should be grateful for any further identification information. I have an historical interest in this period.

Many thanks N

[raaay]

Hi Nicholas ,

 

It is sword that was made on the Island of Java , and is  signed Shiyawaka Sumaran , according to the book called  Fuller and Gregor swords smiths of  Japan 1926 - 1945, the oshigata is  on page 116 ,  you should be able to find more info with a search on the board here , good luck

[Nickelodeon]

HI Ray, thank you for that excellent information + source = clarity - a whole new picture is revealed! Kind regards, Nick

[Nobody]

As it is said that the blade is a Java sword. The characters look a little strange. They were not inscribed by native Japanese. The characters were intended to be as follows.

 

ジャワ刀 (Jawa-to) – Java sword

スマラン (Sumaran) – Semarang

 

FYI, there is another thread.

WWII Japanese Katana Identification Help - Military Swords of Japan - Nihonto Message Board

[Bruce Pennington]

Nicholas,

Could I get some photos of the metal fittings, close-up, for the files.  I like to keep a record of the Java swords.

[Nickelodeon]

Hi Bruce,

 

I’ll post some photos for your records - but will wait until daylight in the morning.

 

I bought this sword from a local auction about 4 weeks ago. It was the cheaper of two costing £275.

 

The other had a leather outer covering and cost £750.

 

I will post the pictures of the other as this shows the tang and detail in their listing.

 

I have other items from WW2 including, if I remember right, a DFC with details of the recipient. I wanted to return this back to the states, but could not find any living family - posted it on a war graves site as well.

 

I bought the Katana out of curiosity as it moved away from the traditional ceremonial prized ones and wanted to delve into the history.

 

I have spent hours searching the internet and translated a portion of the inscription as Suma and Jawa. I noticed a lot of sites repeating each other resulting in ‘vaguerisms’ galore.

 

I am not sure if I can establish what I’m looking for, specifically:

 

What was the estimated year was 333 made

What is the highest number stamp recorded

What was the rate of production

Did a Javan or Japanese craftsman make it

Was it made from a billet and oil drenched

Was it manually hammered or machine hammered

What was the exact location(s) of the place they were made in Semarang

 

Any pointers would be appreciated.

 

Kind regards, Nick

[Nickelodeon]

Hi Moriyama-san,

 

Thank you for your reply and the additional detail. It’s interesting that you mention that the characters look a little strange. I will be posting some close up photos as I mention in my reply to Bruce, and would appreciate any comments.

 

Kind regards, Nick

 

 

 

[Brian]

The numbers aren't serials as you would expect, starting at 1 upwards. They are more identifying numbers to keep all the fittings together. There would be no sequential count showing where this one fits in the sequence.
No-one knows the production figures of these. They were likely made in local forges. Maybe by locals making them for the Japanese that didn't have supplies of new swords. Probably oil quenched and forged in rudimentary forges would be my guess.
 

[Nickelodeon]

Thanks Brian, makes sense, Nick 

[ROKUJURO]

9 hours ago, Nickelodeon said:

......Was it made from a billet and oil drenched

Was it manually hammered or machine hammered.....

Nicholas,

I will try to answer to your questions.

Depending on the equipment and 'modernity' of the forge, they had pre-formed steel in sheets, bars, rods, or similar. Billets were mostly found in the traditional forges where raw iron/steel (= TAMAHAGANE) was processed and used.

Industrially made steel is different from TAMAHAGANE-based steel and has to be oil-quenched (not drenched).

Unless there is clear information, we/I do not know about production methods in Java. Often, swords produced outside of Japan ("Island swords") appear a bit crude.

You cannot tell from an item if it was machine or hand-hammered. Machine-hammering has the advantage of faster work and fewer heating cycles, keeping material loss and decarbonization lower.  A lot depends on the skill of the worker. Hand-hammering can be more precise, resulting in good shapes and performance.

[Nickelodeon]

Bruce, Hope these photos are suitable for your records, Nick

[Nickelodeon]

Morning Jean, Thanks for your information. I’ve just posted some photos, though I’m not an expert on sword quality. Cheers Nick

[ROKUJURO]

The TSUKA-MAKI (handle wrapping) is done with a wrong technique. Not typical Japanese.

[Nickelodeon]

Hi Jean, the TSUKA-ITO is a webbing material, interesting it’s not typical Japanese. I’ve not had it long and cannot add any more info, thanks Nick

[Bruce Pennington]

That would be expected as these were not made by Japanese smiths.  They were made by Java locals.

 

Thanks for the photos, Nicholas.  Unless @BANGBANGSAN can give you more info, I don't think we really know anything about their operation.  I only have 3 others on file with fittings, and they vary considerably.  I suspect they used whatever they had available, manufacturing some themselves by the looks of them.  

 

One other has the ito material you describe:

 

This other one has "31" stamped on the habaki

[BANGBANGSAN]

I’m not an expert for the Java swords. But I think this type of Gunto is a purely combat weapon made in the battlefield. It may have been produced with the involvement of Japanese blacksmith/sword maker who were responsible for maintaining the army swords(軍刀維修団）, and the materials used were probably something from old car springs.

