Japanese sword

[ghp95134]

Gee ... I've never seen an engraved habaki like that. It looks well-executed to me.

--Guy

[Stu W]

Thanks for the extra pics. I'm pleased to see the engraving is not kanji.

I'm thinking along these lines; a non traditionally made blade, made in part with the use of machines, from the early 1900s initially for civilian carry in a different set of furniture. When the war came along it was mated with a tsuka, tsuba and a partial set of seppa for use in the field.

Not a reproduction in my view but also not a standard Type 98 configuration either given the length and the habaki.

I suggest you wait for Bob Coleman to comment.

Regards,
Stu

[BOB COLEMAN]

My internet has been down for several days. The habaki is a puzzler as it does not fit any known pattern. The blaance looks like a true Japanese machine made military blade. The enhanced habaki is something one finds on chinese fakes. This may be something the owner had done. Without having it in hand, I am caught in the middle on this one.

[Stu W]

Hi Bob,

Good to have you back. I found this to be an interesting study and started off with your line of thinking till I focused in on the fact it's a wak not a katana length sword. I've come across several like this that were all in leather covered wooden saya. Each was a pre-war blade that had been updated into gunto mounts for battlefield carry. I too think it has an element of machine production although not to the extend that would a Type 95. The absence of any arsenal markings lead me to think pre war too. Then of course I'm wondering why anyone would be making waks for war rather than katana? On balance I still feel it's a pre war blade but as you correctly point out without an in hand examination a conclusive judgement may be difficult to reach.

As to the habaki, when I first heard about the engraving it did raise a red flag, as I mentioned in a preious post, but the quality of the engraving exceeds that of the ones I have come across on Chinese reproduction. Given my belief that the sword was pre war made I was then able to accept the habaki as being one from a piece mounted for civilian display or carry depending upon the blade age. Perhaps I've arrived at an incorrect conclusion because my line of reasoning was flawed somewhere along the line.

I'm going to have a look at the photos again but this time on a large screen. I might see something that I did not before.

Regards,
Stu

[Stu W]

Message for Matt,

Hi Matt. Can you advise if the habaki slips easily into position or is there evidence that it had to be forced to conform to the shape of the blade? I'm thinking that if the blade is legit, regardless of age, that a cheap thin Chinese repro will be force fit whereas a proper habaki will likely fit well but not show signs of having been forced into shape and position.

Regards,
Stu

[BBMATT]

[BBMATT]

It fits nicely I think. Its not loose or tight. Hope the pictures help.

Thank you for your time.
Matt

[BOB COLEMAN]

The fit of the habaki is not in question. It is the odd design work. As I previously mentioned, it is unlike any known Japanese habaki design. The more I look at it the less I like it. That may be an indication that the sword is a Chinese fkae.