Kaiser21

Gentlemen: Thanks for your prompt and decisive replies. I guess the good news here is I've learned something about these swords and recognized a probable fake when I saw it. I'll have to give the potential seller the bad news that he's been had. Based on my dealings with him to date I believe that he genuinely thinks he has a good sword here. Thomas: I did have a look at the thread you linked to. Good information that I've saved for future reference. Tom: Gotta have a sense of humour these days ! That got a chuckle from me. Cheers: Steve

I've been offered this Type 95 by a Militaria collector who is down sizing. I just bought a very nice 2nd Model Kreigsmarine Officer dagger from him so I suspect he knows what he's doing in at least one area of Militaria collecting. This sword however gives me a bad feeling. It appears to be an early production model based on the copper Tsuka and that would make it relatively rare. Things that don't sit right with me are: The habaki is a mess and the strange characters are a red flag. The serial number seems too high to be in the range of early production. There is only one discernable arsenal stamp. I think it's a fake but I'm still new at this area of collecting so I'd hate to pass up an early production example by misjudging it. I'd appreciate it if someone can tell me I'm wrong here.

Geraint: OK. Interesting. Many thanks for taking the time to educate me on this topic. I've learned a lot as a result of this post. Cheers.

You gentlemen have been very tolerant so far, so please indulge me with another question regarding the naming conventions. I'm inferring that Izumo Daijo is an honorific of some sort and the smith was known as Fujiwara Yoshitake is that correct?

I seem to recall that my friend told me that the wrapping chord came undone at some point and some helpful soul attempted to make it right. Thanks for your input.

Here's a better picture of the nakago. Hopefully this will make things easier to evaluate.

John: No need to apologise. I'm afraid you'll have to indulge me here as I have zero experience in sword smith signatures. In your view what does the signature say?

Thanks very much for your input. I realise that these comments require an investment of time on your part. No need for apologies at all. I have an appreciation of the complexities involved here. I will ask for a better shot of the nakago.

John: Many thanks for providing this link. I had a quick look. This is beyond what we were hoping for! Steve

John; That is great news! This is exactly what my friend was hoping for! The name of the smith and the period when the sword was made. I have to think that if there is the possibility that the signature was forged (in some instances, not necessarily in this instance) then his work must have been considered desirable? Thanks gentlemen for your prompt responses. My friend will be thrilled to know this. Steve

Geraint: Thanks for this. This may be the best picture of the nakago we can get. If it makes the difference between an educated guess and a definite identification I'll ask for a straight on shot. I'm pretty new to the Nihonto area myself. I'm thinking based on your comment that "Izumo Daijo Fujiwara Yoshitake" is a well known smith? Good of you to take the time to respond. Steve

I’m posting this wakizashi for a friend who isn’t comfortable posting pictures on forums. It was brought back to the U.S. shortly after the end of the war by a then Major in the American occupation force. He knows very little about it and is hoping to get a translation of the signature and an approximate time period of production. He’s had the sword for many years as he acquired it directly from the Major who was an acquaintance and just wants to know more about it. The knife is apparently not original to the sword. These are the only pictures I have. I’m told the blade is 22 inches from tip of kissaki to the tsuba. I’m hoping I can help him out here by asking the experts on this forum.

Well. "He who hesitates ...." I decided to pursue the purchase this morning and it's gone! I was sure it was good but couldn't gauge the price. It had been sitting around for weeks so I concluded that if it was a good deal it wouldn't still be available. Guess only two people knew what it was. Oh well, live and learn. Many thanks for your input guys. Too bad it was in vain.

Bruce and John: My apologies. It's been a while since I read the posting rules. Please disregard my comments re. value of this piece.

John: Thanks for clearing that up as well as the reference material. This field has a lot of ground to be covered, but I'm making some headway. Worth picking up for the price do you think?

Bruce: By the "all white same" I take it you're referring to the ray skin on the Tsuka? Not to be mercenary, but I'm tempted to pick this sword up however I'm not keen on overpaying for it.

Probably just lack of knowledge on my part. I'm equating the presence of two suspension rings on the saya with the type/model. I should have said Type 94 which I think has two rings as opposed to the Type 98 with only one. When you say "looks completely Kai Gunto" do you mean it's a legitimate Kai Gunto?

I came across this Gunto on-line and it looks interesting. As I'm new to Japanese sword collecting I'm interested in whether this one is worth picking up? It looks to be a Kai-Gunto in the Type 98 mounts. No tang stamps beyond what appears to be the Toyokawa Arsenal stamp. I'm assuming the blade is stainless steel made from bar stock. Two questions: Is it original ? Is it worth pursuing at $640 U.S. ? Opinions welcomed as I'm trying to get a feel for what fair market values are.

OK. I get it now. Thanks. I did post it on the "Help with our Mons thread" but no response as of yet.

OK. Then, much the same as what I referred to as a Mon" ? Is there a way of determining if this is a family/clan mark or a manufacturer's mark? Thanks for replying Chris.

Steve: Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm new to this area of collecting so forgive my ignorance, but I don't understand what a "kamon" is. The link appears to be the same as the marking on my sword alright.

I’m primarily an Imperial German collector but now that I’m retired, I’ve been dabbling in other areas that interest me. About a month ago I picked up two Japanese swords through an on-line auction site. They come from the estate of a Captain who served with the British Army Royal Engineers during the campaign in Burma. Pictured is an Army Kyu Gunto. It was badly stored and as a result the scabbard has some significant rusting on one side but the saving grace is the blade was well oiled (for the most part) and only has one area of rusting. The crappy auction site pictures only showed the rusted area next to the Habaki so I was taking a chance on the blade not being a write off. I suspect this sword, not having the look of a stereotypical Samurai blade was relegated to storage in the basement of the condo in which this gentleman lived on the waterfront. I was drawn to this sword by the two mekugi pegs on it on the basis of almost all the examples I found on-line had only one peg. I sensed this one was out of the ordinary. I was greatly relieved when I got it home and pulled the blade out of the scabbard. I managed to get the blade unmounted (without losing a finger) and it appears the tang is not signed. I'm also curious about the lat picture which shows the pommel which has what looks like a Mon but not anything I've been able to find anywhere on the net. Maybe it's a manufacturer's mark? These blades are fascinating, incredible craftsmanship. I hope you find this of interest. Steve

I'm new to Japanese sword collecting so I'm not even sure if this is a Mon. This is the pommel end of a Kyu Gunto I recently acquired which had a Nihonto blade mounted in it. I'm wondering if it's a Mon or just some standard device that appeared on all swords or specific manufacturers? I've prowled through page after page of Mons examples on the net but nothing looks like this. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks Steve N

Interesting discussion. So, these serial numbers were stamped by hand or machine? There is such a variety of alignments and depth of impressions I'd conclude hand stamping? I was drawn to it because unlike pristine examples, this one looks like it was used in the field.

Thanks for your comments gentlemen. The one thing I found odd (and I didn't even notice it until I was Photo shopping the picture) is the fact that the 4 on the blade is a smaller size than any of the other numbers. My background is Manufacturing Operations in the Aerospace and Defence industry, so I have some appreciation of the things that happen when managing serially numbered production. Probably lots of ways that could happen. I'd think it would be a lot easier to put a bogus number on the Saya than the blade so I'd be inclined to say that the blade number is legit. Maybe that Production Plannner/Inspector lost one of their number 4 stamps and used a smaller one temporarily?