WW1 Japanese naval dirk

[exidezz]

I found this sword and was told it was a WW1 Japanese naval dirk but I cannot find any references. It is very similar to the WW2 Japanese naval dirk, yet noticeably different. It is longer and heavier than the WW2 Naval dirk (which i also have). I am hoping someone here has enough knowledge to point me in the right direction or know what it is. A number of people I have spoken to have never seen this before.

 

Some details:

3/4 fuller

brass S-shaped crossguard

ray skin wire bound grip

Leather bound Scabbard with engraved brass overlay with gold gilded detail

 

 

[SwordGuyJoe]

I'm not getting a good feeling from this one. Here is why:

1. The detail on the metal fittings is muddled and sloppy

2. The blade is very poorly done. Even on machine made blades, they typically adhere to a level of quality, this example doesn't come close to

3. Is the seppa a part of the tsuka???

4. The aging looks artificial - For example look at the coloration of the same handle vs. the brass of the wire wrap (which at looking closer doesn't look like wire, but a "wire stamped" piece of metal)

 

I've been wrong (many times) and for your sake, I hope I am again. That said, this looks like a modern reproduction/fake.

[Stephen]

sorry to say Joe is right, repo.

[Dr Fox]

Is that a blade from a bayonet??

[reeder]

Looks like the Chinese examples on eBay IMHO. In terms of blade being from a bayonet, it looks like it could be but if Chinese production I doubt that's the case but wouldn't surprise me.

 

-Brandon

[Kai-Gunto]

Patinated china fake. They flow on ebay.

[exidezz]

thanks for your opinions guys. My thought is if it was a fake china copy then it would be a 'copy' of something that already exists.

[Geraint]

Dear.......(sorry, no name)

 

You are right, it is a copy of something that already exists, just not a very good copy. Compare the standard of workmanship with the naval dirk you already have, the differences should be clear.

 

All the best.