Bruce Pennington

The first photo is the date: Showa 18 or 1943. Corrosion is to thick to see a month.

Mich, No date or stamps on the Kanenao? Also, that brown tassel says this was carried by a Gunzoku servicemember. Oh, and for and 'island sword', that nakago on the first one is pretty well made!

Here's what I have

Thanks Thomas! New chart with correct date and added smiths: Tan 1941, Aug Kanetsune – Gifu Yahoo Auction 1942 Sadatsugu – Gifu Hxv, NMB 1942, Jan Kanetada – Gifu David Price, NMB ND Kaneaki (RJT) – Gifu Cillo, pg 37 ND Kaneaki (RJT) – Gifu Military trader, W-A ND Kaneaki (RJT) – Gifu G584, NMB ND Kanekuni – Gifu Zook, NMB, kaigunto ND Kanesumi, Sato (RJT) – Gifu Sksguide, NMB ND Kanetoshi – Gifu Slough, pg 122 ND Kiyonobu, Nagamura – Gifu Cillo, pg 85 ND Kiyonobu, Nagamura – Gifu Beater, NMB ND Kiyonobu, Nagamura – Gifu Aukshunshuset.com ND Kiyonobu, Nagamura – Gifu Nic, NMB

George, I was actually hoping you would take a look at the smiths in the chart to see if any of them are connected in some way.

Ok, thanks Steve! So, on first glance, then, I don't think that's the same as what we are seeing on the WWII blades (and even before). You can see this one is tied to other kana: And yet, there are a couple of smiths that did use distinct marks.

@george trotter @mecox I have 10 blades on file, now, by 7 smiths, all from Gifu! That by itself doesn't help a lot. But if you guys can see if these smiths have any other close connection, like a forge, it might help. Tan 1941, Aug Kanetsune – Gifu Yahoo Auction 1942 Sadatsugu – Gifu Hxv, NMB 1943, Jan Kanetada – Gifu David Price, NMB ND Kaneaki (RJT) – Gifu Cillo, pg 37 ND Kaneaki (RJT) – Gifu Military trader, W-A ND Kaneaki (RJT) – Gifu G584, NMB ND Kanekuni – Gifu Zook, NMB, kaigunto ND Kanetoshi – Gifu Slough, pg 122 ND Kiyonobu, Nagamura – Gifu Cillo, pg 85 ND Kiyonobu, Nagamura – Gifu Beater, NMB

Many thanks, Moriyama-san! I wasn't really buying the "kanefusa" as there were 3 tic marks on top, not 1 (sorry for the poor terminology!).

Yes, at 16:22 they even showed a close-up shot. Were they describing the dots?

I have this filed as Kanefusa, but it doesn't seem to match any of the others I find on NMB, nor Sesko's list. Can I get a full translation of this, please?

Why don’t we run this by Akira Komiya over on Warrelics and see if he has any insight.

Sword Care Guide https://japaneseswordindex.com/care.htm

John, Could we get a shot or two of the textured one? These are too dark to see the details.

The leather covered saya is the WWII part. Civil swords brought into the war got that as a minimum. Many of them retained civil parts to some degree.

Another Mt Fuji, possibly viewed over a stone wall. Posted for sale on a Boy's Day sword by @Ray Singer HERE.

One small correction, Chris. The stamp at the top is the Showa not Seki. Shouldn't change anything else about your blade, but it does put the probable age of the blade a bit earlier than if it was a Seki stamp.

Chogi Oil many different ones to choose from on that link.

You don’t show the blade, but the ones with the stamp are usually really well-made too.

Peter, Any stamps up higher, possibly under the tsuba/seppa set?

Here ya go, Peter. And thanks for the added photos! The stamp on the kabutogane, though can't see it well, is usually the "TO" of Tokyo 1st Army Arsenal

Yes, I've seen a few, not a lot, but a few blades with slogans on them over the years. SMR was the only one, to my knowledge, to do it on a mass scale. I think the rest are done on individual order. Posting pics of the one above for posterity

Not often you see an Army gunto with that flat ito style (there's a name for that). Also, the mon is one I haven't seen. Have you gotten it identified?

Thanks Smith! Just an update. We now have 400 Mantetsu blades on file. Nothing new to report, if you have been following this thread.

Well, David, no one has stepped up to help you on this one. So I'll make an almost totally uneducated guess for you (that should stir the pot!) Nakago has some darker patina, which usually means some age. I don't study these, but it's not as deep as the really old ones, so maybe 1700's or 1800s? Hard to say by just the old patina, though, as you can come across blades from the 1600s with almost no patina.

Hard to tell, but it's either Feb '44 or Dec '44.