Scogg

Fascinating, thank you for sharing those. A couple firsts for me! Never seen a number on the nakago-mune, or paint like that. Very interesting, -Sam

Indeed, would love to see the nakago for my notes. Many nakago I have seen on Variation#3 swords are not stamped; so do not worry if yours is unmarked. Although, every Variation#1 copper nakago that I have seen has the 東 stamp. Like Conway says, we don't see the nakago very often, so sample size of my observations is small. Best, -Sam

Hi Becca, welcome to the forum. I am a fellow Oregonian, and I work in Tualatin. I started a Nihonto club out here, with the goal of hosting an annual event every winter. Feel free to send me a private message, and I'd be happy to arrange a meeting sometime soon to help you with your sword. I'd be happy to meet you at my place of work, or anywhere else that you are comfortable bringing the sword. I can bring some tools to disassemble it and offer all the information that I am able. I can also help you take some proper photographs of the tang so we can share them here and get a good translation from other forum members. If that sounds good to you, feel free to message me. I have no interest in buying your sword or anything shady like that; my goal will be to help you understand what you have for your families history. All the best, Sincerely, -Sam Scoggin

Hi Nazar, nice sword, congrats! So I am encountering some outdated information within my monograph; that I hope to remedy here very soon with my second edition (or sooner with an updated edition). Some of this information is carryover from previous publications, that I have since discovered through cataloging are not entirely accurate. Part of the reason I began this project, is because I encounter similar inaccuracies across almost all sources. I need to do better on my own material, and make sure it is accurate. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. An April 23, 1941 document revises the brass tsuba design by removing the sword knot slot. Although, no confirmed production examples of this revised unslotted brass tsuba have ever been observed. So I need to make an edit to my document in the Variation#3 chapter. I make mention of this in the Variation#4 section; so this is an oversight on my part. My sincere apologies for letting that slip. I would date your sword to between April 1941 and March 1942. Let me explain the asymmetrical ito versus symmetrical ito. I suspect we're encountering a little language barrier here, (nothing wrong with that). I've attached a photo that better highlights this change (please click on the image to make it larger for viewing). I do not mean literally a mirror image of both sides of the tsuka, but rather that the ITO wrap pattern was made to be the same on both sides; in respect to the ito knots and open diamonds. You will see this difference most clearly where the ito meets ferrule (fuchi). If you continue to count the diamonds starting with my arrows, you will also notice the difference. Hope that helps, and apologies for my errors. Some of these differences are very challenging to articulate clearly, and I am still trying to find the best verbiage for describing them. I will work on these edits ASAP, and get it into the download section. Best, -Sam

Hi Chris, welcome to the forum. Hope you don’t mind, but I’m gonna post your photos here after some cropping; so that more members can see your Dirk. Best of luck, -Sam

Yes, I believe that’s the one. They suggested that they may X-ray the sword in the future to try and read the Mei. Even in-person, I had to ask to see precisely where it was. Really wonderful sword, and a privilege to be able to see. -Sam

A few photos of today . I'll try to get some more before the end of the day, but it's pretty crowded!

Hello Joseph, welcome to the forum. According to my interpretation of my records, I'd loosely date it somewhere between June 1939 - April 1941; and probably somewhere near the middle. Stamps: 岐 = Gi = Gifu Swords Cooperative. 名 = na = 名古屋陸軍造兵廠監督課 = Nagoya Army Arsenal Supervisory Section. 4 stacked cannonball stamp = 造兵廠小倉工廠標識 = Army Arsenal Kokura Factory trademark. It's missing the mouth of the scabbard, grommet screw, hanger loop, and sarute. Because the mouth of the scabbard is missing, we cannot know if it was originally matching or not; that said, it's at least correctly a Nagoya style scabbard. Otherwise looks correct. Best of luck, -Sam

These blades are a little more forgiving than other Japanese Swords, being machine made. For my Type 95 swords, I just give the blade a wipe with a non abrasive cloth like a microfiber with 95%+ isopropyle alochol, followed by wiping it dry. I then apply a very thin (nearly impreceptible layer) of tsubaki oil; you want very little on the blade to avoid it beading/collecting and saturating the wooden liner inside the scabbard. If this is your first time oiling a sword, I would check on it the following day to see if oil is collecting or beading anywhere (which would mean theres a little too much), and give it another wipe to even it out / sop some up. Choji oil works too (clove), and so does any pure, clear, and uncented mineral oil, or typwriter oil. I prefer tsubaki (camelia) because its both traditional, and uncented. I've heard of people using renwax too, but I don't have experience with that. I would not do anything to the hilt or scabbard, except maybe a light wipe or dusting with a dry non abrasive cloth. You could maybe, very gently, tap the scabbard mouth down ontop of a towel, and get any collected particulate out of there. The clove oil reminds me of the dentist; unfortunately for me. Best of luck, -Sam

