Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Sword Production Statistics

Article about: I was about to thank cabowen for his contribution to the type 3 sword thread, but the moderators seem to have closed it. Anyway, if sword fans are interested in detailed manufacturing stats

  1. #11

    Default

    I have examined many of these type 3 swords over the years. Th e style with the standard handle wrap and steel saya always contain factory made blades. The lesser seen type with the lacquered ito and saya always contain true hand forged blades. I have also noted that these blades are usually of a higher quality than other contemporary hand forged blades.

    BOB

    LIFE'S LOSERS NEVER LEARN FROM THE ERROR OF THEIR WAYS.

  2. #12

    Default

    Just taking a break from my writing work on the IJA helmet development work, I will comment on some points you raised.

    1. Was non-use of brass due to a shortage of brass? No, it had nothing to do with any shortage. The army spells out the reason in unequivocal terms in the 1938 document.

    2. Relationship with the Jumei Toushou program. Yes, the army commissioned smiths would have been part of the initiative. They came under the appraisal commission, which by 1942 was an organization within the arsenal, completely funded by the army's weapons development budget. Job descriptions within the Nov. 1942 charter has Section 1 responsible for appraisals and buying of Gendaito and Kosakuto (the earlier February charter said Koto, Shinto, Shinshinto, and Gendaito, but this was amended). Section 2 was in charge of liaising with the artisans. They also held exhibitions and awarded honors to the Toushou.

    3. The army itself had clearly explained that the 1940 variant was about dealing with a serious shortage, so if you want to question the integrity of the army documents, there is no point in me commenting. I only go as far as the documents go, the rest becomes speculation / fiction so I'll leave that to collector's who like to weave stories.

    I'll leave the rest to Mr. Kolick you refer to.

  3. #13
    ?

    Default

    Thank you Gentlemen for the fine post. They are greatly appreciated by a student in learning!
    Semper Fi
    Phil

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote by nick komiya View Post
    Just taking a break from my writing work on the IJA helmet development work, I will comment on some points you raised.



    3. The army itself had clearly explained that the 1940 variant was about dealing with a serious shortage, so if you want to question the integrity of the army documents, there is no point in me commenting. I only go as far as the documents go, the rest becomes speculation / fiction so I'll leave that to collector's who like to weave stories.

    I'll leave the rest to Mr. Kolick you refer to.
    My apologies for referring to you as Mr. Kolick, when I meant Mr. Komiya...

    The "serious shortage" mentioned in the documents doesn't really spell out clearly what the shortage is, that is, a shortage of "officer's swords" doesn't really specify if the shortage was due to a shortage of blades, or a shortage of mountings, or both. If it was a shortage of blades, it would seem odd that they would specify hand forged tamahagane blades as an expedient solution. If it was mountings, the change from the cast brass to iron might indicate that there was an issue with brass. Just trying to read between the lines a bit...

  5. #15

    Default

    Just a quick note to add...the links turn into all question marks, because, apparently, the servers or systems do not have the Japanese language script to use, so they "do not know how to print it" and they come out as question marks instead.
    William

    "Much that once was, is lost. For none now live who remember it."

  6. #16

    Default

    Indeed the army did not specifically say it was a shortage of blades, but of the whole sword. However, the wordy establishment mandate of the appraiser committee of 1938 also refers to the same shortage and the faked blades that appeared that took advantage of the situation, which the army simply referred to as "inferior products" in the 1940 memo. Reference to shortages are all over the place, yet not a single one can be construed to indicate that there were enough blades. The committee established in 1938 was also there only to buy Samurai sword blades for use in Gunto. Saya, etc were returned to the seller.
    Besides, if material shortages for the fittings were the reason, they wouldn't even bother to invoke a "Rinji Type", as switching materials in the specs as per article 4 of the uniform code was a routine thing, done simply by an ordinance listing alternative materials that could be used. "Rinji Materials" and "Rinji Type" are worlds apart.
    If you really read between the lines, it is impossible to draw out any conclusion other than a shortage of blades at that time (1937-1941). There is reference again in 1945 of a general shortage of swords, but 42-44 seemed to be good years for swords.