I would like to add one of those  Java sword to my collection one day for research purposes.

[Nickelodeon]

Hi Trystan, that sounds like a desperate shortage of steel in wartime……I take car springs = leaf springs (UK). If only they could talk. Thanks for info, it’s an eye opener. Kind regards, Nick

[Brian]

Shortage of steel yes, but you can imagine that out on the isolated colonies they didn't exactly have access to tamahagane or decent steel. They would have made them from whatever was available.

[ROKUJURO]

3 hours ago, Nickelodeon said:

Hi Jean, the TSUKA-ITO is a webbing material, interesting it’s not typical Japanese. I’ve not had it long and cannot add any more info, thanks Nick

Nicholas,

I am sorry for my mistake! I used the wrong term, but I meant to write TSUKA-MAKI (corrected now).

[ROKUJURO]

1 hour ago, Brian said:

..... They would have made them from whatever was available.

Spring steel - be that from coils or leaf springs - is not a bad choice for sword blades. It is the thermal treatment after hardening (= YAKIMODOSHI) which always decides about the properties and performance of a blade.

[Nickelodeon]

Thanks Jean, Forged in Fire, Nick

[BANGBANGSAN]

9 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

That would be expected as these were not made by Japanese smiths.  They were made by Java locals.

 

Thanks for the photos, Nicholas.  Unless @BANGBANGSAN can give you more info, I don't think we really know anything about their operation.  I only have 3 others on file with fittings, and they vary considerably.  I suspect they used whatever they had available, manufacturing some themselves by the looks of them.  

 

One other has the ito material you describe:

 

This other one has "31" stamped on the habaki

Bruce

Do you have more photos of this sword?

[Kiipu]

Pictures of 131 can be seen via the link below.  I think you have the highest that I have seen so far.  Thanks for sharing Nicholas.

An Appraisal on Some Japanese Swords Please Sword Number 3

[Bruce Pennington]

2 hours ago, BANGBANGSAN said:

Do you have more photos of this sword?

Trystan,

They were 2 separate swords.  

First

 

I have more, if you like.

 

I didn't have that "131" gunto, thanks Thomas!.

 

The second one I posted is marked "31".  Found on "Live Auction", no longer have actual link.

 

[Kiipu]

2 hours ago, BANGBANGSAN said:

Do you have more photos of this sword?

 

The second picture with habaki number 31 is coming from Hartleys.  Alas, the five auction pictures were low resolution.  In addition, the link no longer works.  But all is not lost Trystan!

A mei, a very odd/questionable Nakago, a weird mark and katakana writing.

 

 

 

 

 

[Nickelodeon]

Hi Bruce,

 

Regarding the numbered parts, (333 in my instance), could these be production numbers from those made in Semarang? The reason I say this is that numbering the parts for each sword for is logical for individual fit, but it would also fit in with a ‘mass production division of labour or a production line’. It would then follow that the sword numbers would be consecutive.

 

Numbered swords could then be issued from the Arsenal / Stores to a named officer, allowing a stock check to be taken etc. as well as personal issue acknowledging the traditional meaning of possessing the katana.

 

Presumably the finished swords would be stored with other weapons and supplies that would be issued? I expect that any records would be none or few, however, general operations and procedures in other theatres of operation would be repeated in Java..

 

I mention this as there appears to be no repeat numbers, albeit looking at a small sample. Although production would be local with a shortage of materials, I would also expect Japanese oversight to be efficient, (a culture is steeped in transition & ceremony), rather than a random ad hoc allocation.

 

3

31

49 (Unconfirmed see photos)

131

333

 

Any thoughts appreciated.

 

Nick

 

 

[BANGBANGSAN]

7 hours ago, Kiipu said:

 

The second picture with habaki number 31 is coming from Hartleys.  Alas, the five auction pictures were low resolution.  In addition, the link no longer works.  But all is not lost Trystan!

A mei, a very odd/questionable Nakago, a weird mark and katakana writing.

 

Thanks Thomas!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BANGBANGSAN]

7 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

Trystan,

They were 2 separate swords.  

First

 

 

 

I have more, if you like.

 

I didn't have that "131" gunto, thanks Thomas!.

 

The second one I posted is marked "31".  Found on "Live Auction", no longer have actual link.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Bruce!

[Bruce Pennington]

7 hours ago, Nickelodeon said:

Any thoughts appreciated.

Nice find on the 49 gunto.  Your guess is as good as any.

 

This 49 has a legit looking company grade tassel.  I have one other with tassel, too.  Supports the idea they were being used by Japanese troops as opposed to collaborators.  Although, I don't know for a fact what sort of tassels the collaborating units used.

 

If anyone knows, please chime in.

[John C]

8 hours ago, Nickelodeon said:

there appears to be no repeat numbers

There are no known documents that explain exactly how the control numbers were used. Theories include: numbers relating to parts bins; numbers used by the assemblers to keep parts organized (each sword is slightly different); part numbers relating to the assembler rather than the assembly (possibly for piece-work pay purposes); and sequential numbers used for accounting purposes. There are some data which show patterns (e.g., the Mantetsu and the souvenir sword studies), however nothing official has been found.

 

John C.