Stegel

Wow, very nice !!

You guys have summed it up pretty good, so i'll just add that from what i've seen, Matched swords are the 'Norm'. I'd have to go digging to get a more accurate figure, but i'd say only 20-25% of swords are mismatched. So when sellers try to use the fact that its matching, hence, rarer, don't fall for the sales pitch. BTW- Neil, i thought one of your coppers looked familiar, and now that you mention that story.... it's the one with the beautiful chocolate brown patina on the handle? One of the nicest IMO. I went to look at it for a fellow who lives in NSW, the deceased estate was in Sydney, but for some reason the sword was being sold in Melbourne (so i went to see it in hand). It was mismatched with scabbard being 1719. It sticks in my memory because i have a matching 1721, only 2 numbers away! Blade was covered in cosmoline. He ended up being the second highest bidder and missed out.

Was browsing the web and found something interesting, so i thought i'd alert everyone here to beware and keep clear of this one. Someone is going to get caught with what i consider to be a fantasy piece, not the rarity that it is promoted as. The description states: Upon closer inspection of the photos provided, i thought it odd that the blade would have the 'he' stamp, and it is definitely not in my opinion. The scabbard looked very poor and unusual, i agreed with the seller who stated it was 'probably custom', but not from 1945 i thought..... After checking some records, i was right, - custom from within the last 3yrs. A serial number check revealed that the blade was sold in 2016, as a relic with no scabbard. It also had the remains of an Aluminium handle with the appearance of being in a fire, so was charred and burnt. Looking for similarities between the old photos and the new, revealed the numbers being identical, and i also marked with a red arrow in the pics, the dent at the front top tip of the habiki. 2016 serial numbers are the top 3, with different filters, the bottom serial number is the cleaned up 2020 one. I've included a compilation of 2016 photo's , the same of the current 2020 sale, and a comparison of the serial numbers for you guys to check out and comment freely on. Whether the current seller produced this 'rarity' or purchased it as is, remains a mystery, but this is definitely one to stay away from.

Sorry, didn't see Dan's reply. Bruce, i think in this model, the Admiral's sword is completely different, saya and all.

Agree with Mark on this, confirmed by looking into Dawsons... here's the references Bruce. 1883 Naval Officers sword for ensigns to captains. From the OP's pics, it appears to be a 9 leaf variant, not 11. Not sure what the difference is though. The blossom is not the Plum Blossom from Manchurian usage but a Japanese Cherry Blossom. The Plum has round petals, while the Cherry has notches at the end of the petals.

Over the weekend, i was doing some sword maintenance when i decided to further investigate an old pattern 3 with a transitional tsuba. To clarify to anyone unaware, it is merely the plain black steel tsuba which has both slots to cater for a Top locking or Side locking mechanism. (which is the main difference between pattern 3 and pattern4 in this model) So far it appears that only the Tokyo Arsenal produced these, involving all three sub-contractors. These are all fitted with the Top locking mechanism which makes sense as Tokyo Arsenal never produced patterns with the Side lock, but as the tsuba can accomodate both, and one can foresee a possible future change to a Side lock mechanism, we have the 'Transitional' title. All have the Jinsen Arsenal acceptance stamps, so these may have been special samples supplied in order to facilitate the new upcoming production of the Type 95 model at the Jinsen Arsenal. The Tsuba are the thinner version associated with the Tokyo arsenal, not the thicker Nagoya type. The Seppa are always the same with these pieces, being only 3 parts, consisting of 2 plated and one, slightly thicker, being painted. (for those familiar with Dawson's book, it is neither var2 or var2A) After dismantling, this particular sample had a few interesting features, - matching serial numbers between the fuchi and blade itself - both the 'Jin' and 'He' stamps present - Solid Copper Fuchi being Nickel plated before the application of paint - the now well known 'w' stamp on the tang just after the Habiki. Here's a photo for viewing.