That stands to reason Conway. I'd be curious if your cataloging efforts agree (generally) with my number estimates. Russ, anything is possible! Although, I have only encountered a few Type 95 with numbers etched out like that. Coincidentally, that one was actually local to me, and a friend almost purchased it. Your theory could be correct, or someone could have done it more recently because they believed numebrs on Japanese swords to be a bad thing or fake identifier. All in all, a huge part of the reason I dived deep into this type of sword, is because I believe there is a lot more to them that the general militaria collecting circles understand. I think they are more rare and interesting than many people give them credit for. I am obiously a bit biased toward them, so keep that in mind Best, -Sam

Happy to help. In my opinion you did not overpay. You paid what is essentially higher-end retail value for a NORMAL brass tsuba Type 95; but yours is especially rare with that punctured wrapping and low number; and there's really not good known price point on this variation yet. On top of that, yours is in remarkably good condition with what looks like all original paint and very little blade damage. Honestly, I probably would have paid that for this sword; and I think you did good Your sword is complete as far as the sword itself goes. A leather tassel would make it a better display; and if you really want to go all-out, you could attempt to find a belt and hanger, but those are exceptionally hard to find at good prices. Best of luck with it! I may be a little biased, but I think its a great one. -Sam

Interesting numbers Bruce. Definitely hard to quantify. Could it be because its wear was restricted to senior NCO's, primarily Sergeant Majors and Warrant Officers. Corporals and Sergeants generally did not carry the Type 95 unless assigned to regimental headquarters or serving in mounted branches such as Cavalry, Transport, or Military Police? See Nick Komya's comment on post #10, for my source: https://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/short-development-history-type-95-gunto-676112/ This is one reason why I do not like to call these Type 95 swords "NCO swords" anymore. You're much more privy to the internal Japanese Military and rakings stuff than I am. In your opinion would this restriction about senior NCO's help make a little more sense of Fullers numbers? Best, -Sam

Thanks Chanlder, I really appreciate the excersize. Lovely looking sword. -Sam

I'd like to talk about the presumed total amount of originally manufactured, seriliazed on the blade, Type 95 military swords. This data is from my cataloging efforts, and should not be considered all encompassing. (~ = approximate). Lets break this down simply into just the just the hilt materials. Some overlapping does occur. Observed copper hilt swords range: 4 to 6561 Observed aluminum hilt sword range: 6756 to 162718. and 200797 to 202802. Observed wood hilt sword range: 201750 to 218821 and 300060 to 301814 Now lets digest this data into a total amount presumed manufactured. (~6561 copper) + (~157967 aluminum) + (~18825 wood hilt) = 183,353 swords It should be noted, that this number is not precise because it's loosely based off of what is observed in the market. Some margin of error is entirely expected due to overlapping, and the simple fact that I havent seen everything. My point in bringing this up, is that I believe based on my limited observations, that these swords are less common than many people believe. Hope someone finds this interesting -Sam

Conway, I believe you're onto something. To me, it seems these swords sell for quite different prices depending on where you are in the world. I often see them fetch more over in Europe than in the US, presumably because there are fewer of them there, and maybe it's more difficult to move them across borders. For something worth under $2,000, the hassle probably isn't worth it for many sellers, so they tend to price them a bit higher. People often think these swords are “common”. Approximately fewer than 200,000 were made. Some might think “but they go into the 300k range”; but there are large blocks missing in the known serial number ranges, and when we account for that, the total manufactured is likely closer to 200k. (PS. I will make a post in my pinned monograph thread above generalized serial number ranges.) How many of those originally manufactured survived today? Nobody knows, but definitely less than 200k. This might sound like a lot, but considering other militaria; where often multimillion units were manufactured, it doesn’t feel like too many to me. Supply and demand and such. Best, -Sam

