Jump to content

Looking for examples of late war NCO swords


WilBru5
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello all I am researching something and would appreciate help from the members here. I am looking to see examples of the ito wrapped wood handled variation #4 described on pg 205 in swords of Imperial Japan by Jim Dawson.  Others know this as the "Late War", "last Ditch" NCO sword.  Or as described in the Ohmura study as "The maximum Last stage type".  It is also known here by Shamsy's description as "Pattern 8". 

In particular I would like to see good clear pictures of the tsuka and wooden saya,  And any arsenal/inspector stamps on the blade tsuba, fuchi, suspension ring mount, and chape/drag.

Here are my pictures( I already attached them on a previous post of related subject, but am reattaching them here for clearity )

 

post-5124-0-71061300-1575581651_thumb.jpg

post-5124-0-10049500-1575581678_thumb.jpg

post-5124-0-02174300-1575581857_thumb.jpg

post-5124-0-31853700-1575581870_thumb.jpg

post-5124-0-72022600-1575581888_thumb.jpg

post-5124-0-12911600-1575581941_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its like the Type 3, Typ 0 or some say naval landing swords. I say Type 3. :)

From Nick (and I agree):

"I would strongly oppose calling the so-called Type 3 a Type 0, as there never was any intention to make it a type. If the difference from the type 98 had been more minor, the army would have officially designated it 九八式呂号軍刀, Type 98 Model B Sword, which was how other contingency specs were named, but the sword went a bit too far outside that category of established practice to apply that style of naming."

 

Bruce P gets it right, calling it the Rinji??? (something starting with R, can never remember). Type 3 and 0 are fantasy easily refuted by the army records in the Japanese National Archives.

 

Don't fall into the trappings of the collectors term, Bruce W. Read this: http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/deflating-another-myth-type-3-army-officer-s-sword-expanded-version-584796/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rinji variations. Easy!

 

Seriously though, they're a variation of 98s, made most likely by the same producer/business /collective/shop etc. There's plenty of examples of very similar 98s like this (as in the 98s are all the same), including the incredibly crude 98s with Seki stickers. They all share the same features, but they're still just a 98 variant.

 

Whether or not these were ever officially designated is unclear. I've never seen it, except by collectors who like to group things and give them a name. Just like all 95s being essentially the same sword, grouped by characteristics.

 

Edit: maybe 98s should be broken into patterns like 95s, each pattern distinguished by grouping like swords. I could see that working.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve i agree with you but it is normal that things get different and popular names. Look like the different names in US or other Nato members Russian stuff and how they called the same thing. Some equipment has 3 or 4 different names. No one spoke out the correct term of the producer. It is nothing we must argue over. 

 

For Example: Russian project 885. In Russia Military it is called "Yasen". US called it "Granny". In Germany it is called "Esche". Correct Nato-name is Sewerodwinsk-class submarine. 

 

The popular name for a "new" Type 0 sword is Type 3 and some other called it naval landing sword. If you describe it as Type 0 without any picture i bet no one has a picture in mind. But when you say Naval Landing Sword 99% of the collectors know how it looks like.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed,there are several ways to describe the sword that are all recognisable. My hope is merely to make the correct designation the one people eventually use, though I understand that the other designations are so ingrained that it may require a new generation of collectors.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rinji is probably the best one for now. The sword never received a 'Type' designation, and the 3 and 0 are based on assumed (and incorrect) dates. Hey, we'll all know what we mean, so whatever you want to call it, Chris. You'll have to excuse me when I try to convert new collectors to call them Rinji.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rinji is probably the best one for now. The sword never received a 'Type' designation, and the 3 and 0 are based on assumed (and incorrect) dates. Hey, we'll all know what we mean, so whatever you want to call it, Chris. You'll have to excuse me when I try to convert new collectors to call them Rinji.

 

 

Rinji is probably the best one for now. The sword never received a 'Type' designation, and the 3 and 0 are based on assumed (and incorrect) dates. Hey, we'll all know what we mean, so whatever you want to call it, Chris. You'll have to excuse me when I try to convert new collectors to call them Rinji.

 

No better place to start using a proper term than here on the NMB ( Rinji Seishiki ) !

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rinji Seishiki (臨時制式-Temporary Type) or Type Rinji sounds ok.It dosen't matter people call it Rinji, Type 3 , Type 0,Type 44 or NLF sword,I knew what sword they are talking about.

Maybe Type 3 is not the correct name ,but is the most common name for that type of sword.I personally prefer to call it 三式 :laughing: .

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick Komiya didn't like my use of just "Rinji" for short of Rinji Seishiki. I've forgotten his actual words, but he said it's like saying "Junk" when using the Rinji without the Seishiki! Ha! I just hate taking the time to type both words. I'm considering calling it the "RS" model; but then no one would know what I'm talking about.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rinji Seishiki (臨時制式-Temporary Type) or Type Rinji sounds ok.It dosen't matter people call it Rinji, Type 3 , Type 0,Type 44 or NLF sword,I knew what sword they are talking about.

Maybe Type 3 is not the correct name ,but is the most common name for that type of sword.I personally prefer to call it 三式 :laughing: .

 

It's all good, any one of the terms you mentioned most people will recognize and will surely continue indefinitely...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 12/5/2019 at 2:17 PM, IJASWORDS said:

One of my pattern 8.

 

In IJASwords post #2 above, on the fourth picture down from the top, is that a ヘ inspection mark or just an indentation and/or scratch in the wood grip?  I have marked the area with a red square in the picture below.

 

jinsen-patttern-8-inkedpost.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am challenged by this entire thread. These ALL(!) look to me like individually produced "things" that were made by and for brain-washed folks who understood only the worst parts of their culture and patrimony. These were made in very small shops by guys with a few files and some recycled bar-stock for guys who drank the cool-aide. They are diverse because every decision involved in their production involved figuring out how to deal with the available scraps. These swords will NEVER be allowed into Japan because they are embarrassing.

Peter

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Peter Bleed said:

I am challenged by this entire thread. These ALL(!) look to me like individually produced "things" that were made by and for brain-washed folks who understood only the worst parts of their culture and patrimony. These were made in very small shops by guys with a few files and some recycled bar-stock for guys who drank the cool-aide. They are diverse because every decision involved in their production involved figuring out how to deal with the available scraps. These swords will NEVER be allowed into Japan because they are embarrassing.

Peter

Good points Peter, but isn't interesting that they do, in fact, have at least some value with some collectors even if only from the perspective of "Historical" artifacts. They were made for Japanese Army officers during wartime, after all. Some find value in that fact alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Peter Bleed said:

I am challenged by this entire thread. These ALL(!) look to me like individually produced "things" that were made by and for brain-washed folks who understood only the worst parts of their culture and patrimony. These were made in very small shops by guys with a few files and some recycled bar-stock for guys who drank the cool-aide. They are diverse because every decision involved in their production involved figuring out how to deal with the available scraps. These swords will NEVER be allowed into Japan because they are embarrassing.

Peter

Got a burr under your bonnet Peter? Your whole post is odd.  I get cranky sometimes when things are getting to me at home.  Need to talk?

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were certainly rushed.  My late-95 doesn't have a bohi (takes time to make) and you can feel, as you slide an oiling cloth or paper towel along the blade, 3 stages of tapering in the blade body- widest, middle, and thinnest.  There is a noticeable "line" for lack of words, where the tapering shifts.  You can't see it, but I can feel it.  Yet it's a solid weapon, heavier than the early 95s and a good looking blade.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...