Weather proofing

[John John]

I have noticed on many Type 3 Shin Gunto swords what looks like some sort of lacquer or maybe wax impregnating the rap and into the skin covering the handel. has any one else notised this and if so what is the reson for it. My only though is it may be weather proofing.

[Bruce Pennington]

Ian,

Have you read Nick Komiya's articles on the Rinji seishiki (RS) (Type 3)?  They are :

Rebutting the Name "Type 3"

and

Unveiling the Rinji Seishiki - 1940

 

To your question, though, I don't think there has been a direct answer given.  In Nick's article he states: 

"On 22nd August 1940, Army Regular Memo 5830 officially announced the completion of this Rinjiseishiki Sword project. It said that Kaikosha and Gunjin-kaikan will release for sale to officers swords priced at 115 Yen in annual quantities of 3,000 swords (however, for 1940 it would be limited to about 1,000 swords). Though the price went up from 80 Yen now to 115, the annual production target of 3,000 a year is just as the 1938 mandate had demanded.

The printed memo further explained that the sword “was made to be robust and practical in both blade as well as exterior fittings, based on lessons from the Incident” However, in the earlier handwritten draft, this same sentence read slightly differently as it said “was made to be robust and practical in both blade as well as exterior fittings based on lessons from the Incident. It is in conformity to army uniform regulations” The last part was dropped from the final announcement.

Furthermore, the cover letter of this earlier draft from 16th August gives away further hints about how the army perceived this new sword. The Japanese title had originally read 軍装用軍刀, “Gunto for Field Dress”, but the 4 kanjis in front were crossed out, leaving only the word “sword”. This indicates that the sword was to be limited to field wear and you needed to wear the Type 98 for dress occasions, etc. That implied that when hostilities were over, officers were expected to go back to the Type 98 swords as required by army uniform regulations.

The deletion also stressed that the sword was NOT a Gunto, but simply a sword. This minor distinction is important as only the Type 98 could be called a Gunto at that time."

 

The RS was designed to be "robust and practical" for field use.  In reading about the field repairs teams, they reported that a large percentage of their work was in repairing tsuka.  I suspect the lacquered ito was to keep it from fraying. 

 

I haven't looked for this characteristic in my surveys, but what I have always considered the custom fittings - lacquered saya and ito - actually show up a year ealier (1942 is the earliest example I have on file) than the light tan (1943 is the earliest I have on file), plain fittings, with no lacquer.  My gut feeling is that they tried to put out nice looking fittings at first to draw the customer base.  Yet the custom fittings went against the primary order to make a cheaper sword, so young officers could better afford to buy them.  Again, I haven't checked to confirm this, but I bet we will find that the light tan, what I call "standard" fittings will not have lacquered ito as a general rule.

 

[Scogg]

Ohmura’s study guide also mentioned the lacquered ito. See image from the link below with descriptions. It’s a well known feature on these swords.

 

ohmura-study.net/952.html

Quote and image from the link above:

“The hilt was changed into Ikkan-maki- binding (Tenshō era-mounting for battles), and reinforced by applying Japanese lacquer to a Tsuka-ito…”

All the best,

-Sam

 

 

[John John]

11 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

Ian,

Have you read Nick Komiya's articles on the Rinji seishiki (RS) (Type 3)?  They are :

Rebutting the Name "Type 3"

and

Unveiling the Rinji Seishiki - 1940

 

To your question, though, I don't think there has been a direct answer given.  In Nick's article he states: 

"On 22nd August 1940, Army Regular Memo 5830 officially announced the completion of this Rinjiseishiki Sword project. It said that Kaikosha and Gunjin-kaikan will release for sale to officers swords priced at 115 Yen in annual quantities of 3,000 swords (however, for 1940 it would be limited to about 1,000 swords). Though the price went up from 80 Yen now to 115, the annual production target of 3,000 a year is just as the 1938 mandate had demanded.

The printed memo further explained that the sword “was made to be robust and practical in both blade as well as exterior fittings, based on lessons from the Incident” However, in the earlier handwritten draft, this same sentence read slightly differently as it said “was made to be robust and practical in both blade as well as exterior fittings based on lessons from the Incident. It is in conformity to army uniform regulations” The last part was dropped from the final announcement.

Furthermore, the cover letter of this earlier draft from 16th August gives away further hints about how the army perceived this new sword. The Japanese title had originally read 軍装用軍刀, “Gunto for Field Dress”, but the 4 kanjis in front were crossed out, leaving only the word “sword”. This indicates that the sword was to be limited to field wear and you needed to wear the Type 98 for dress occasions, etc. That implied that when hostilities were over, officers were expected to go back to the Type 98 swords as required by army uniform regulations.

The deletion also stressed that the sword was NOT a Gunto, but simply a sword. This minor distinction is important as only the Type 98 could be called a Gunto at that time."

 

The RS was designed to be "robust and practical" for field use.  In reading about the field repairs teams, they reported that a large percentage of their work was in repairing tsuka.  I suspect the lacquered ito was to keep it from fraying. 

 

I haven't looked for this characteristic in my surveys, but what I have always considered the custom fittings - lacquered saya and ito - actually show up a year ealier (1942 is the earliest example I have on file) than the light tan (1943 is the earliest I have on file), plain fittings, with no lacquer.  My gut feeling is that they tried to put out nice looking fittings at first to draw the customer base.  Yet the custom fittings went against the primary order to make a cheaper sword, so young officers could better afford to buy them.  Again, I haven't checked to confirm this, but I bet we will find that the light tan, what I call "standard" fittings will not have lacquered ito as a general rule.

 

Thank you Bruce. Great information. I can see now that there was a lot more going on with time and variants of the sword now. The Type 3 is a bit of a plain model, not for parade, but very robust, as mentioned. Thanks again.

[John John]

11 hours ago, Scogg said:

Ohmura’s study guide also mentioned the lacquered ito. See image from the link below with descriptions. It’s a well known feature on these swords.

 

ohmura-study.net/952.html

Quote and image from the link above:

“The hilt was changed into Ikkan-maki- binding (Tenshō era-mounting for battles), and reinforced by applying Japanese lacquer to a Tsuka-ito…”

All the best,

-Sam

 

 

Thanks for the info Sam.