Showa stamps

[Voz]

I've heard two completely different explanations of Showa stamps.

 

The most common one is that these marks were used to identify swords which were made non-traditionally in some way.

 

The other explanation is that the Kaikosha (Army officers club) used the Showa stamp to show which swords were purchased from them.

 

Does anyone know which of these is right?

 

Thank you for your help!

 

Alex

[Kai-Gunto]

No.1

[David Flynn]

Thomas, have you been told this, or know it for a fact? If you know it for a fact, please tell us your sources.

[kusunokimasahige]

Read page 79-83 of Fuller and Gregory's book on military swords. Though they state they cant go into all details about stamps, it is only logical that if stamps would have been issued by Kaikosha they would have mentioned it.

 

No mentioning of this story only adds to the story of stamps being issued by Army clubs selling swords being a load of cock and bull......

 

KM

[Voz]

I have ANOTHER slant on Showa stamps!!!

 

Can it get any more confusing?

 

A collector replied to my post on "Nihonto Club" discussion pages.

 

He said that when he was collecting (20 years ago) the general consensus was that swords with stamps on them were ones which went through some kind of military logistics path (which ties in with the assertion that the Kaikosha were the only users of Showa stamps) AND all the swords that have these stamps are generally of an inferior quality.

 

Because I have now two sources that say that Showa stamps were used by the military, it looks more likely - especially as no-one has actually disproved this, merely contradicted it.

 

It also looks like Showa stamps do denote an inferior blade.

 

Can anyone actually disprove this argument? For example a source contemporary with the production of these blades that the showa stamp was used on blades other than those issued by the military?

 

Another slant is that Showa stamps were used to show which blades were not made traditionally.

 

The sword I have that has prompted all this research was made by Kojima Kanemichi. The signature states that it was made of Yasuki steel - could this blade have been made of this steel and not in any other respect be non-traditional? Apparently the Japanese military experimented with ways to produce better swords at this time. Yasuki steel was (and is) very expensive steel, so would it not be rather idiotic to make second rate swords out of it?

 

What I'm getting at is that perhaps my sword was a prototype of some sort, made in a traditional way but with a new kind of steel?

 

I was sold the sword as being hand-forged, and it does show a hamon (I'm pretty sure I can discern a hada too - but it is a very minute grain). So why go to all the effort of making the blade by hand when it was going to be marked as sub-standard with a Showa stamp???

 

Of course I would want to think well of my acquisition. I am however very open to criticism and any information, of whatever kind, would be gratefully received.

 

Thank you for your time and knowledge,

 

Alex

[Ed Harbulak]

The Japanese obviously know the significance of the Showa as well as Seki stamps on swords since they initiated the use of those stamps in the first place. If you try to send a sword with a Showa or Seki stamp to Japan for shinsa or polish, it will not be allowed into the country simply because it is NOT a traditionally made blade, no matter how well it was made or looks. It is after all a sword that was originally manufactured in Japan and if the Japanese don't consider it a traditional blade, it isn't. So unless you have more information than the Japanese, we have to believe what the Japanese tell us. Only star stamped blades are considered traditionally made and permitted to enter Japan for shinsa or polish. Your sword may be well made, but it isn't fully traditionally made. As suggested read what Fuller and Gregory have to say about WWII era swords with stamps.

Ed Harbualk