Neil and Bruce, Here's a picture of one of mine, it too uses the gold 'wash' /gilt plating as an undercoat before the usual top coat of paint. Two other ones i have are similar, but another even earlier one appears to use a grey primer as the base coat, and is in poorer condition. I'm aware that the Type 32's had 'rust' and paint issues with scabbards, and with the introduction of the Type 95's these were being addressed. This may be the result of this effort. My guess would be that it was time consuming and not an economical viability to continue, as i don't see examples of it later on, in the other patterns. There were definite issues with 'black' paint in the early years which appeared to have been resolved later on.

From what i can see, Scabbard is obviously non genuine. Blade IMO is Authentic, fonts,patina and all. Handle has been repainted, tsuba and fuchi over polished, and good reproduction tassel added. The fuchi has correct stampings for that serial number range, so i would put any reservations of the suya stamp down to over polishing and possible photography being not the best.

Merry Christmas everybody!! You must have ALL been good this year, because Santa got delayed delivering all your goodies and didn't get here till yesterday!! He was really tired and worn out, but had enough in him to back his ute up my driveway and finally dropped my pressy off! Boy, oh boy, oh boy!! Just what i wanted, a nice stand to put all my toys in!!! After loading it up, we had a few drinks and watched the Boxing day Test !! Here's wishing you ALL (and your families) a happy and safe lead up to a great New Year.

Great thread! and very interesting! I have been on the outside looking in so to speak, and as this topic is spread over a couple of forums, and numerous sources, it can get a bit dis-orientating for me. (just like a good suspense novel) So just on a side note, if you are only following one thread, namely this one, then maybe this helps, as it helps me with my understanding: In English, it is common to use acronyms to shorten words, generally the first letter of each word used. So this now becomes the abbreviated form. We can see this in Ohmura's web page where he mentions this : South Manchuria Railway Co,Ltd (SMR)..... where SMR is in this case a TLA (Three Letter Acronym) or as i prefer.. abbreviation. In Japanese/Chinese where Kanji is being used (and i believe the nature of the languages also), they use contractions, as the context or "intended interpretation" can be very important to the final reader of the phrase. Over on the Warrelics forum, in the sister thread to this one here, it is explained by Nick in post 64 and expanded in post 66 to show possible interpretations depending on kanji positioning. The conclusion being that these contractions cannot be translated literally, without some knowledge of the language at least. Some contractions are also used in archival documents from what i gather. What i think was my personal eureka moment, was not a moment at all, more of a very long and slow realisation over time. Some things began to fall in place, and make some sense, especially with certain posts and document referrals made here by Thomas, and also Nick over at warrelics. However, i'm still not 100%, perhaps i'm still in the 'moment'. The big advantage is in being a native speaker/reader and familiar with the lingo, past and present, and it's these guys that most of us will have to rely on for info from the archives. Thanks to Bruce for your tenacity and persistance with this thread, also Nick and Thomas/Kiipu for sifting the info out and presenting it. It all makes for a very interesting and 'suspenseful' read on my behalf. Great work!!

Sorry can't edit my previous post, but this picture compilation of IJASWORDS (neil's) examples of Rinji swords for Type98 were posted in another thread and not here,forgot to add them just after the reference to Dawson Ch14 .

