Bruce Pennington

Possibly. I suspect most collectors on NMB that want one in their collection, already have one. If I didn't already have one, I would have been the first to PM you!

I know I have seen this seal script stamp on another sword a little while back. I tried to find it, but no luck. If memory serves me correctly, that sword was considered a fake as well. My curiosity, though, would really like to know what that seal script says!

@Okan - a third example?

Good point. Mantetsu are the same with using "Spring" on the massive majority of their blades.

Mine came with a saya with no number! Probably a refit or repair. Prices are higher on them because they are the first version and produced in such limited quantity. It's like buying the first few years of a Mustang.

John, I don’t know where Richard Fuller got his information for that chart. I simply don’t believe number six. I will send him an email and ask him where that statement came from and see what he says. I have never had a Nan Ban Mantetsu in my hands, so I’ve never been able to actually compare the two. I personally don’t believe there’s any difference in any of the three versions of the blades he discussed. They simply just changed what they wrote on them.

Very normal, Ken. In fact, it is unusual to see a fully formed stamp struck on this blades. thanks for the photos! I will add them to the files.

Depends on if you have the $3-400. If so, either way, you have a re-wrapped tsuka. One way is poorly done, and Chinese in style. The other way will be beautiful, and WWII correct. I think you'll be glad you did.

Just to be clear, I don't think Noah's sword is gimei. I was just puzzled by the same inscription, same date, on 2 swords. But my question about that was answered. Thanks guys!

Intereting one, Thomas. Well-made nakago and nice hamon. Could be left-over surplus from the war? Faint Toyokawa Arsenal stamp. Surprised our fellow member @mdiddy is calling this a WWII kaigunto in "late war Kai gunto mounts." He does add "This is a variant that was made late in the war and which were commonly handed out or sold to U.S. service members after the war." So closer to the truth. I admit that he is free to have his opinions. But the evidence is heavily weighted against the claim that they were made during the war. I mean like, 99% heavily weighted.

They put so much effort into the details, but then put Army menugi on it! Tsk, Tsk. Thanks Mal, I'll have to start a new document. I'll call it "Stamps of the Fake Japanese Sword"!!!

OK, I must’ve confused this one with another one I’ve been discussing lately.

I could be wrong, since I haven't studied mon on menugi closely, but the one I have on a kaigunto completely replaces the center sakura. All these are simply put on top of the center sakura. I'd like to see other legit examples. It doesn't look right the way these were mounted.

I don't think I've ever seen that circled "KO" stamp. Have to add that to the Unknown files. Thanks Noah!

John, is this the one with the aluminum saya?

@MatsumotoKen Ken, would it be possible to get photos of the Gifu and Na on your blade? I think I see the Na, but not the Gifu. The classification of "Non-traditional" broadly includes a variety of deviations from the traditional blade. Here is a good run-down: With the huge shortage of swords during the war, most factories incorporated machines of various types to speed up the sword making process, the hydraulic hammer being one. But all of the blades were made by people.

Ok. Just another reminder of why I've stayed away from Bayonet World! They have a vast array of stamps that would overwhelm my limited time to try to track. So, in short, disregard my first post about the WA, then.

It's likely the sword was owned by a general, yes, assuming the bring-back story is correct. @PNSSHOGUN, John, would be the best source of the tassel value. Before COVID these were selling for $1,500. The nihonto guys will have to give you an estimated value range for the rest of the sword.

Also, not to detract from Noah's discussion (and Brian can move this to the Gassan thread, if appropriate) but I was comparing Noah's blade to another found by @Stephen for my kakihan files and the inscriptions on both sides are the same, even the date of February 11 1937, yet they are clearly different blades! The other one is posted HERE and is fully polished, shiny habaki, posted back in 2016! I seriously doubt Sadakatsu could make 2 blades on the same day (Ok, I know it took many days to make a blade). Why would they both be named the same name for the same family with the same date? Is it possible the family commissioning these blades wanted 2 (or more) for gifts?

The top edge of the slider seems to be a gold metal?

They do vary some. I recall them being discussed on a thread a while back, because of the shape of the top knob.

There's another stamp on that same bayonet I don't recognize. Anyone make it out? It's pretty faded. @SteveM @Kiipu @BANGBANGSAN

Here is a "WA" stamp on a bayonet. Note the Kokura Arsenal stamp. Of this stamp, Fuller says: "Wa" stamp. Probably indicates manufacture in an occupied area, most likely by a collaborating force. Found on poor quality rolled or hammered blades" Since this has a Kokura stamp, I assume the Wa indicates "poor quality rolled or hammered blade" but probably Japanese made on the mainland. Previous examples are on sword blades that were clearly made in "an occupied area." and I appreciate seeing the bayonet example, as it expands on the use of the WA stamp. Corrections or additional thoughts are welcome!

I would also appreciate a clear shot of the nagako (tang) showing the kao at the bottom, please.

You probably know that you have a general's tassel on that one, right? It's worth as much as the sword by itself.