An Interesting (if Troubled) Zoheito

[Kaigunto230]

 

I recently purchased an interesting Zoheito produced at Kokura Arsenal in May 1944. I’ve been researching it and studying it for the last week. It has some drastic drawbacks, but I also had some good, specific reasons to purchase it. I wrote this post to compile some information from several other posts and as a tool to help me get back into the study of this hobby.

 

 

 

I. Zoheito Generally

If you hadn’t heard of a Zoheito (like I hadn’t), a quick summary I liked was that a Zoheito is the commissioned officer equivalent to the Type 95 NCO Gunto: machine-made and arsenal-produced. However, references to them seem scarcer than I would’ve guessed:

·       Dawson page 68 shows a Type 19 Zoheisho-produced sword. However, the book doesn’t use the term “Zoheito”.

·       Plimpton doesn’t mention them at all that I could find.

·       The shorter Fuller and Gregory book doesn’t mention them either.

·       Ohmura, however, has a nice page on them: http://ohmura-study.net/206.html

·       And finally, there’s a great section in them on Malcolm Cox’s wonderful book on WWII swords from Fukuoka, Kokura Arsenal, and Kyushu: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/files/file/118-showa-period-swordsmiths-of-fukuoka-prefecture-kyushu-and-the-kokura-arsenal/

 

II. This Particular Sword

This sword has been posted about several times on NMB:

·       https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/10853-mei-translation/

·       https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/52349-sword-id-and-value/

·       And actually, it’s even featured on page 116 of Cox’s WWII Fukuoka smiths book!!

 

What’s interesting about this particular sword is the production quality. It seems like the vast majority of Zoheito are mumei, undated and only have a small acceptance mark and occasionally the Kokura stacked cannonballs. By contrast, this one has a very strong mei that reads:

·       Kokura Rikugun Zōheishō / 小倉 陸軍 造兵廠 = Kokura Army Arsenal, and

·       Showa ju kyu nen go gatsu / 昭和十九年五月 = Showa 19 (1944) May.

 

 

 

The sword also has three stamps near the mune-machi:

·       KO - Kokura Army Arsenal Supervisory Section

·       HO - 1st Factory of Kokura Army Arsenal

·       3

 

Furthermore, it has incredibly strong kiri yasurime along the length of the nakago. Back in 2016, these features led Mr. Chris Bowen to theorize to the previous owner (in this thread: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/10853-mei-translation/ ) that the sword was actually Gendaito and made by Moritaka: http://www.jp-sword.com/files/blade/moritaka/moritaka.htm . I’m reaching out to Chris to ask if he has any follow-on thoughts or more details.

 

It seems like there’s only been three similar swords reported to the NMB like this with a smith-style mei saying it’s Kokura Arsenal-made but no smith mei:

·       My sword

·       One made in February 1945 with the same style mei but with an RJT star stamp but no smith signature: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/13623-kokuri-rigun-z%C5%8Dheis%C5%8D/#comment-142780

·       Another December 1944 Kokura-produced Zoheito with the same style mei but without an RJT star stamp: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/16353-interesting-late-44-gunto/

 

There are some other swords that have kanji indicating the sword was made at Kokura Arsenal but these are star stamped and signed by a smith:

·       Kasuga Seizōsho Fumitada, May 1945: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/25118-gendaito-translation/

·       Yoshinori made, May 1945: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/4859-gunto-mei-help-please/

 

So my sword is interesting to me in that it seems like it has qualities of both Gendaito and Showato. After getting it in hand, I was hoping for a faint star stamp, but unfortunately none was present.

 

As to the obvious flaws: the seller mentioned he inherited the sword from his father and he was unsure if it was his father who caused the damage to the sword with sandpaper or a prior owner. The father bought the sword in a 1970s flea market. But the damage is done, and the blade itself is very poor. However, the nakago and mei remain gorgeous and interesting in their own right.

 

Why did I buy it? I’ve been majorly into Japanese firearms for the last four years and have amassed what I think is a nice collection of those (I’m the same username over on Gunboards if you’re interested). But Nihonto and Gunto are still very much things I enjoy, and I’m glad to have amassed a decent starter library to study and enjoy the swords I do own and think about future purchases.

 

So when I saw a listing for the sword on a local firearms forum without photos, only about two hours drive from me, I was intrigued. I came to NMB to see if I could learn more based on the description and discovered it had been posted to the Trader section here for sale too, with photos. By the time I negotiated the price down, it was $300, and it came with some Type 95 fittings worth at least $100. Then my wife said she’d like to contribute $100 as an early Father’s Day present!

