Arsenal Stamps.

[Nazar]

This topic reminded me of my very first Japanese Navy dirk I bought on a local internet auction. It turned out to be assembly: saya from one dirk, blade from another and all other parts from third dirk. However, the habaki, the tsuka and all that in between belonged to one dirk and was made by Suya Shoten with every part marked 144.  Here are some photos.  

 

 

Initially I misread the scratches on habaki, reading them as IIIII + IIII, but looking closer I understood it's  X + IIII + IIII.

 

 

144 scratched on seppa and fuchi and painted on tsuka wood.

 

 

 

[John C]

8 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

use lower grade steel

This is what I was thinking as the most likely scenario. Running out of tamahagane so using "regular" sword steel.

 

John C. 

[BANGBANGSAN]

On 7/25/2026 at 7:32 AM, John C said:

@Bruce Pennington

Here's a slightly better comparison. I think it is a pretty good match. But I defer to you, Thomas, Trystan, and John for final analysis. Could be the first "special" one you have on record, correct?

Moving on the assumption this is a special consideration sword, the next question is why? Maybe not made from tamahagane or maybe just too long or heavy (it has some weight to it.) I'll do some measurements. 

 

In any case, there has to be some reason it would receive arsenal inspection marks but no star.

 

John C.

Here is  another 特 special marking on the tang.

 Per military inspection marking regulations, the designation 特 “Special” means: Adopted for special procurement pursuant to Article 11 of the Weapons Acceptance Inspection Regulations.

 

 

[John C]

2 hours ago, BANGBANGSAN said:

Article 11 of the Weapons Acceptance Inspection Regulations.

Thank you, Trystan. Would you happen to know what specific regs were contained in article 11 (and Clause 2)?

@Bruce Pennington Bruce: For your records, note that both stamps (Toku and 2) are on the mune as well. Two is not a pattern but we're getting there.

 

John C.

Edited Monday at 08:52 PM by John C

[Bruce Pennington]

9 hours ago, John C said:

note that both stamps (Toku and 2) are on the mune as well.

If that second stamp is a 2, I agree, but dang, I sure can't see a 2 in that mark.  I've had that one listed under "unknown" for a while.

[BANGBANGSAN]

On 7/28/2026 at 4:50 AM, John C said:

Would you happen to know what specific regs were contained in article 11 (and Clause 2)?

 

 

 

Thomas might help you find the answer.

[Bruce Pennington]

Speaking of "Toku", I've found another in my files, so 3 now.

 

Seki Toku Unknown          Seki Toku 1 ('43 Sadatsugu)                              Na Toku 2 ('44 Kanehide)

      

 

I'm starting to think the "unknown" on the first one is a poorly struk "1"

[BANGBANGSAN]

18 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said:

Speaking of "Toku", I've found another in my files, so 3 now.

 

Seki Toku Unknown          Seki Toku 1 ('43 Sadatsugu)                              Na Toku 2 ('44 Kanehide)

      

 

I'm starting to think the "unknown" on the first one is a poorly struk "1"

The first one is  the same one that I post

[John C]

@Bruce Pennington

Bruce:

Should we do a call out to all members to check their mune and look specifically for the Toku stamp?

It may be interesting to see 1) how many are gendaito a) star stamped, and b) non-star stamped; 2) how many showato or other (i.e type 97, Koa, Zoheito, etc), 3) type of arsenal stamps (seki, nagoya, etc), and 4) any obvious flaws that may indicate why the stamp was given.

Just a thougt on figuring out the percentage of overall blades in the field given this designation and the reasons why it was given.

 

John C.

 

[Bruce Pennington]

Ok, let's try it.  I'll post it as a pinned thread and see what we get.