I have been offered a choice between two Japanese swords in a trade. I would like to know which sword is the better one from a collecting standpoint. Both are in World War Two mounts. The top sword (Sword 1) has a signed blade (with the Showa stamp) but no leather cover on the scabbard. The bottom sword (Sword 2) has an unsigned blade but has the leather cover on the scabbard. Sword 2 has a longer tang... the handle is 10 1/4 inches long compared to Sword 1 which is 9 1/2 inches long. I have tried to get pictures of the wave pattern on the blades. Sword 2 seems to have a more "interesting" wave pattern. I know that some older blades were put in WWII mounts, so I am asking the experts out there... which sword would you choose and why? Thanks for any help you can offer!
-
Last edited by aeroraider; 12-13-2004, 08:14 PM. -
Sword Pic
Sword Pic -
pic
picComment
-
picture
pictureComment
-
another
anotherComment
-
Last Pic
Last PicComment
-
Hi,
They both look pretty crisp and I would buy them both. Can you send some better pictures of the temper line on the bottom sword in the first picture? Is this the sword is not signed?Comment
-
Reply
Hi,
They both look pretty crisp and I would buy them both. Can you send some better pictures of the temper line on the bottom sword in the first picture? Is this the sword is not signed?
PM your email address and I will send you some pics. The bottom sword is Sword 2. It is unsigned. The swords are not for sale, but I have been offered my pick of the two in a trade.Last edited by aeroraider; 12-13-2004, 09:19 PM.Comment
-
Although both blades appear to be WW II period, sword #2 appears to be hand made and would be the better choice.
BobComment
-
Thanks
That seems to be the concensus... number 2. Thanks to everyone for their input.Comment
-
Hi Bob,
Both appear to me to be hand made. The file marks on both are pretty visible, and I agree they are both 1920-1930's manufacture.
Gary
Originally posted by Bob ColemanComment
-
The signed blade is in the style of the arsenal mass produced blades made in the early 1940's. The tempering is likely with oil in lieu of the traditional water method. the skinny, stubby tang would indicate1942-44 era production. I would expect an earlier hand made blade to be dated.
BobComment
-
They're both nice James, but given a choice, I'd go with door number 2.
RoyComment
-
I would too, but the diagonal file marks are indicitive of hand work. I have a Wakizashi that was made 175 or so years ago and it has no signature (it was made as a wakizashi and not cut down) so that is not allways a good indicator.
I have a Yamada made blade that was done in the 1920's that has the same short tang.
Gary
Originally posted by Bob ColemanComment
-
A thin, unrefined blade tang is a sign of a mass produced, poorly made sword, be it 500 years old or 65 years old. Except for the aluminum handle NCO swords, arsenal made blades all have hand filed nakago. One must remember that an old blade does not mean it is a good blade. Over the 1300 years of making the modern Japanese sword, many periods of mass production and poor quality occured. The better quality gendaito have strong, firm tangs that are well filed and do not resemble the poor quality of the military issue blades.
BobComment
Comment