Shamsy

Other than the carved ring style, not similar. For 95s, there is a small loop of metal, an inch or so of uncarved wood, then the grooves for the ring carvings start, typically 12 rings (by my count). This sword lacks the initial inch of uncarved, straight wood and has 14 rings carved.

I posted this sword in the numbered habaki thread. Then I got curious and took it apart for a further look. Rather than hijack that thread, I thought I'd share the findings here. I'd say most likely a generic 'island sword' (the term we use for 'not sure who/when/where it was made, but showing genuine signs of age'). It could also be a repaired blade, though as you will see, the 'repair' is hardly fitting of the name. The fittings aren't bad. The habaki is on par with Japanese habaki. The other fittings are okay. From my own amateur observations, the blade itself appears to be reasonably well made, has a proper looking kissaki and ihori-mune. The ha-machi and mune-machi do not align, as the habaki has an inset for the mune-machi. There are a few file marks on the first few inches of the nakago, a number 21 stamped (matching habaki) then it becomes... well, you can see. Looks like it was mashed with a hammer... badly. All comments welcome, all opinions valid, please view photos carefully. Island sword, jeep spring, fake, repaired blade?

While I would love to say this was some unique or missing model of Type 95, Bruce, I think it would be more accurate to lump it with the generic 'catch-all' term 'Island sword'. When I removed the handle, the nakago was quite mutilated. It initially looks well made and possibly Japanese in make along with file marks... but a few inches down there is damage, de-lamination and large hammer strike marks. It may be a repaired blade? It did have matching numbers to the habaki stamped on the nakago, 21. I'll post a new thread for discussion rather than hijack this one.

Here are some pictures @Bruce Pennington

If there is an existing mekugi-ana in the nakago, who would a new hole be drilled when remounting? Doesn't that weaken the nakago? Wouldn't it be easier to use an existing hole and adapt new mounts to fit? I read that; "when remounting, the position of the tsuba and areas of the handle ito wrap are different on each mount, so the same holes cannot usually be used" but couldn't a skilled craftsman adapt the tsukamaki to match? That just makes more sense to me, though I have no experience with which to form more than an impression.

Here is my sword with numbered habaki

Good job, Dave. That's the gunboard thread I mentioned in my earlier comment. I tend to believe that these are Chinese made swords, for collaboration forces and maybe Japanese officers in need...? I enjoyed reading this, Thomas. I have a couple of swords with what I believe is artificial leather of some kind on the saya. They look similar to the presstoff.

Tang looks completely original, I didn't realise anyone had suggested otherwise. You can see the stamp in your picture, Bruce. Nicely cleaned up pics, but the weld on the end.... horrible, definitely looks like a home job.

Not so much the scratches, Thomas. Terrible quality pictures, but they show how indistinct the numbers are. I think the blade has been heavily sanded to make it look better and remove rust or patina. I can't be sure, but that's what I suspect. I assume you've added the 4 sets of rework numbers from Dawson to your sample?

Yep, blade has been heavily cleaned of rust. You can tell by how shallow and indistinct the numbers are. Tang repair is very crude. I think someone has worked to 'restore' a very damaged sword.

Grossly over-cleaned. The sarute is questionable and an unmatched saya. Not a good sword at all.

It certainly reminded me of that earlier one, Bruce. Better stamps and more true, but still the same issues we see in almost all of the fake 95s. The patina is the typical hurried affair and sloppy too. Which I'm quite grateful for, honestly. I don't like the idea that one day my historical swords will be indistinguishable from some cheap crap thrown out of a factory that day. I don't think the patina is something that they will ever get right though. Copied the pictures because I like to consolidate them in one thread.

Listen to the people here, steer well clear of that collectors advice and you'll do well!

Why on earth would you want to see the nakago? Also, you'll wreck the ito and the clamps will never be the same if you take it apart.

The last time these were discussed here and elsewhere the consensus was that they are guenuine WW2 swords and seem to come in two grades. The one Bruce posted is the lower grade, the one you have posted is the higher grade with the plum blossums. Made in China during the war. There have been a half dozen threads about these on NMB that you can find with some careful looking. There was a good discussion on gunboards forum about these. I'm a bit too sick to find that ancient thread right now. Stegel was involved and can likely find it. Or like I said, a careful search here will find a wealth of previous discussions.

We were never fighting, Bruce! Don't read too much into it, it was supposed to be a light ribbing among mates. Like myself, you missed the 'humour/sarcasm' of Thomas's post and took the post at face value. Then my post has been read as an offended response, which was not what I was intending to convey at all. The minor lesson here is to be mindful that written word does not contain the same inflection as oral and can be misunderstood or confusing. I believe all the 'cool kid's' put /s after sarcasm so that it is not misconstrued. Let me add some emoji to my original reply so that it reads in the tone intended.

Don't ever be sorry. Offense is taken, not given and I have not taken offense, I just don't really get the humour. I was actually quite excited to think of an early dated RS, but I cannot read mei, which appears to be my downfall, having taken the statement at face value. It is just the difficulty in conveying sarcasm and other idioms in a written medium.

So some sort of 'humour' then lol. Right *thumbs up*. Easy to say you 'get it' after the explanation ;-P. I actually thought you may have been referring to an early dated blade in RS mounts, which considering that the long held and erroneous date of 1944 was thought to be their official date of approval (based on blade dates and until Nick found the official documentation), an example of earlier date would have been interesting. I seem to remember when you first joined NMB that Stegal disliked your jests, but I'm glad that they are now considered high-humour .

I'm just confused. What is a Type 100? There is no such thing and I am not in favor of creating more false 'Types'. The thread linked is a RS sword. No one has been looking for any converted Type 95 that I am aware of? What we are looking for are converted Type 32 swords converted to look like 95s.

Yep, that's the one Bruce. Definitely the Nagoya stamp. I might be able to get you a better photo, but the stamps are all a but meh due to the tiny surface they can be added to.

Bruce. I asked Neil about the blueing on sword 3. He thinks an oxidizing blueing.

Under the unknown section, Bruce, there is a Nagoya Army Arsenal stamp on the bottom of a Type 95 saya throat-catch. That can be moved to known if you like. There are a few examples I've seen on Seki stamped 95s.

Hard to say Bruce. The darkening and texturing of metal occurs normally and none of my 95 have very shiny metal under the paint. I'm not sure that photographs would be a sufficient comparison between our two swords. My 32 certainly seems to have some kind of finish applied. I'm not very familiar with the subject though. It could be any number of finishes, or (though highly unlikely as it is very uniform and neat) it may be age patina. It would likely be a question best put to Nick. He has researched that area more than anyone else I know so seems likely to have the best info.

Thanks for bringing here again Bruce. I am no where near as active as I should be over there.