Jump to content

Bruce Pennington

Gold Tier
  • Posts

    10,764
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    127

Everything posted by Bruce Pennington

  1. I have much to learn! Thanks Ed.
  2. Ok, here's a couple to throw a monkey wrench in the issue: Both provided by Tim Blackburne 1. Akimitsu,1943, star-stamped, "Na" on mune, イ536 on all fittings ....... But 2128 on the blade and 2. Kanemitsu, 1944, no star, no stamps, "1" on fittings ..... But 24 on nakago
  3. Just got back from a long road-trip. I'll re-read all this tomorrow, a bit fog-headed now. George, I noticed the same thing happening with the Mantetsu numbers, beginning in 1942. We have 4-digit numbers, both in the 1000 and 2000 ranges in '42-'44. For a factory making 400 per month those serial numbers seem artificially high (even if they doubled their production numbers, it's still too high). Nick Komiya uncovered an Army document ordering serial numbers (I think it involved all weapons, not just swords) to randomize the numbers to hide production capabilities from the Allies. I suspect these large numbers might have been as a result of that order. It's significant, to me, that they start showing up after the Army took control of sword production. I am intrigued by your proposal that the list of forges are labeled with kana. It would be cool if a link could be found. To me, it would be impossible to prove with the limited amount of information we are working with, though. Your example with fittings marked with the same katakana & number sure seems to point to a shop putting it on the blade and fittings. I have seen shops match their fittings with the number on Mantetsu blades, but they didn't put the katakana on the fittings like this one. Yet, like Thomas pointed out, there must have been dozens of different ways shops worked their numbering systems. And this still doesn't eliminate the possibility that the blades were numbered by the forge, or Army inspector, and the shops simply mimicked the numbers.
  4. Back home and looked it over. The paint might be over an original brown. but it's very uniform like it was painted on before any dinks and dings could happen to the original paint. I've seen paint-jobs that were obviously done after multiple dings and chips. This wasn't like that. I also noticed that the wear patterns on this were almost identical to another 95 with original paint. So the gunto was worn/used during the war with this paint on it!
  5. Ed, I wonder if the left and right facing swasticas were intentional or just part of the elaborate pattern. Anyone creative enough to make that pattern likely built it around the swastikas. I learned something tonight as I didn't know the "left" and "right" facing carried different meanings!
  6. Wow, that's unusual! Almost looks like bamboo mats.
  7. Stephen, Did the owner state whether the fittings were RS or Type 98? The nakago has 2 ana, like it was made for RS fittings, but I've got 2 others in this year-group made that way, but found in Type 98 fittings.
  8. It is my understanding that each of the contractors indicated by their stamps made the whole sword, fittings and all. Someone may correct me if I am wrong about that.
  9. This is another example of what we have been struggling with, swords that are so poor we don’t think they’re original Japanese, but so good they don’t look like island swords. Like the one I just posted which had a clearly Japanese sword Smith signature, but a large number on the habaki. A theory is developing that these were made in China for the Japanese.
  10. Here’s an unusually large number on a legit civil sword converted for the war: found Here.
  11. You’re right, thanks. And thanks for the extra photos! I was trying to use Thomas,’ fancy chart arranged in a different way, I didn’t read it right.
  12. MOモ 104, so a 1943 blade with the Nan-ban Army Arsenal stamp. Thanks Stephen, a new one! Any chance of getting the full set of nakago shots?
  13. It is a good book, but it was superseded by a newer version, same authors, in 1997. The newer version has more updated information and is more comprehensive. They learned a lot between the two books.
  14. I am out of town this weekend, but will get back to you when I am home again. From memory, I believe the black is painted over chipped and beat up original paint. But I do believe it is war era in origin.
  15. I hope we get some input from owners out there on this. Nick's history of the RS model points out that it was officially ordered in 1938, but wasn't officially announced in the newspapers until 1941 with an expected output of 3,000/year. But apparently that wasn't reached, and it seems it might have been 1943 before it really launched. This is one of his threads on it, with the relevant paragraphs in posts #5-8
  16. Elements of truth to that in all the reference books. I like Ohmura's site for it's unmatched display o fcolor photos of high quality fittings and it's variety of colors and designs.
  17. Not a great work of art, but art all the same (and certainly WAY better than anything I could do!!!). Found by Thomas @Kiipu at Warrelics Here. Bob Coleman didn't believe it represented real Japanese work or art. He didn't say why, and he's no longer with us, or I'd ask. Anyone see what he was seeing, or not seeing, that made it seem Chinese to him?
  18. You can read, for free, dozens of high quality pages about gunto at Ohmura's site: http://ohmura-study.net/900.html
  19. I would do almost anything for a nice toffee apple! But in spite of Steve's faith, I cannot recall or find the discussion either. @cabowen mentioned that he's seen a '42, but he didn't post pictures in the thread I found. I'm fairly sure someone posted a '41, but I can't find it. The search function, in spite my checking "All of my search words", keeps giving me 317 pages that contain "type" not just "type 3" or "type 44". There are a couple of NMB guys with "Type 3 collector" in their by-lines. Hopefully someone will help out George.
  20. The translation guys will help with that first one. But the second one is likely a Chinese fake. It COULD be one of the island-made swords of the war. Will need more pics of the whole sword and fittings to say more.
  21. I missed that point. A shame. Seems stupid, too. Japanese reading Japanese inscriptions on the nakago would see the 1985 date. I guess they're counting on non-Japanese buyers to get sucked in.
  22. Dave, Here's another one! The whole gunto is black and it looks original, or at least period: https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/forum/ken-jasper-international-militaria-forums/Japanese-militaria-forum/12244933-1943-Japanese-sword-please-take-a-look
×
×
  • Create New...