Looking forward to seeing some nice swords today. Man, Florida is balmy compared to the PNW. It’s like I can drink the air! Looking forward to viewing some nice swords indoors, and meeting some of ya’ll. I’ll be the youngish looking scrawny guy in a tan baseball cap Best, -Sam

Thanks John, and welcome to the forum Max! Could we possibly see the other side of the hilt? What you have is a really nice example of an early Aluminum hilt Type 95 military sword. Yours would have been made between July 1938 and June 1939. It was manufactured near Tokyo by Suya Shoten, inspected by Tokyo first army arsenal inspectors; and these swords were under Kokura Army Arsenal administration. (Suya is the harp logo on the ferrule, the middle is for the Tokyo first inspectors which is also on the blade, and the third concentric circular stamp is for Kokura army arsenal) The other side of the hilt should have the metal wrap pattern punctured by the securing screw. This is actually probably my favorite variation of this sword (Variation#2 from Suya), because it’s the first variation that I got myself, that started my obsession. In June 1939 the wrap pattern was adjusted to be symmetrical, so the mekugi would more easily go throught the samegawa diamonds and not the wrap pattern. (See my example below). A relatively rare variation. My serial number range for the Suya variation#2 swords is between serial umbers 6756 and 12148; and it shares some of that range with Iijima and Gifu. Very nice sword, congrats! For more info, I have written a Type 95 paper that’s in the document section here on the forum. Best of luck, -Sam

Indeed, the price range for these is pretty wide, and I don’t record whatever the fees or shipping may be. My price ranges earlier are what I believe to be fair prices, even at my reselling rate. I often see and catalog these go for over 1000. I’ve probably lost half a dozen auctions staying below that threshold. 1900 is pretty high though. I wonder if someone thought that string cord was an orange officers tassel? Kind of wild, for machined swords. People really like them though, and they make a great example of a wartime Japanese sword for the casual militaria collector. Not quite as intimidating to keep/store/maintain as a Nihonto may be; and I suspect that’s part of the allure. Just my views, -Sam

Hi Pete, It can be frustrating these days because our phones and cameras take images with such large file sizes. Our admin, Brian has added an image resizing tool to the top menu. Beyond that, I have found that taking a screenshot on my phone of the original image works good to copy the picture at a much smaller size. Cropping helps too. It can be a pain sometimes, but it’s one of those things we all battle with from time to time. Cool piece, thanks for sharing. Looks like you’ve got some interesting items from your time over there. All the best, -Sam

It’s interesting to think about. I believe it would have cost money to have a mon added to an officer’s gunto, so it’s definitely a nice bonus to find one on a set of fittings. That said, I’ve seen mon on gunto with old blades as well as on Gendaito, and plenty of Showato. Because of that, I’m hesitant to use the mon as an indicator of blade quality. I do not know, but I wonder if it would cost and officer more to buy a brand new showato, or to have an older blade refitted. Someone else here might know or have a source for those $ details. Given the amount of customization available, it’s difficult to draw connections between the blade and any single component of the fittings. Compound all that with swapping and tampering post-war, it gets even messier. Extra things like Mon still do get me excited sometimes, but I usually try to remain objective and view each sword as a “unique individual”. Bruce’s example of the “type 3” contingency model is a good exception, where fittings and blade quality seem to show some correlation. All the best, -Sam

I'm not sure the presence of a mon would suggest anything about the blade itself. The reasoning behind my thinking, is that you often find mon on those Kyu Gunto parade/dress sabers, that have dull edge and artificial hamon. Best, -Sam

Can we see the whole saddle, or just that part? Is that the back support? Would love to see the whole thing... -Sam

Ohmura's website is a godsend; it's fabulous. Sometimes my computer decides to translate it a little funny, but otherwise it's an invaluable resource. Off of the web, my favorite publication about Military Swords of Japan is the following: Dawson, Jim. Swords of Imperial Japan, 1868–1945. Cyclopedia ed. Newnan, Ga.: Stenger-Scott Publishing, 2007. And for those who want to go even deeper, our very own Kiipu put this incredible bibliography together. Proved an invaluable resource while writing my Type 95 monograph:

Often times, I do not associate the mounts with blade quality necessarily. I try to asses both individually from eachother. That said, when I find a sword "in the wild" that has a really nice two piece habaki; I do get a little excited and tend to look a little closer. Exceptions to every rule. -Sam

I have encountered nice mounts with machined blades like zoheito