 

Despite the poor polish, there were many qualities that sold it for me. First, I lived in Japan for a time and some of my happiest memories come from several months spent on Kyushu. As a result, in both swords and firearms, I very much enjoy Kokura-produced specimens. I intend to make my Nihonto collection into one focused on Kyushu-produced examples. My first Nihonto was a Bungoto: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/36574-my-first-kantei-post-12-fujiwara-yukinaga-katana/ . The sugata and sori on this sword were pleasant to me, and I was intrigued by the mei and strong yasurime.  So for being made at my favorite arsenal, the unique signature, a book-published sword, and for a net-$100 ($300 sword - $100 wife’s contribution - $100 Type 95 fittings), I couldn’t resist.

 

III. Kantei

Don’t laugh, please. I recognize this is a somewhat silly exercise to do on a beat up Showato, but I wanted to re-familiarize myself with the following terms and go through the exercise. I was only ever a novice to begin with, and it’s been four years since I’ve bought anything Nihonto-related. The knowledge here (on the specific meaning of the terms in particular) is definitely a perishable skill. I used the NMB Kantei sheet located here: http://www.militaria.co.za/articles/Kantei_Sheet.pdf . The measurements are in inches.

 

Brief Overall Description: Zoheito made at Kokura Arsenal in May 1944.

Shirasaya length: N/A.

Overall length: 34 3/8.

Nagasa lengh: 25 6/8.

Nakago length: 8 5/8.

Kasane: 1/4.

Mekugiana: 1.

Mihaba: 1 1/2.

Motohaba:1 1/4.

Sakihaba: 13/16.

Motokasane: 1/4.

Weight: 2 lbs 0 oz.

Sugata shape: Shobu-zukuri – See my questions below. There is no yokote visible, and I wonder if that’s intentional or due to the rough handling this sword has had.

Hada: Very difficult to determine with the scratches. Perhaps muhi-hada or maybe masame-hada.

Sori: 7/16; Type: Torii-zori.

Kissaki: Chu-kissaki.

Mune: Iori-mune.

Hamon: None visible.

Yakiba: None visible.

Boshi: None visible.

Nakago: Ubu; Nakagojiri: Kengyo but close to Iriyama-gata.

Yasurime: Kiri (and incredibly strong too).

Bohi: None. (I’m still trying to get “No-Hi” as a term to catch on )

Koshirae: None.

Polish: Very poor. The blade has been the victim of some sanding along the edges and has scratches throughout.

Period: Gendaito.

School: N/A.

Origami: None.

 

IV. Questions.

1.     Showato or a Gendaito? - My gut says Showato due to the lack of an RJT star-stamp. However, since other examples exist that lack a smith’s signature but do have a star-stamp, maybe this one just missed getting its star. I’d love that to be the case, but I worry that’s just wishful thinking. I’d love your take on it. The polish is bad enough that it’s probably impossible to tell in its current state. I can’t even really make out the jihada. What do you think?

2.     No yokote? - Interesting to me to see that there’s no visible yokote. Does the shape of the sword look like that’s intentional? That’s my take. Or could it have been sanded/ground off?

3.     Buying koshirae and habaki? – I’m wondering if trying to find a koshirae (or at least a tsuba and tsuka) is a fool’s errand. What’s your best recommendation for trying to match up fittings? I don’t want to sink too much more money into it, but it would be nice to at least have a proper tsuka on here for handling/display.

 

If you stuck around this long, thanks for reading! If nothing else, this sword was a great way to get me hooked back into the hobby at a cheap price and start reading and engaging here again. I’d love any thoughts you have about the sword, process, or write-up.

PS - More photos to follow shortly as I jigger with the size limits.

[Kaigunto230]

Here are the stamps near the mune-machi:

 

 

 

Additional photos: 

 

 

 

 

What looks like faded painted assembly numbers: 

 

[Kaigunto230]

The kissaki and missing yokote:

 

 

I find the swelling of the iori-mune gorgeous:

 

 

Very strong kiri yasurimi:

[Kaigunto230]

Obviously I wish the condition of the piece was better, but in the end, I am very happy to have added this to my collection.

 

Thanks for reading!

 

 

[Bruce Pennington]

That was a great write up Michael! Looks like you have a bit of the researcher blood in you!

 

Considering the condition of the blade surface, I doubt anyone will be able to really tell whether it was traditional or not from the pictures. But that’s not my forte anyway.  @mecox @BANGBANGSAN @Kiipu

 

Something unusual about this one is the construction of the blade where the blade meets the nakago.  There is a distinct edge that run between the machi.  I will have to go back and look at my other zoheito, but from memory, I don’t recall ever seeing this before. Very unusual.

[Bruno]

Were zoheito oil quenched, had artificial hamon or no hamon at all?

 

Nice and interesting piece.

[Kaigunto230]

19 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

That was a great write up Michael! Looks like you have a bit of the researcher blood in you!