Hi Mr Williams (Bruce W), You can call me Stegel, where i grew up, everyone called each other by nickname or surname, so first names were rarely used, no big deal as i’ll know when i’m addressed! Now, forgive me for winding back this thread to your post #26, wow, lots of questions etc, i prefer less in posts, but anyway here goes.... my responses are in red font. WilBru5 #26 Posted 06 December 2019 - 07:01 PM Thank you Trystan your pattern 5s are continuing to reinforce my thoughts. which are: Jinsin Arsenal Heijo factory did not make any pattern 1 through pattern 5 type 95 NCO swords, or the corresponding koshirae & saya of those swords. If you base this upon having seen further examples yourself, then i can confirm with my data that this is essentially correct. There are however, a very few pattern 5’s with 3digit serial numbers on the scabbards and what appears to be the same on the blade (appearing to having the serial number ground away leaving the last 3 digits) See Trystan’s post #25. I’m guessing they may have been samples or parts of the Pattern 5 sent to Jinsen possibly assembled or modified by them prior to gearing up for production of the Pattern 6. All have Seki inspection stamps and no Jinsen acceptance stamps as seen previously on Tokyo swords.All have steel scabbards. All pattern 6 & pattern 8 with original koshirae & saya are easily identifiable by their less refined, (cruder) construction. All pattern 6 & pattern 8 original saya will be as easily identifiable by their construction, (metal parts originally painted black and wood originally painted green). I agree in principle, however it should be noted that quality continued to deteriorate with the metal used in scabbards and variations in paint colour do exist. All pattern 6 & pattern 8 , and their original corresponding koshirae and saya, will bare the Jinsin Arsenal Heijo Factory stamp. All pattern 6 & 8 were made by/for the Jinsin Arsenal and were not made by/for any other Imperial Japan Arsenal,(and will therefore not bare any other arsenal stamp as the maker). To date after recording numerous examples over the last 20 years or so, i would tend to also agree with this thought. Since I am already out on the limb, I'm going to go a little bit further; The pattern 5 and the pattern 6 are essentially the same pattern,(the 5 being more refined better construction than the 6) having different saya and coming from different Arsenal makers. Handles are also different patterns of knurling (cross hatching)Pattern 5 is Nagoya, Pattern 6 is Jinsen with the possible examples mentioned earlier( a very small sample) Note- patterns 6/7/8 all have He stampings from my observations. So; I am betting, apon further study, Shamsy will need to expand his pattern list to include another pattern... a "less refined" construction ringed handle with a wooden saya, and it will bare the Jinsin Arsenal Heijo factory stamp,(just wild speculation here). Or maybe The Jinsin Arsenal Heijo factory didn't make any pattern 7?? The Pattern List you’re referring to was something i introduced some years back, to simplify the referencing of T95’s as per the long winded labelling still currently being used.-i.e early/mid/late/copper/aluminium/wooden/brass/steel/var2A -dawson’s etc . You incorrectly assume it needs to be expanded, as it already does include Pattern 7(....the one in between 6 and 8 Lol -no offence meant!) Here’s a rough draft you can look at: While I am this far out on the limb... I don't believe there will be a pattern 8 with original saya found which will not bare the Jinsin arsenal Heijo factory stamp... As I am speculating ALL pattern 8 were made soley by/for the Jinsin Arsenal. I believe your speculation here, as it mirrors all my observations to date. And since I am merrily wondering down this path; "why is the pattern 8 tsuka ito wrapped?? The pattern 8 is supposedly the very last version... the last ditch, when all materials and time was in short supply... And yet, the pattern 8 uses more valuable supplies than the pattern 5,6, & 7. Plus the tsuka of the patterns 6. & 7 were already being made, and we can see an obvious decline in quality... so why try to improve the quality of the pattern 8 by taking the extra time and supplies to wrap the tsuka?? OK this is a fair question, and as it’s essentially directed at my Pattern list, so i’ll attempt to explain why i placed it last in the order it is. From your earlier posts, i note that our backgrounds are not too dissimilar, although not decades, a good part of my early working life was engineering based in a factory environment, both production and later development. However, this has no bearing on the topic here, other than to hopefully explain why i have come to the conclusion i have, be it correct or not. Like most collectors, i have a copy of Dawson’s book, and read his take on the last two ‘Late war’ variants. My interpretation differs in that i think both variants were intended for NCO use.(This is not to say anyone is wrong mind you- both are plausible) So then from a purely production based point of view, taking Time as the most crucial element to meet the demands of supply, i considered the ringed handle to precede the ito wrapped one. Instead of fully carving the handle, a quick partial carving, followed by a basic ito wrap (no same/filler paper involved) and i believe you can churn these out at an even faster pace. This is where we differ, unlike you,i believe it would be a time saving effort. Yes, ito wrap is extra material, however i believe it is not as big an issue as it might appear. The end result is what i believe most personnel would want.... a handle that looks more like the officers versions. At this late date in the war when the Jinsin Arsenal Heijo factory began producing swords, I am guessing was necessity due to lack of supplies and support from main land Japan. I think it plausible just as necessity dictated the Jinsin Arsenal Jeijo factory produce their version of the type 95 NCO sword,(pattern 6 and a possible ringed handle variation), necessity also dictated they produce their version of the contingency( B substitute) variation of the type 98 officer's sword... That being what we are calling the pattern 8. I disagree with you here, the contingency pattern for the T98, already existed...NLF/Pattern44/type 3/Rinji/Type 0. They also produced the various patterns of Rinji for officers, one of which Neil has already shown...(Dawson covers this in Ch14 of his book). (reposted for convenience) Jim Dawson's description in his book referred to this variation as variation #4. And in his description he postulated as to whether these were intended for officer use. I think it is plausible. Correct, in his very last sentence, he speculated, and i quote “the presence of handle tape may reveal that these swords were intended for officer use”. Nothing else is mentioned or expanded on this speculation. I admit it is plausible. Now your speculation, (also plausible) builds upon Dawson’s speculative sentence, to extrapolate even further...that is: Assumed officer use and concurrent production with the pattern 7. Whatever the chances are of this being the actual case, i do not agree, as i cannot see anything to lead me to your same conclusion. (mind you 1 in a million and you can still win the lotto draw) I think it is plausible the sword we are referring to as a pattern 8 has been mischaracterized... I think it plausible the Jinsin Arsenal Heijo factory began producing "at the same time" their versions of "both" the type 95 NCO sword and the contingency variation of the type 98 Officer's sword. This would account for additional effort and supplies applied to the pattern 8. Also; NCO swords were issue items, thus the numbered blades of the pattern 6 being the norm. But Officers had to buy their uniform accompaniment, thus the reason almost all pattern 8 sword blades are not numbered,(no need for inventory control). Just being silly here, but as both patterns do not have serial numbers on blade or scabbard... you could take this further, if you like and conclude, that the pattern 7 was also intended for officer use ??, why not?? I admit at this time I have no hard evidence to base this on. So I offer these thoughts up for open discussion... prove it right or wrong with verifiable evidence. Or just perhaps debate it out, presenting alternative views and interpretations, until more evidence is discovered. Here’s an old draft i made up a few years back to show the mid to late war progression as i see it. I'm of the belief that the Type 95 gunto consists of Patterns 1 to 8 inclusive. What i call 'Last Ditch' is the very "Spartan"- also wood handled, with cross hatching version, as can be seen at the bottom. Not all will / need agree with me, but I'm happy to discuss further, time permitting of course. Stegel

