Help on dating of WWII Japanese Sword - Factory Made

[Quest Master]

I recently bought a relic sword, meaning a battlefield pick-up that was outside for some time and not pristine. I am not Japanese sword guy, but I liked it...so I bought it. I mailed it home to myself, and it arrives today.

Questions:
1. Can a WWII Japanese NCO factory produced sword be dated by the serial number on the blade and arcenal marks?
2. What year did the wooden handle/round tsuba start being introduced, as opposed to the aluminum handle/brass tsuba.

I ask these questions to match the provenance that I was given to where the sword was said to have been picked up from.

I will be able to post pictures tonight when it arrives.

[Stu W]

I recently bought a relic sword, meaning a battlefield pick-up that was outside for some time and not pristine. I am not Japanese sword guy, but I liked it...so I bought it. I mailed it home to myself, and it arrives today.

Questions:
1. Can a WWII Japanese NCO factory produced sword be dated by the serial number on the blade and arcenal marks?
2. What year did the wooden handle/round tsuba start being introduced, as opposed to the aluminum handle/brass tsuba.

I ask these questions to match the provenance that I was given to where the sword was said to have been picked up from.

I will be able to post pictures tonight when it arrives.

Some educated guesses can be provided as to year and perhaps first or last half but not day or month to the best of my knowledge. I, and others who focus on these swords, will stop by the thread later to view the photos and provide you with more info. When photographing the fuchi stampings please do so with the sword tip down.

In the interim check your PMs

Regards,
Stu

[Quest Master]

The sword has arrived. And here it is. The serial number on the blade is 155027. Now that I have looked through some photos, I believe this sword originally had an aluminum handle and not wood (but you tell me). I'd like to know as much as possible about it...specifically if it can be dated to prior to May of 1943. As you can tell, it is in rough condition and not very exciting - except the story that came with it. It does have the scabbard, but due to rust, I do not see a serial number on it. Thanks in advance for the help!

[Stu W]

Interesting piece. The fuchi markings are read other way up and from left to right indicate maker, Suya Shoten (harp looking symbol), followed by the small Tokyo First Arsenal inspection mark and last but not least the large star shaped Tokyo First Arsenal production/administration mark.

Till 1944 the Type 95 production program was administered by Kokura even though they did not produce any of the type. In 1944 Kokura relinquished control to Tokyo First and Nagoya Arsenals who had till that time been producing the NCO swords.

The front seppa (variation2), fuchi, iron tsuba all indicate a sword from the mid to late 1941 through mid 1943 ... with some margin for error on the 1943 end.

The blade serial number is read with cutting edge down as it should be for a Tokyo piece. What's non standard is the fact the blade is without bohi. It's rough as would be a late war wooden tsuka type.

So I'm inclined to think this started life as an aluminum tsuka version and was later blended with a blade and wooden tsuka from a late war piece.

I'm going to hit the post button then go back and study it some more. Perhaps I'll see something else but I believe it to be all authentic parts. Just can't tell the reason why they are together in this manner. Unless you know it to have been assembled by someone post war then I'd say it was a battlefield modification.

Others will comment soon I'm sure.

Regards,
Stu

[Stu W]

Please post a broadside view of the scabbard drag shoe. Tokyo and Nagoya Arsenal drag shoes have different profiles.

Regards,
Stu

[Stu W]

Make sure you get an opinion from member STEGEL who is quite well versed in this Type and has more than a passing familiarity with serial number sequencing from the different arsenals.

Regards,
Stu

[Quest Master]

Please post a broadside view of the scabbard drag shoe. Tokyo and Nagoya Arsenal drag shoes have different profiles.

Regards,
Stu

The scabbard, well....as a relic, the bottom of the scabbard is damaged, missing about 1" or so of the bottom. Only about 2" of the bottom part of the "fin" remain. I don't know if the bottom was battle damaged....but it is missing and not rusted off.

As seen, all of the parts have even patina and putting, so they have been together for a LONG time, but I am trying to prove that this sword was issued and captured before May of 1943.

Thanks for the help!!!

[Stu W]

OK, too bad, but we can still work with what you have. Can you show us more? Do you have the wooden tsuka? How about the full length of the blade and what there is of the saya. I'm wondering if a wooden tsuka was fashioned in theatre and will be seen as such by experienced eyes. That would eliminate one issue with dating it prior to the one you mention. That still leaves the blade being without bohi but viewing it may reveal more.

Thanks for posting this interesting piece.

Regards,
Stu

[Quest Master]

Stu,
What you see is what I have. There is no handle. I originally thought that it may have had a wooden handle based on the round steel stuba, but now that I have seen other swords of this type, and the fact that the scabbard catch is on the top, I now see that this may have been an aluminum handle type. Pardon my lack of sword "terms".

Thank you for all of the help. Please keep the details coming!

[Stu W]

Stu,
What you see is what I have. There is no handle. I originally thought that it may have had a wooden handle based on the round steel stuba, but now that I have seen other swords of this type, and the fact that the scabbard catch is on the top, I now see that this may have been an aluminum handle type. Pardon my lack of sword "terms".

Thank you for all of the help. Please keep the details coming!

Ahhh, that's good news! As you now realize it should not have had a wooden tsuka (handle) so that's no longer an issue.

Let's have a look at the full length of the blade.

Regards,
Stu
PS: Wife wants me to relinquish the computer and from the look on her face I think she means it. I'll check back later or in the morning.

[Quest Master]

Ahhh, that's good news! As you now realize it should not have had a wooden tsuka (handle) so that's no longer an issue.

Let's have a look at the full length of the blade.

Regards,
Stu

OK!
Tell me exactly how you want me to photograph it. It is complete....but rough condition like the rest of it.
I can take pictures tomorrow night.
Thanks again for all of the help!

[RussellM]

Check the top of the scabbard throat to see if the number matches the blade.

Regards

Russ

[Quest Master]

Ok, additional pictures:
Here is the end of the scabbard. As you can see, it has been cut off, though nicely folded over. I don't know if this was wartime done - or done by the veteran. The patina and rust says that it was done a while ago.

Blade tip:

Blade end:

Overall:

I also noted that the "the small Tokyo First Arsenal inspection mark" is also on the blade after the serial number:

Let me know what you think. Thank you!

[Quest Master]

Again, the main point of this thread to date this sword before May of 1943.

The scabbard has too much oxidation to see if the s/n matches on the scabbard.
Thanks!

[Stu W]

Even with only part of the drag remaining I can say with near certainty that the saya (scabbard) is a Tokyo Arsenal piece.

Regards,
Stu