 

Considering the condition of the blade surface, I doubt anyone will be able to really tell whether it was traditional or not from the pictures. But that’s not my forte anyway.  @mecox @BANGBANGSAN @Kiipu

 

Something unusual about this one is the construction of the blade where the blade meets the nakago.  There is a distinct edge that run between the machi.  I will have to go back and look at my other zoheito, but from memory, I don’t recall ever seeing this before. Very unusual.

Thanks, @Bruce Pennington! I've devoted more of my fun money to guns than swords over the last few years, and at the very low price for this piece, I figured the research opportunity and history and condition of the mei/nakago generally made for a good purchase.

I saw that edge along the machi too and wondered. The sword was previously fitted with a really bad habaki which was too narrow. I wonder if that line is a scratch that occurred from that ill-fitting habaki.  

[Kaigunto230]

15 hours ago, Bruno said:

Were zoheito oil quenched, had artificial hamon or no hamon at all?

 

Nice and interesting piece.

Thanks, @Bruno! To my understanding from Cox's book and Ohmura's site, there's no hamon and the sword is oil quenched with a dry polishing.

[Kaigunto230]

I messaged Chris Bowen, and he was kind enough to reply with additional information about his thoughts on the sword. He said that he never gives attributions when “there is nothing visible in the blade. The yasuri-me, style of nakago, and mei are all similar to Moritaka and I would suspect that he was involved in some fashion. I would suggest finding out more about Moritaka and who else worked/trained at the Kokura Arsenal; look for post war smiths as well who were trained my Moritaka. The work style is close so if it wasn't Moritaka it was likely a student.” He encouraged me to study Moritaka swords, as Moritaka was “someone with similar workmanship who also contributed to the Kokura arsenal and thus was a good starting point to research further.”
 

He believes the sword to not be a “shobu-zukuri blade, but rather a shinogi-zukuri blade that has been abused and lost its yokote.” That’s a question I had too, so it’s nice to get an evaluation from an expert. He said that in the current polish, it was impossible to determine if the sword was showata or gendaito. I tend to agree.

 

He mentioned sending it to a togishi to polish a window. The thought intrigues me, but I also know that polishing would be very expensive. I wonder how much a window would cost and if a quality togishi exists in the States. I worry about sending the sword overseas; if it proves to be showato, isn’t that something that can have the sword confiscated and destroyed?

Does anyone have experience with getting a State-side window done?
 

Regardless of the cost, I anticipate holding onto this sword for decades, so maybe at some point in the future it would be an option.

In the meantime, a hearty thank you to Chris for the follow-on information.

[Bruno]

3 hours ago, Kaigunto230 said:

Does anyone have experience with getting a State-side window done?

Chris BOWEN has a good togishi in Japan. The price and waiting is inferior to togishi in the USA. You shall ask Chris Bowen directly. 

Chris can take care and handle this project. I already had a sword polished in Japan trought his service.

 

Does the blade have koshirae or a habaki at least? If not, you might have a shirasaya made for it.

[BANGBANGSAN]

On 5/31/2025 at 10:37 PM, Bruce Pennington said:

That was a great write up Michael! Looks like you have a bit of the researcher blood in you!

 

Considering the condition of the blade surface, I doubt anyone will be able to really tell whether it was traditional or not from the pictures. But that’s not my forte anyway.  @mecox @BANGBANGSAN @Kiipu

 

Michael

I have a Zoheito also from the Kokura Army Arsenal, which likewise does not have a star mark, but it was made a month later than yours. 

 

 

[Bruno]

13 minutes ago, BANGBANGSAN said:

I have a Zoheito

Trystan,

Does yours have a hamon?

[Kaigunto230]

@BANGBANGSAN Thank you for sharing! Fascinating to think of our swords being made so close in time together.  @mecox might be interested in seeing the mei for his book.

 

Yours looks in much nicer condition than mine. Are you able to determine if, despite the lack of star stamp, it's gendaito or not? 

Also, interesting to see it in those mounts instead of RS Type III mounts. That's been another thing to think through if I try and find mounts for the sword - what style would be most appropriate. 

[Kiipu]

The sword in the OP was made in an arsenal forge and not a factory.  It is traditionally made as that was the purpose of the arsenal forges.  Besides Kokura, Tōkyō 1st and Ōsaka 大阪陸軍造兵廠研究所軍刀鍛錬所 had arsenal forges.

 

A zōhei-tō 造兵刀 [Arsenal Sword] is a wartime machine made blade just like a Type 95 blade.

[BANGBANGSAN]

11 hours ago, Kaigunto230 said:

@BANGBANGSAN Thank you for sharing! Fascinating to think of our swords being made so close in time together.  @mecox might be interested in seeing the mei for his book.

 

Yours looks in much nicer condition than mine. Are you able to determine if, despite the lack of star stamp, it's gendaito or not? 

Also, interesting to see it in those mounts instead of RS Type III mounts. That's been another thing to think through if I try and find mounts for the sword - what style would be most appropriate. 