Bless you Bruce (P), can't help but love you sometimes!! However, i can be intentionally rude sometimes.....when i get rubbed the wrong way! Grumpy old man syndrome......ManOPause...... whatever!!! Lol I also extend a hearty welcome to the other Bruce (W), another possible Connoisseur or Aficionado of the Type 95?

I'm with Brian on this topic. I think any hamon on Type95 swords is chemically etched if anything. Similar to parade swords and such. Close up photo's are needed to help determine this, i don't have any so can't help there. I know the prototype definitely has an etched hamon, so logically they may have included the process during early production, but i'd be guessing to be honest. Differential hardening on these i believe, is a 'wish' list bonus, and not very likely. Just my 2cents worth boys...

The fittings are interesting, i wouldn't spend money on a re polish though. If you can afford it and the price is right, then i would say it could be worth a second look. Can you get some closer pics of the fittings?

I agree wholeheartedly with Chris on this one.... which is making me wonder about the point of this thread. Firstly, Thomas, if you have a Real Question to ask, because YOU don't know.........then ask it openly and honestly. If You do know and wish to make an educational point for fellow collectors, then make it clear and just say it. Give us your opinion on the pieces at this Spanish site instead.??? maybe you have already.... It is this kind of reply to your own question that i find a tad abrasive. My!! aren't you a clever boy! answered your own question Please don't preach to the converted, most of us are not novices here. Most of the links you've added, have had input from a few of the members joining in on this thread. So nothing new really. Perhaps you could use pieces from your collection to make points - from which we could all possibly learn something Do you have a collection??? I think you may just find that you'll be received a lot better if you drop the attitude

Hey Bruce, here's some to pick from

Some additions here... The "一 within a cherry blossom" also appears in the 47k-49k range for both Std issue (Brass Tsuba) and Contingency issue (Steel Tsuba)

Mizuno produced only the Aluminium Handled Type 95 with the Top Locking mechanism, but in both the Standard issue and contingency issues.

