Yukihiro

Here is my Toshimasa blade:

Yes, you are right: owning a blade that is not visually satisfying can be quite frustrating. As regards the koshirae, it is nothing to write home about either, so I think buying it would be a mistake. Thank you all for all the information provided and for your opinions. Best regards, Didier

He might well be one of those you mentioned. Shipping is not the problem - restoring the blade is, as I don't think I will ever be able to afford that expense. Now the question is to know whether the blade is worth buying and keeping as it is.

I was also skeptical of the sword being a Navy one, but the nakago apparently fits tightly in the tsuka with no wobble whatsoever.

It's Navy and apparently original to the blade. Is a han-tan-to a blade that is partly hand made and traditional? I'm afraid the blade will never be held by an expert if I buy it and I know polishing it would far exceed what I can afford.

He did tell me the name of the swordsmith but my point is primarily to ascertain the intrinsic value of the blade without hurting its commercial value as the seller gave me liberty to use his photos. The metal used to forge it was not tamahagane, that is for sure, but knowing whether it has at least some traits that set it apart from the bulk of gunto production would help me decide whether it is worth buying or not.

Were they all the students of one master swordsmith?

Do you mean by that it is still in its "original" (WW2) polish? I have often wondered what an original WW2 Seki factory polish would have looked like right out of the Seki arsenal (I do not imply that this one looks like that).

You have a very keen eye, and a wealth of knowledge, I think. I told the seller I wouldn't disclose the name of the swordsmith so that, if the gunto is not deemed to be of good manufacture, the news won't hurt the value of the sword he is selling, but, according to what I have read on the forum (https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/10331-takayama-to/), the sword does have something to do with takayama-to, although it was not signed by him.

The sword does have a Seki stamp on the nakago, which would point to a mere showato, but I'd like the blade to be judged on its own merits: do you think it is of any interest or is it yet another mass produced gunto blade? The seller told me it had been shipped from Japan with an export permit, but I suppose that does not mean per se that the sword is something out of the ordinary. Is the lack of yakote a flaw or do you think the kissaki was meant to look like this?

Here are some more photos.

Being no expert in the field of WW2 Japanese swords, I must say that I am unsure as to the quality of the blade I am posting - the kissaki, in particular, looks a bit off to me. Could you tell me whether there would be the slightest chance for this blade to have been at least partially traditionally made? The seller thinks the blade might have been water quenched but a seller being a seller, he will invariably tell you what to you want to hear from him.

I would be tempted to use a microfiber cloth to tone down the acid etched hamon, but I have already been advised against that solution - what do you think, Bruno?

Well, are you sure the ito is new? Is does show some signs of wear here and there, but, of course, I suppose that too could be faked in some way or other. The fittings are not totally mixed as the tsuba, the seppa and the spring of the retention clip all bear the same number: 480. I was not able to see that number elsewhere but, on the other hand, I have not gone to the trouble of dismantling this gunto entirely. The guy who sold it to me told me he had bought it from an Englishman at Ciney (Belgium), but that does not mean that the sword may not have come ultimately from the infamous SHOWA22.

That is the way I see it: a fish-shaped stamp. But I must say my first move was to interpret it as a 0, when I first spotted it on the tsuba. It is 'swimming' to the right on both seppa but 'diving' downwards on the tsuba, so who knows?

I gave it my best shot On another note, I think I can now say with a certain degree of certainty that I have an all original koshirae here: the number 480 also appears on the latch.

So I understand you think this is the mark of the shop that sold the tsuba and the seppa? I will have a look at the other fittings, just to make sure that this mark does not appear on them.

Hopefully this is good enough. I will try to make a better picture when I have more time.

So I suppose they have nothing to do with the number that was stamped into the tsuba and the seppa?

Yes, that is also the conclusion I have come to upon examining the blade.

Could someone tell me what is written in green painted letters on the nakago? The tsuba and seppa bear the number 480 plus some kind of fish-shaped stamp (Ω?), and I doubt the green letters read the same. Thank you very much in advance!

Here is a better picture. This one is not made of iron, though : it seems to be solid brass.

So that explains why there are unusual features to be found on this sword: it is not a military one!

Yes, I understand. My point though is to gain as much information as I can on the details that can set this particular gunto apart from the myriads of other Japanese military swords that appear each day on the market. I willingly admit that it is far from being unique and will never be considered a work of art, but, nonetheless, I am very much interested in trying to get a better picture of the swordsmith who made it and also of the officer that carried it during WWII. That is the point of the questions I am asking.

Is this an instance of a papered Nagata Sukenori gunto? https://www.e-sword.jp/sale/0810_1124syousai.htm The only things I could make out were "Nagata Sukenori" and "to". By the way, this one is Seki marked...