Japanese M1883 (1896 version I believe)

**26Intrepid** · 10-24-2021, 04:55 PM

Hello,

I’m pulling out swords for a quick wipe down and oil. This is one I haven’t seen in a while. I believe it’s the 1896 version (3rd) of the M1883. The sword itself is in pretty nice condition... the leather scabbard has a little wear.

Question... is this the correct scabbard for this sword? The reason I ask is because the fittings on the scabbard don’t have any design (plain). The hilt on the sword has the usual chrysanthemum and leaf design. The black same’ grip is a little unusual as well (Usually see them with white same’). The two fittings on the scabbard have rope designs? Interesting piece... maybe a high ranking warrant officer?

Also, it’s a few inches shorter than the the other versions.

**ghp95134** · 10-24-2021, 05:53 PM

Scabbard looks correct per Dawson.

- Guy

**26Intrepid** · 10-24-2021, 06:50 PM

Thanks Guy! One of these days I need to get that book! Thank you again.. D

**Jareth** · 10-24-2021, 11:33 PM

Excellent condition sword! Was the drag shape changed?

**26Intrepid** · 10-24-2021, 11:57 PM

The drag looks modified (Not rounded)... it was that way when I got it. Thanks... I agree, it’s a nice sword.

**Nick Komiya** · 10-25-2021, 11:16 AM

What does M1883 (1896 version) mean? What is the difference between the 1883 and 1896 models?

Can anyone explain how American authors use these paradoxical model distinctions?

That model with the haikan designed like a rope was only discontinued by Edict 23, dated 26th Feb 1914, so what is the reason to peg it at 1896?

**26Intrepid** · 10-25-2021, 04:58 PM

Hi Nick,

Thanks for the info on the discontinued haikan design.

As far as the 1883/1896 variation? I can only say I read it online or in a book when I purchased the sword. Whatever I read.... I documented it in a book that has all my notes. As with everything In life... I guess you can’t always believe what you read. I can only assume it was true at the time because I don’t have any knowledge of the history on these pieces.

Thank you for clarifying. So, I will just log it as a Japanese 1883 naval dress sword and leave it as that.

Once again, I appreciate the post and the clarification.