Masafusa? Mei help and sword advice sought.

[Cuirassier]

I just literally bought this sword. I do not believe for one moment the saya belongs to the sword, but someone may tell me different. I suspect the sword mounts are private purchase early 1930's, Japanese army officers and somehow got married to a naval saya, probably in some surrender storage facility. The sword has a wakizashi sized blade also. I just liked the fittings and had not seen them before, though they remind me of some early 1930's I have seen. The blade I am sure, I think is older.

 

My questions are two fold;

 

1) The mei is Masafusa correct? But which Masafusa? I read the mei as being Awa province? I am used to reading Shinshinto / gendaito mei, and this one is not either I believe?

 

2) Any best guess as to how this gunto came into a naval kai gunto saya? The auction house says the seller claims it came from a family relative who got it during WW2. Did Naval Landing officers put their favorite guntos into naval saya to conform to some regulation, or is this just as I suspect, "You want a sword mate, sure, let's find you a scabbard"

 

There clearly is a date on the other side of the tang but I do not have an image of it. I have only what I could get from the auction house. It was a punt for sure, but I just liked the furniture and mei style. Knowing my luck, it will be gendaito and have a stamp on it, but I think / am hoping not. I know I know, why not take some more photos when I get it? Well, I am going to have it sent to a refurbisher to have a new saya made for it (keeping the naval saya for a deserving kai gunto in the future), unless someone says "don't".

 

Cheers in advance

[John A Stuart]

The signature looks like 阿州住安(芸)包房 Ashu Ju Aki Kanefusa to me. John

[Geraint]

Hi Mark.

 

So what you have looks to be an interesting civil wakizashi in a gunto saya. This is going to be a personal thing for sure but when the sword arrives check the saya fit with care and see if perhaps it was made for the blade. It is possible that this was simply done to bring the sword sufficiently in line with dress regulations to make it possible for the officer to wear it. Assuming that to be the case then my personal inclination would be to keep the saya as it is as a part of the story of the sword. I know many collectors would want to do what you suggest and swap it out for a new civil style saya so perhaps live with it a little while until you maker your decision.

 

Nice find, I would have had it like a shot if it came up anywhere near me. Enjoy.

[Cuirassier]

Hi Guys (John, Geraint)

Thank you very much for your replies.

The thing is, the grip is very early 1930's army, while in a 1937M kai-gunto saya. I did read that originally the Imperial navy tollerated "civilian" swords (for me this is not a civilian sword, but an earlier less regulated army sword), so I guessed it was possible that the officer complied somewhat with the new regulations by having a true naval kai-kunto saya, but the "clash" between fittings for me does not ring true. I still think this is a later post surrender / war marriage, unless anyone can say they have seen this before and with provenance that such war time marriages did exist.

Regards

Mark

[Cuirassier]

Nice find, I would have had it like a shot if it came up anywhere near me. Enjoy.

 

PS; thanks, I am looking forward to getting it and will post some more pics when I do :D