WWII Sword, can I please get help identifying?

[Crusader22]

Hello, and good day,

 

I just found a WWII sword in a local small town gun shop, it was brought in by a WWII Marine veteran's family, and essentially "given" to the shop owner, as they had no interest and the veteran had passed away. I got it for a reasonable (to me) trade.

 

I am very new to this field. The amount of variation is dizzying, and I speak nor read any Japanese.

 

Im guessing it is a WWII production blade. It is extremely sharp, but the blade has several small chips to the Ha, and some mild corrosion. The hamon looks irregular and "dainty", for lack of a better descriptive term. It is difficult to photograph.

 

All parts are serialled "74", and all match each other.

 

Beyond that, I will let the photos speak for themselves.

 

I am extremely excited to find this, and intend to start a modest collection of Nihonto, but have a LOT to learn. I previously was a longtime (somewhat published) collector and researcher of WWII German firearms....that was easy compared to this!

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you, and I am looking forward to my new hobby growing and learning is my passion.

 

Jeff 

[Ray Singer]

By the gendai smith Akiyoshi and dated May 1942

[Crusader22]

That was very fast, thank you very much!!

 

I will look into it further with this information.

 

Jeff

[Crusader22]

29 minutes ago, Ray Singer said:

By the gendai smith Akiyoshi and dated May 1942

If I may ask, what "type" is the mounting?

 

Thank you

 

Jeff

[Ray Singer]

Type 3 gunto koshirae.

http://ohmura-study.net/952.html

[Kiipu]

Jeff, you did real good.  It is an early Type 100 with a "star" stamp and a serial number of 74.

[Crusader22]

Thank you both.

 

Im getting dizzy reading on all this, this seems to be a quite complicated subject. I assume the "Type 100" is a less common variation?

 

Im getting the impression it is not at the bottom of the barrel, so to speak.

 

Very happy to hear that!

 

Jeff

[John C]

14 minutes ago, Crusader22 said:

Im getting the impression it is not at the bottom of the barrel, so to speak.

Jeff:

Type 3 is sometimes referred to as type 100 and refers to the style of mounts. See Ray's link for details. The star stamp identifies the sword as a "gendaito", meaning a traditionally made blade as opposed to a mass-produced or machine made blade. So yes, a more desirable blade. It looks as if the blade has some condition issues, however still a nice piece of history and a good find.

 

John C.

[Crusader22]

Can this sword be assumed to be Tamahagane, versus other steel types?

 

Fascinating, for sure.

 

I may be addicted.

 

Jeff

[Crusader22]

Also, as for the damage and condition issues, from my experience in other collecting fields, I know to LEAVE IT ALONE. So many WWII rifles, etc., have been destroyed by well meaning "finish restoration" efforts...

 

Is this kit I bought for a modern reproduction katana (and it's proper use, which I researched) appropriate for this piece? And will it improve the appearance if used properly?

[Bruce Pennington]

2 hours ago, Crusader22 said:

Thank you both.

 

Im getting dizzy reading on all this, this seems to be a quite complicated subject. I assume the "Type 100" is a less common variation?

 

Im getting the impression it is not at the bottom of the barrel, so to speak.

 

Very happy to hear that!

 

Jeff

Ha!  Hi Jeff!

Boy, you jumped into the pool at the deep end, for sure!  Love it!

 

So, starting at the beginning, read:

Legally Rebutting the "Type 3" Sword Name - Nick Komiya

 

Unveiling the Rinji seishiki Sword, 1940 - Nick Komiya

 

Arsenal Marks on RJT Swords

 

3 hours ago, Ray Singer said:

By the gendai smith Akiyoshi and dated May 1942

Ray,

Is this Sasakawa or Fujita?  I'm really bad at this, but it looks like Fujita to me - {出羽山形住藤田昭吉), Sesko's list

 

[Bruce Pennington]

The RJT program started summer of '41, and I only have 4 or 5 other blades on file dated earlier than yours.  So nice find there!

[Crusader22]

Wonderful, thank you!

 

The links you posted (especially the second one) are slowly clearing up the muddy water for me. 

[Bruce Pennington]

I have 228 star-stamped blades on file (yeah, surprised me too!) and yours is number 5 by date.  Nice to see yours has 2 screws.  Seems they started out that way, then went to one steel screw and one bamboo peg in 1943.

[Crusader22]

One more quick question, the shop owner implied this sword is an NCO model, but given it's cost in 1942 yen, I would rather guess it is more appropriate for an IJA officer, though there is no tassel.

 

Any thoughts on this?

[PNSSHOGUN]

They were for officers, not NCO's.

[Crusader22]

Thank you!

[Crusader22]

Yet another question as I look over every minute detail of this sword. 

 

I cannot figure out the saya coating paint, or lacquer, or how this interesting, uniform texture was achieved.

 

It looks more like a molded thin layer was applied...of, "something".

 

Thin leather of a ray or other animal?

 

Also, pic under magnification of the hamon edge, because I did not know my camera could do that.

 

 

[Ray Singer]

7 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

 

 

Ray,

Is this Sasakawa or Fujita?  I'm really bad at this, but it looks like Fujita to me - {出羽山形住藤田昭吉), Sesko's list

 

 

Fujita Akiyoshi. 

[Kiipu]

This would be Yamagata Prefecture prior to the serial number prefix of MA マ.

昭和十七年五月日 A day in May 1942.

☆　羽州山形住昭吉作　７４　"Star" Ushū Yamagata-jū Akiyoshi saku 74.

[John C]

14 hours ago, Crusader22 said:

It looks more like a molded thin layer was applied...of, "something".

 

Thin leather of a ray or other animal?

Jeff:

The saya is probably black lacquer with a texturing layer underneath (think orange peel paint texture on your walls - same concept), though metal saya were painted. The same' could be ray skin or celluloid, which was used as materials became scarce. Painted burlap was even used toward the end of the war. The tsuka wrap is shiny because it would have a thick coating of lacquer on it.

 

John C.

[Crusader22]

Thank you, John.