Featured Japanese Military Sword - WWII Era

I have a Japanese Sword that appears to be from WWII Era. It measures 39 3/8” tip to tip Sheathed. From my viewpoint the blade looks to be Damascus Steel (See Pic #6). The Sleeve has a Green Cloth Wrap which I have not seen before. The Sword is held together with a wooden peg. The Tang is Signed (3-marks) as pictured. I’m specifically seeking information as to the Maker of this Sword and the Status or Rank of the Owner/Carrier and any other pertinent information. Photographs attached.

 

Original WW II Japanese Army Officers Shin-Gunto sword....

is a good place to start looking...

 

The sword is a Shin-Gunto katana, Army officers sword. Rank is denoted by the colour of the tassel, but the tassel here is a modern one and incorrect. The cord binding (tsuka ito) on the tsuka (grip) is also modern. Komokwa's picture shows nicely how the grip and tassel should have looked.
The blade is signed Kane Kuni . The little star mark is an army acceptance stamp, post 1926, the start of the Showa era. The tsuba, (guard) is pierced, which was an optional extra, and usually denotes a better quality blade.
What I can see of the blade shows an extremely nice grain, which doesn't seem to fit in with the Showa stamp. There are many Chinese copies of these swords. The sword looks genuine judging by the few images that I can see, but the only picture of the blade seems odd to me. The pattern of the hada, or grain, should only really visible in the jigane, the section of the blade from the shinogi (the line down the middle of the blade), to the ha (edge). We really need more pictures of the blade to make any real judgement.
For the record, a simple two character signature (mei) like this one, and the Showa stamp usually denotes an arsenal swordsmith, who were inferior smiths who made swords in vast numbers. Some of these blades were simply lumps of metal shaped like a traditional blade and were hardened in oil, not water. These swords have no grain in the blade at all. A quality blade like this, would usually have a fuller signature, probably with the date on the other side of the blades tang. This blade is a bit of a conundrum, so more pictures are needed of the blade I am afraid.

 

The handle wrap looks rewound.

Because of the way these swords are put together.....I've seen parts swapped out and replaced .
Sometimes superior blades were replaced by lesser ones , & older tsubas , with newer ones.
Fine menuki of precious metal were often pulled from the grip.
Sometimes even the tang was cut down in size.

Yes, more pics.....and close ups of clear quality are needed, as the blacksmith requests..

 

remember, this is not a 1600's Samurai Sword......

The first original Japanese swords that are considered the precursor of the 'modern' katana began to appear during the early Heian period (around 700 CE). Katana were mainly used by the samurai, the military nobility of feudal Japan (1185-1600) up through the Edo period (1603–1868)

 

Katana were in fact only used by the samurai. The katana has a blade lenght of more than 2 shaku, roughly two feet, and nobody other than the samurai class were allowed a weapon of this length. Others, commoners, merchants, tradesmen, if they had anything at all, would only have a dagger, and probably they didn't even have this. Doctors, IIRC, were forbidden to have any weapon at all, and would often have a wooden imitation of a dagger in their obi.
Katana begin to appear about 1500, and at this time many old and much longer tachi blades were cut down to make them usable as katana. The tachi was worn edge downwards and slung from a belt, whereas the katana was worn at the waist and carried edge upwards, which need a shorter blade length than the older tachi so that it could be drawn from the scabbard. After this time, tachi were relegated to war, or ceremonial dress, but the katana and shorter wakisashi were everyday wear. Even at home, a member of the samurai class, be they male or female, would always have at least a dagger on them.
What is interesting is that during WWII, when the sword in the original post and that shown by Komokwa were made, they could have an ancient family heirloom blade in them. The oldest such sword that have owned was made in about 1350, and was cut down from an earlier tachi blade to make it a katana.

 

If an heirloom blade was being used, would they still apply the army tsuka and tsuba?

I read an 18th C account of a European trip to Japan where they commented to the effect that the swords were as good as the finest Toledos, but were worn in a foolish fashion, shoved through the belt.

 

Yes, the old blades could be mounted in the WWII Shin-Gunto mounts. As I mentioned, the oldest that I have owned was ca. 1350, but mounted in standard army mounts for use during WWII. I have , however, also owned old samurai swords with the traditional hilt and fittings, but with a ring added to the scabbard so that it could be worn in the same manner as the standard army sword and again, used during WWII. One of them that I owned was surrendered by the officer commanding a POW camp in Malaya, and was made about 1625-1630.

This young officer has such a sword, civilian katana, but used during WWII.

