Bruce Pennington

The blade is in Type 98 Japanese officer fittings, and the blue and brown tassel was used by captains and lieutenants. Your sword is not dated, but from the small stamp at the top I can tell you it was made between 1935 and 1942, with the most likely dates of 1940 and 41. You can read about the Type 98 on this website. Lots of history and pictures: Japanese officer sword-type 98 Good site for care and cleaning: Japanese sword care guide

Japanese Sword Care Guide The sword as a family heirloom and a valuable piece of world history. Disregard anyone who says that it’s not worth taking care of. People’s lives were given for their countries, and these swords represented that. The discussion in the link above about that stamp is pretty good, but it came before we made new discoveries about its origin. The large Seki stamp was used by the Seki Cutlery Manufacturers Association. It was a civilian organization, not a military one that was inspecting blades to ensure quality and weed out poor quality swords.

That thought occurred to me last night as I was thinking about it, too. With the resurgence of the samurai styled swords of the 1930s there was a massive demand. I suspect there were a company or two that started mass producing these civil tsuba to meet that demand.

You can read all about the Type 95 here: Japanese NCO Gunto - Type 95 - Ohmura

Brden, I would appreciate a picture of the full serial number on the back edge of the tang, please! Good reference for sword care: Sword Care Guide Here’s a more comprehensive Mantetsu article: South Manchurian Railway - Mantetsu

Yes, the tassel was for Feild grade officers - Majors and Colonels. Unusual to be on an NCO sword. It could have been added after the war but it is possible that an officer bought the sword during the periods of sword shortages. Officers were permitted by regulations to rent or purchase NCO gunto during those times.

@Scogg - one NCO in there

It is the Showa stamp of the civilian Seki Cutlery Manufacturers Association, used from 1935 to 1942, with the massive majority of them found in ‘40 and ‘41.

The answer to both is yes! Like I was discussing with Thomas,, we have no documentation to prove that the great leaf pattern was tied to the Gunzoku like the Sakura and bamboo patterns depicted in Dawson and Ohmura, but they could be. But officers were also allowed to use civilian blades ref fitted for the war. The fitting came in various degrees of completion.

The mei is “Koa Isshin Mantetsu made” koa Isshin was a wartime slogan meaning Asia is United or Asia is One Heart. The slogan for uniting the seven “tribes” of Southeast Asia. You can read all about these swords in this document- South Manchurian Railway- Mantetsu Also, there is a lengthy discussion of them here:

According to Nick Komiya, Warrelics, the Gunzoku had the right to wear the same swords, both officer and NCO, as their equivelants in the IJA. The only specified item for them was the all-brown tassel, but our only source for that is a Uniform Regulation change of 1943. So, before that, as far as any uniform regulation we know of, swords of Gunzoku could be the identical thing we see from IJA personnel including the tassels. So, the idea that there was a specific Gunzoku tusba (and associated other fittings) was generated by Ohmura's work (I'm away from my books and don't know if Dawson or Fuller referenced this topic).

I have: 1939 Kanemichi, full civil koshirae (leather missing) No Date Kanesada, Showa stamped, full Type 98 except with Budo fuchi ND Kanezane, Kokuin, Kikusui on blade, full civil w/leather ND Kanemitsu, leafy Kiri on nakao, incomplete fittings - wood saya missing kagutogane, Army menugi ND Mumei, possibly pre-WWII, full Type 98 except Budo tsuba ND Yoshitsugu, full civil w/leather Looks like I only have that 6, not 7. Two of them were the same sword. Most seem to be WWII era blades, however the majority, 4 of 6, were fully civilian fitted before their impression into service. Another thought - These "Gunzoku" tsuba seem to be more mass produced than your run of the mill civil tsuba, simply based upon the fact that we see "many" of them compared to the purely civil tsuba that we see on civil swords fitted for the war, which are individualistic and random. What does that mean? I guess we are guessing (beside Ohmura's page). Another thought - If I were a regular IJA officer, would I buy a sword with a "civil" tsuba or one with an army tsuba? Just brain-storming here.

I'm no mei expert, but that one looks pretty questionable for Emura. I'm often wrong, though.

Ok, sure. The only reference we have is Ohmura's page, showing the bamboo, sakura, and "mallow" shapes on the Gunzoku swords - Army Civilian Swords - Ohmura

Russ, I don't have yours on file, may get some pics? Would love to hear your thoughts on that, Thomas. I had lumped them in with the other Gunzoku specific tsuba patterns, but that's just due to thier general shape and that they are found on the typical styled gunto with leather cover. I have 7 on file, some in full civil fittings w/leather cover, and some with Type 98 kabutogane and/or tusba. I even have one that was fully Type 98, but had a grape leaf fuchi.