Bruce Pennington

I will admit that I am no expert on Type 19s, and will go back and read what Dawson said about these. But at the time of their making, late 1800s, they were the only officer blades. Wasn't it the use of these in the Sino-Japanese war of the 1920s that brought about the revival of true samurai-styled swords for the military? They were breaking in the Chinese winters due to brutal cold, plus they were bouncing off the heavily wrapped Chinese soldiers. So, they were being used as weapons in battle. Kenny, can you tell if yours is chromed, or is that just the shine from lighting? If chromed, I'd say clearly it was a "dress" sword (I don't know when they experimented with chrome, if it was that early, maybe not). But if plain steel, then it was made as a weapon.

I have found that if you crop a photo before posting, even a tiny bit, the website software will post it upright correctly.

Thanks Stephen! It's added to the collection! I like this one because the "writing" of the Spring kanji is sloppy. It's a reminder that the Mantetsu mei aren't cookie-cutter copies of each other. Different workers will have variations from others, and even could have a bad day and his own work may get sloppy.

Thanks Chris! Yes “Fu 795” is the full number. The Spring kanji is pretty sloppy but is a good example that the Mantetsu mei wasn’t this perfectly struck, monolith. Some blades have been questioned in other threads because of variations in the writing, but this is a good example showing that they were still carved by humans that had good days and bad days at work! Ha!

Chis, On your Mantetsu - could you try getting a better picture of the bottom kanji that I've pointed to here? I can't quite see it properly and it looks confusing in the image you've provided. Thanks!

No, even the handle is a fake.

This article on Japaneseswordindex really helped me understand the science of blade thickness on cutting ability: http://www.japaneseswordindex.com/niku.htm

Neil, I also find interesting the ashi. Bolted together.

Neil, I fully agree with everyone - quite gorgeous rig! Austus - I believe it's there. The angle of the shot makes it hard to see. Neil, could we get a shot of the menugi?

Apologies to everyone who downloaded the previous Stamps Doc, it was butchered a bit by the Word to PDF converter! I found a better one and have attached a clean pdf version of the latest document. Stamp 4.3 (2).pdf

From Nick's discussion on Warrelics (with Nick's trademark crude remark unedited): "1940 Sword regulations for Gunzoku The reason they had to update in 1940 was because of the China Incident. Gunzoku also had to serve in the war zone and required appropriate attire and gear for that reason. Another reason was the establishment of the civilian uniform of 1940 and the army wanted to incorporate those into the Gunzoku uniforms. The background info says "currently Ko-in class are required to be in business suit even in the war zone, putting them at a disadvantage and inconveniance. Therefore it was decided to establish field uniforms like those worn by Hanin-kan and also permit them to wear swords." "Hanin-kan currently wear swords identical to company grade officers, but not to confuse them with army officers, the rear of the sword belt and tassel shall now be in brown as differentiation." Now, that is the REST of the story. Some additional sources for possible myths here are--- 1. Old saber fittings/accouterments for Hanin-kan were identical to army company grade officer specs, but lacked cherry and vines in the metal fittings. Check whether your books have this right. 2. Hanin-kan would have worn swords, belts and tassels identical to company grade army officers (with blue backing) until the brown backed belts and tassels came in 1940 As you see, having Gunzoku wear army officer swords was a longstanding army tradition. Claiming that the sword features shown in post 10 of this thread were special designs for army civilians is simply stupid. Why would they expend such effort at a time they couldn't even produce enough swords for combatants?" Found here: http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/what-were-regulations-army-civilian-employees-carry-swords-701783-4/

Neil, according to Nick Komiya’s research the civil forces, Gunzuko, were authorized to carry full Type 98s like the army. So as far as I know about the refitted civilian swords - anyone with one could carry it, or anyone could buy one refitted.

Well known, and oft talked about, found on a kyu backstrap:

Chris, it was a brass screw that I painted army green.

George, that very well may be. One of my Type 3 (Rinji) models did'nt have a metal plate on the far side. I had to use bamboo. But you might try a screw to find out. The plate is a very thin sheet metal, and theoretically, the hole in the wood will be the same size as the hole in the metal, so it might not be real obvious peaking through from the other side.

George, I had to go to Ace hardware. Home Depot didn't have a wide enough variety of brass screws. But Ace had it.

That’s a beauty Bryce! Is it yours?

Alrighty then! Thomas and I have compiled as complete a list of officer blade inspection stamps as I have ever seen (Thanks Thomas!!!). I don't know why the PDF converter splits the new Inspector Chart when it's all on the same page in Word. I'm attaching the chart as a separate doc in case someone wants it all on one page... Inspector Chart.pdf

Jean, Most folks don't break Type 95s down. About half the time, when you put them back together, there's a slight wiggle or looseness to the fittings afterwards. And, if legit, there won't be anything there except an occational "W" stamp, or Seki.

What Mark said, plus: 1. The sandblasted look to the tsuka is usually the first warning. The details on the kabutogane are crafted nicely, but it's like it was sanded down. Common look for fakes. 2. The saya throat opening - the brass inner isn't blended into the steel outer shell. I'll post a pic of a good one if I have it. The openning for the latch is too square. 3. The fakers are getting better at the stacked cannon ball stamp of the Kokura arsenal, but they are still struggling to get the Iijima Shoten contrator stamp right. 4. The inspector stamp on the blade is horrid and looks like it was hot-stamped to the blade. 5. The fakers like this 13xxx serial number range. I haven't done a survey, but it wouldn't surprise me if they are all the same number. 6. The barrel nut at the top of the tsuka isn't right. Like I said, though, a really good replica (term to use if selling as a replica, which happens sometimes).

Vlad, That is one of the highest quality reproductions (fake) I have seen. I have heard Poland is making these. I wanted to say it's legit, but there are a few too many things that are wrong, or slightly off. I agree with John.

Neil, What's that on the end of the arrow in the second photo?

You polite Aussies! Us Yanks didn't get the moniker "Ugly Americans" by being polite! I understand, no worries! Just razzing.

Got a request for a full translation of the banners in this photo. We know it's a send-off for an employee, Mr Ogawa Hisaichi, but interested in what they are saying about the manufacture of swords. This came from Richard Fuller. He said “They seem to confirm the manufacture of gunto and diplomatic swords at the factory/workshop of Matsuyama with reference to tempering a sword (by) expert artisan(s" I ran this by Guy, at Wehrmacht-Awards, and all he saw were send-off slogans, and nothing referencing swords. Just want a second opinion before I give the word back to Richard. Thanks for the help!

I’ve seen a few lately in the $6-7,000 price range from Japan. Don’t know if they’re selling that high though.