This thread is interesting, initially i was in the same boat as Bruce, thinking we were looking at the ichi Sub-contractor logo, as that is where the link led me to believe, but all good now. I've been looking at Type 95's for a while now and think that your hypothesis has some strong merit to it Thomas, so well done. I say this as all data collected by me to date, points in a similar direction. The corporate logo for Mizuno was, as you correctly indicate, identified and confirmed by Nick Komiya a few years back now. and they ceased production just prior to the Arsenal Administration re-shuffle, relinquishing Kokura's control in 1942. Bruce, Look at the center of the round Seki sub-contractors logo on the Fuchi (not the blade itself), thats where you will find ( 刀 ) If i'm following this correctly, Thomas suspects that the Gifu logo ( 岐 ) was replaced by the Seki logo -with production remaining at the same factory.

It's no good Brian.

Thanks for clearing that up, its all fallen into place and i can see your comments in the correct light now!

OK, i may have gone off on a tangent with that, but i now see exactly what you meant, and can agree with you. Thanks for clarifying.

When i started to collect "militaria" in the form of type 95 NCO's, you could get them for $250-$350 AU, my first copper handled piece was $700, but it was in mint condition, and several years down the track.. not long after F&G's 2nd book 1996 and Dawsons 1st edition also 1996, was released. With NCO's,I think that because prices have been creeping up over the last 15-20yrs at a greater rate than other gunto, they are seen by some to be an 'investment' option which provides growth and the option to cash out at the 'end' - while still being able to enjoy a collection of sorts. There are also Collectors of all things Japanese (WW2), and only want one sword to complement their displays, most invariably go for the T95 sword, before adding a T98. Note that battle damaged items are not frowned upon, but actually desired by some collectors. As i've said in the past to others who chose to start collecting, the NCO variants provide a limited spectrum of collecting, which depending on how far you want to take it can be big or small, however, a perceived "end" to the collection can be seen, thus completing the collection if you like (at each collectors personal comfort/interest point). What puts the type95 in greater preference to the type32, is the more 'Japan-easy' feel (i'm so sorry, i don't believe i actually wrote that! -no offense meant ) I think traditionally made nihonto have also risen in value over the years, not at the same rate, but risen non the less. Some people are still willing to invest in polishes for these blades which further pushes their value up upon resale but not necessarily, in all cases, to the point of a complete recompense. I think these prices are generally much higher than current NCO prices, and not everyone is comfortable in doing this. Non-traditional blades don't normally get the same treatment, so, i think have not seen as great a rise in prices Years ago i wanted to collect the Yasukuni shrine smiths, why not? it's a limited list isn't it?? What stopped me was the variety of blades each smith produced, then the fact that each blade started from 3K (which is now much more!) and i would perhaps need to replace the war time polish to really enjoy the blade, multiply that by some 15 smiths and it gets to be a rich mans hobby. I also thought about getting and example from each of the 5 major schools of smithing, but didn't, as i only really liked the blades from one of them. Incidentally, i do have several nihonto in my 'other' collection if you could call it that. Personally, i chose what i believe to be the common mans more realistic option, in militaria and T95 NCO swords. Not everybody's cup of tea and i fully understand that. DaveR hit it on the head, with Militaria vs nihonto, overall there would be more collectors of the first type in my opinion. I don't agree with the comment as they are NOT fully documented in all the books, just the very basic info, expanded a little with each new book..... you'll learn more here on the forum than in the book. What has made my collecting enjoyable is finding out more about them with each year that i've been collecting, that is where the finer details come into play- for me at least. I also don't quite understand what is being meant here, ALL pieces in my collection are Genuine and antiques. I don't believe that as a collector of militaria, particularly type 95 NCO's, that i or other collectors are gullible. If you're making reference to the numerous fakes being sold, then i get it, but that's not the reason IMO why prices have risen. Just my opinion, based on my own collecting experiences.

Damn Neil, Vajo needs more pictures to look at.... ok, i'd like to see them too! but i need to see numbers!! Cheers