No star stamp.

[Kaigunto230]

2 hours ago, Kiipu said:

The sword in the OP was made in an arsenal forge and not a factory.  It is traditionally made as that was the purpose of the arsenal forges.  Besides Kokura, Tōkyō 1st and Ōsaka 大阪陸軍造兵廠研究所軍刀鍛錬所 had arsenal forges.

 

A zōhei-tō 造兵刀 [Arsenal Sword] is a wartime machine made blade just like a Type 95 blade.

@Kiipu Thank you! Because I can miss the obvious sometimes - you’re saying the sword here is NOT actually a Zoheito at all but a Gendaito, traditional Nihonto made in an Arsenal forge (Zoheisho) but not star stamped nor signed by the traditional smith? 

[Kiipu]

In my opinion, it is a forged blade and not a factory made blade.  However, evaluation is usually done in hand or by pictures of a blade in some sort of polish.

 

The "Star" stamp did not show up at the Kokura forge until 1945.  The blades made before then, such as 1944, did not have one.

May to December 1944: No star stamp.

February to May 1945: Star stamp.

[Kaigunto230]

9 hours ago, Kiipu said:

In my opinion, it is a forged blade and not a factory made blade.  However, evaluation is usually done in hand or by pictures of a blade in some sort of polish.

 

The "Star" stamp did not show up at the Kokura forge until 1945.  The blades made before then, such as 1944, did not have one.

May to December 1944: No star stamp.

February to May 1945: Star stamp.

Fascinating, thank you! More study for me to do!

[Bruce Pennington]

18 hours ago, Kiipu said:

The sword in the OP was made in an arsenal forge and not a factory.  It is traditionally made as that was the purpose of the arsenal forges.  Besides Kokura, Tōkyō 1st and Ōsaka 大阪陸軍造兵廠研究所軍刀鍛錬所 had arsenal forges.

I did not know that, either!  Thomas, you always amaze!  Thanks brother.

[BANGBANGSAN]

6 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

I did not know that, either!  Thomas, you always amaze!  Thanks brother.

Bruce

You may have come across the relevant information on the Omura website — perhaps you just didn’t happen to notice it at the time.

 各工廠 (造兵廠) 鍛練所で専属嘱託刀匠に依り作刀された鍛錬刀 (茎に刀匠銘と造兵廠標章刻印)
　　東京砲兵工廠: 横山祐包・森岡政吉、東京第一陸軍造兵廠: 吉原宣威 (昭廣・國家同人)、大阪工廠(造兵廠): 月山貞勝・貞一
　　(二代) ・貞重・正清、小倉工廠(造兵廠):  白龍子忠孝・平貞重・兼延、　旧兵器廠　善平　他

[Bruce Pennington]

Just now, BANGBANGSAN said:

perhaps you just didn’t happen to notice it at the time.

Not to mention that I do not read Japanese ha!

[BANGBANGSAN]

Just now, Bruce Pennington said:

Not to mention that I do not read Japanese ha!

The blade for officers made from an Army Arsenal
There are two kinds of blades for officers of directly or supervisor manufacture on an army arsenal. In the public,
the common name was carried out to "Zōhei-tō.

Forging sword

1. Forging sword in which swordsmith under exclusive contract carried out sword making by sword workshop of each
　arsenal (A swod-tang has a swordsmith Mei and an arsenal trademark stamp)
　Osaka Arsenal: Gassan Sadakatsu, Masakiyo,  Kokura Arsenal: Hakuryushi Tadataka, Tairano Sadashige, and Kanenobu,
　Arsenal: Yoshihira others.

 

http://ohmura-study.net/206.html

[Bruce Pennington]

Oh, I do remember reading that, but did not realize that that was what he was trying to say.

[Kaigunto230]

On 6/3/2025 at 5:27 PM, Bruce Pennington said:

Oh, I do remember reading that, but did not realize that that was what he was trying to say.

I was in the same boat! Now I’m trying to learn about the various official forges.
 

It’s still interesting to me that this sword has the meo for the forge itself at Kokura but not the smith’s mei and therefore doesn’t follow Omura’s description.
 

I wonder if any other arsenal forges had similarly signed swords. A fun continued research process. 

[Bruce Pennington]

Mei and arsenal trademark stamp ..... what is an arsenal trademark stamp?  Inspector stamp?

 

Looking at the Osaka files, I do have one Sadakatsu with "1 阪" on the mune.  I don't have a Masakiyo with the saka stamp, but have several other smiths.  Wonder if this is what he was talking about?  Does this put the "KO" and "HO" stamps on the mune in the same category? I have several smiths with these on the mune.  As for Tokyo 1st, other than zoheito, I only have 2 with the "TO" - Yoshiharu and Takehisa.