Kiipu

Whoops! I seem to have missed that fact. I guess the pink slip is in the mail.

A souvenir sword and a Type 100. Of note though is the nakago mune markings on the Type 100. Your opinion on 2 Japanese swords

Note the character for large 大 ink stamped on the back of the belt. Japanese naval sword belt

Hiromitsu was a Seki swordsmith. Considering this is a late war Type 100 it is probably just a machine made blade. Is this the same Gifu marked sword that you posted pictures of in the "Arsenal Stamps." thread? If so, calling @Bruce Pennington.

ウ七〇三 while @george trotter has reported ウ七〇四. U703 is an army contract blade with a yamagata "M" inspection mark.

And putting it all together, one gets the following. 廣光 = Hiromitsu. 昭和二十年四月 = 1945 April. I suppose it is a late war Type 100 with inspection marks?

And also maybe to waterproof the canvass? Plain canvass would be like a sponge. The late war Type 100 made by Nan-Man Arsenal used a rubberized canvass material possibly for the same reason?

Do you think the canvas was dyed or painted black?

Besides the black canvass that was used, I have also noted the use of a black "electrical tape" type of material. Does anyone know what the correct term is for this? Below is a link to one of the better illustrations of this material in use on an Inaba. Navy Rinji Model

Attention all hands! At the top of the page below the banner, click on Nihonto Info and then click on Research. Clicking on the last entry will yield Sesko's Compendium.

Hi Eric, it was noted that the sword was matching, presumably by the serial number? Is this indeed the case? A disclaimer is in order. Japanese officers did use and modify Type 95s. They could either rent or purchase them outright. It is a rather hotly debated issue when these hybrids, a Type 95 blade with officer fittings or vice versa, appear. Puzzling Type 95 Nco The leather sword knot is causing verdigris to form on the crossguard and should be removed. Also, some greases can stain the blade, so it would be wise to remove all the grease from the blade. Replace it with a substance that is more blade friendly. A finally, some better reading material for your edification. Short Development History of Type 95 Gunto

武州住正長 Bushū jū Masanaga.

The portion highlighted in white is 襾. However, I agree with Bruce that this is not the complete character which looks more like 酒. However, Trystan has forgotten more than have learned so take it with a grain of salt.

The blade and its fittings looks good but the scabbard is for an officer's sword. Notice the scabbard lock on the hilt does not lock into the scabbard. Also note the two tassels, one for an officer and the other for an NCO. I would hazard to say it is a mismatch; but it is real. What does the seller mean that the numbers match? Ask for a photograph of this.

The sword belonged to a youth school. The school name is abbreviated and thus difficult to identify exactly what school it is. These school markings are common on swords, rifles, and bayonets, used for training.

My best guess would be Saitama Prefecture 埼玉県. The star stamp may have been dotted out above the signature. If so, the blade is coming via Japan. 埼玉　サイタマ　Saitama. Shimōsa Province

Found the current webpage with better pictures. 高山刀

It is a traditional blade and was part of the Army's early Type 100 program. The Tōkyō 1st Arsenal serialized the tangs and this one falls right inline with all the rest. 群馬今井兼継　Gunma Imai Kanetsugu. 昭和十七年三月 ８９８　March 1942 [serial number] 898. Legally rebutting the existence of a Type 3 Army Officer's Sword The serial numbers on the early ones were stamped upside down and the high is 798. The orientation was changed about serial 1129 to an upright position. I am guessing the serial number on yours is 898; however, it could be 868. This blade falls in the middle of the change in serial number orientations. The problem is further compounded by the use of the same stamp for the 6 & 9! Hopefully another one will surface that will clarify exactly when this change occurred. Edit: I "remembered" that I had posted a summary of this already. Arsenal Mark on RJT sword Fittings

Klaus, what are the faint markings on the bottom of the February 1944 tang? @cisco-san

OK, thanks, it had just not registered that these were marked like this.

Note the encircled anchor on the nakago. Very unusual to see this on a Takayama sword.

A Takayama sword with a stamped number of 225 [シリアル№225の刻印] on the nakago. Swordsmith 刀匠: Ishihara Masanao 石原正直. Polisher 研師: Ōya Michio 大矢道雄. https://web.archive....hayate/62412699.html

As Bruce explained above. The encircled katakana characters read from right to left and are in iroha order. FYI, the drawing is of the blade only with no habaki. Your confusing a cross-section reference point for a habaki. The overall length is 906 mm, blade length is 700 mm, and nakago length is 206 mm.

Sorry Conway, I am drawing a blank and so did another native Japanese speaker I asked. Maybe ask Jan Culbertson about the sword and markings? Mon in unusual locations

I think the command sword is more likely Chinese than Manchurian. Coat the Chinese characters with a light oil so as to darken the rust, and try taking another picture from a different angle.