 

Japanese Sword - Additional Photographs #1

 

maybe try the blade pics in a soft daylight...

 

Japanese Sword - Additional Photographs #2

 

The blade is usually best photographed vertically against a dark background, perhaps even black.
There are a few things that just don't seem right, and I am thinking that this blade is a Chinese copy. Difficult to say for certain without examining it properly.
The yasuri mei (file marks) on the tang seem far to rough for a blade of this quality, and the two character signature, lack of a date, together with the Showa stamp, just don't seem to go with this quality of blade. The hada (grain of the blade) is a bit too obvious, and extends to the mune (spine of the blade). Normally the hada is only obvious in the jigane (lower portion of the blade nearer the edge), and it is not normally so obvious anyway. All this makes me think it is a Chinese blade.

By the way, DONT EVER touch a Japanese blade with your bare hands! The acidity in your fingers will stain the blade very quickly, which is impossible to remove unless the blade is professionally polished, which costs a fortune! ( last blade I had polished took two years to get back, and cost £25 an inch, and that blade was 27" long. And that was forty years ago! That was the sword I mentioned earlier that was surrendered in the POW camp in Malaya).

I haven't collected Japanese swords for some years now, so my knowledge is a bit rusty to say the least. I'd suggest posting this on Gunboards forum in the Japanese section, there are some knowledgeable folks there who can give you a far better appraisal than I can. If you wish, I can post it for you.

 

pretty darn good......for rusty !!!..

I don't like the Hamon .....
but I'm no expert...........just a lover !

 

Sidebar...... @the blacksmith ....any thoughts on this ...
https://www.antiquers.com/threads/short-sword-identification.77460/

 

[QUOTE="komokwa, post: 9419951,

I don't like the Hamon .....
but I'm no expert...........just a lover ![/QUOTE]

The suguha (straight hamon, ie. the hardened edge pattern), is quite common at this period, and many Army blades have this, whether oil quenched or water quenched). Usually an oil quenched blade will have a slightly greyish hamon, as opposed to the more white of a water quenched blade. A water quenched blade, which hardens much faster than oil hardened one, also often exhibits what is called nie and nioi respectively, which are very bright white little lines of extremely hard martensite formed during the quench, and which follow roughly the form of the edge of the hamon. All of the above said, I quite agree with Komokwa, it doesn't look quite right to me either I am afraid.
I'd love to hear the opinion of someone with far more knowledge than about this blade.

Komokwa, fortunately, it is only my knowledge of Japanese swords that is rusty, and not the sword itself!

For the record, the sword that came from the POW camp, I purchased from a friend who had been given it by the British officer in the POW camp, to whom it was surrendered in 1945. The sword, made in ca. 1625-1630 era, had unfortunately been badly mistreated by my friend. It had been used to cut bushes , and them tall wet grass, and after the blade went rusty, he cleaned it with sand paper! Oh, and he stuck it in the back of a door and bent it too!
It had to be straightened before it could be polished (which is a slightly risky thing to do, as the blade can snap!), otherwise a polish would be impossible. After polishing and a new saya (scabbard) imported from Japan, the sword looked as good as it did when it was made.....and just as sharp!

 

Komokwa, fortunately, it is only my knowledge of Japanese swords that is rusty, and not the sword itself!

................. you funny too !!!!

 

Thanks for the info. I bought this sword from a acquaintance who had zero information about the piece. It was his brothers who had recently passed. I will post it on the Gunboards site with better photos of the blade. The blade is SUPER SHARP and in real nice shape, no chips just some scratching near the guard. The sword assembles very well, nice and tight and the blade fits the sheath beautifully. BTW, I wiped off the blade with a clean soft fabric.

 

Something that I hadn't paid attention to, was this extra washer, called a seppa, there can be quite a few of these, anywhere from two to six, perhaps more but, they are the same number on both sides of the tsuba (guard). Here there seems only one of this shape, and it is a very different coloured modern looking metal. I am thinking that this has been added to fill a gap and make the blade fit the handle. Seppa are oval or sort of flower shaped as in the other photographs, but never have I seen one this shape. It looks to me to have been added by someone who doesn't know much about Japanese swords. Usually if the smith couldn't add extra seppa, if the hole ( megugi ana ) was too far away along the hilt for example, then they would punch a new hole in the tang. Some old blades can have three or more holes in them, which is a sign of their age.

I will be very interested to see what others on the Gunboards forum say. Maybe I am totally wrong, but they will know much more than I do. We will see..........

 

it looks out of place from the get go.......but so do other parts and pieces...

the cord wrap isn't original either.....

it's a Frankenstein .......!