Markings On Samurai Sword ?

[Guest IMHF]

What does this mean: This is a sword that was for sale.....

[Guest IMHF]

Second Picture:

[Guest IMHF]

Is this Samuri Sword a fake?

[Guest Rick Research]

The markings are sideways as posted. The chips in the gold paint confuse me, but looks like the last three characters in the first post, which should be on the bottom, are "759."

That and the really crude file marks etc suggest to me a WW2 wartime NCO issue sword-- or else one that's been savagely abused by a maniac with a file.

All I can read are numbers and the characters for year/month/day, so can't help with the other markings.

[Brian Wolfe]

Hi Guys,

I agree with Rick that this is probably a WW II era sword. As to the file marks they may not be all that out of place. The file marks on WW II and even very old swords were sometimes left rough. These marks can aid in the identification of different eras and even the individual sword markers. The different patterns of the file marks are also all named. By the way if you find a pre-1877 sword with rust on the "tang" do NOT clean it off. It is very important to the sword and even to the possible dating.

I would be very careful purchasing NCO swords unless you are quite familiar with them as there are some excellent copies coming out of China. Some even have damage you would expect from the real deal. Even the accountability numbers on the sword and scabbard have been reproduced.

If this is a real WW II sword or even a copy it is NOT a Samuri Sword. True Samuri Swords belonged to real Samuri and not those who used the Code of Bushido to plunge their country into a war.

On 1 January 1877 the Haitorei edict of 1876 came into effect, restricting wearing of swords to just the military and police in uniform. No sword made after 1877 can be called "Samuri" as that worrior class had ceased to exist.

I'll bet your sorry you asked.

Cheers

Brian

[Guest IMHF]

Thank you for all of your great help:

SSG Luna, Lorenzo

[SWE Erik]

Looks like a late ww2 shin gunto with most likely a machine made blade. I believe it to be original.

Too bad the ito wrapping on the handle has damage.

/Erik

[Eric K.]

It seems theres more engraving near the Mekugi-ana (top hole in tang) Also because there IS 2 holes in the tang this means this blade is suriage (cut down) or even O-suriage (greatly cut down) which i don't think it was seeing how the tang is cut on the bottom edge,

The engraving looks a little sloppy to be made by a sword smith but could have been made by a soldier?????

Basically it's not a samurai sword but probably a Gunto blade,maybe chinese?? I would have to see the actual blade.

The handles is no problem to fix, unlike TR and Imperial it is 100% acceptable to fix these swords with new parts whether it's a $100 Gunto or a $50,000.00 Koto

Eric

[Bruce Pennington]

OLD THREAD UPDATE

 

This is not an NCO gunto.  It is a contengency model (Rinji seishiki) of the Type 98.  You can read about them on these threads by Nick Komiya:

 

History of the misnamed "Type 3" Officer Sword

 

Legally Rebutting "Type 3" nomenclature

 

Unveiling the Rinji seishiki Sword in 1940

 

The smith is Yoshichika

 

Probably this one:

"YOSHICHIKA (吉近), Shōwa (昭和, 1926-1989), Gifu – “Yoshichika” (吉近), real name Yoshioka Tetsujirō (吉岡鉄次郎)"

 

The photo on the date-side is not clear enough to make out.  It is March of a WWII year, but cannot see that part.

Edited July 22 by Bruce Pennington