  7. #17

    Default

    Thank you for your comments. Your time is much appreciated.

    There is confirmation from other sources as well, such as in the monthly war time journal "Nihonto Oyobi Nihon Shumi", published by Kurihara Hikosaburo, that there was a shortage of swords/blades in the late 1930's as well. In fact, there was a campaign of sorts instigated by Kurihara around this time to inspire smiths nationwide to step up and meet the challenge to supply the country's soldiers with swords.

    I follow your logic regarding the change in materials, however, clearly there was much more done than a simple substitution of iron for brass. The whole mounting was redesigned to make it cheaper and quicker to produce as well as more suited to battle conditions. Surely this would require complete retooling, material procurement, and other major upsets that would go far beyond what any normal, simple switch in materials would require.

    Further, if the situation was truly dire, it is quite odd that it would take 4-5 years to bring this "emergency sword" into full production. Furthermore, the requirement that these new swords be "hand forged and made of tamahagane" is quite contrary to expediency, which is also very strange. Knowing how many type 95 blades were being produced at the time, as well as the relative simplicity and low cost of their manufacture, surely it would have made much more sense to simply use those. It would have meet the need for both expediency and cost reduction.

    Clearly without further information that clarifies the rationale behind the changes made beyond a "simple shortage of officer's swords", we can only speculate. As indicated, the observable facts seemingly present a more complex situation, which bring to mind a whole new set of questions...

    By the way, if it isn't too much trouble, can you share the document links to the info you mentioned vis-a-vis the Rikugun Jumei Tosho program?

    Again, thank you for your input.

  8. #18

    Default

    Here are the links to the appraisal committee charters

    1. The 1938 version ??????**???????????

    2. The February 1942 version
    ??????**???????????

    3. The November 1942 version
    ??????**???????????

    However, I should warn you in advance that you will not find any word like 陸軍受命刀匠 (Rikugun Jumei Toushou) in the documents or any army document for that matter, as it is incorrect Japanese and insulting for the army to call the smiths that. The smiths themselves may call themselves so or a third party may, but not the army. Japanese is a complicated language when you get down to using it correctly, but this is no Japanese course, so I won't get into it.

    The links will probably morph again though it contains no Japanese. However, they should work.

  9. #19

    Default

    Having lived in Japan for 14 years, I know all too well of the complexities of the language...

    It would seem the term "Rikugun Jumei Tosho" has entered the vernacular, as evidenced by its widespread usage in reference to the smiths participating in the IJA program to supply traditionally made blades. The book "軍刀組合始末: 陸軍受命刀匠の周辺", published in 1994 by the 会津文化財調査研究会, is one example of this usage.

    Thanks for the head's up in regard to the IJA records, and thanks for the links....

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote by nick komiya View Post
    I was about to thank cabowen for his contribution to the type 3 sword thread, but the moderators seem to have closed it.
    Anyway, if sword fans are interested in detailed manufacturing stats for swords. They are all in the archives for you to study.
    Here are 3 lists for your studying pleasure.

    1. 1944 detailed list for handforged swords (shows how many Koashin blades, etc).......??????**???????????

    2. 1944 production including type 95s
    ??????**???????????

    3. 1945 list
    ??????**???????????
    Any chance of getting some sort of summary of these charts in English? I'm not able to read Japanese, and looking at the end row, which seems to be a totals line, it looks like there were nearly 2 million swords made each year? I know it would take some time to recreate this in a graph, but unless someone does, these charts are useless to the majority off us who would dearly love to have a look at them.

    Thanks!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Question Question Japanese Sword Katana Real? sword smith?

    In Japanese Militaria
    03-27-2014, 09:16 PM
  2. WW2 Casualty statistics

    In Discussions
    09-21-2011, 10:52 AM
  3. M40 production

    In Steel Helmets
    10-31-2009, 06:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •