I would not go that far. It could be an overseas repair using locally made replacement parts or a postwar creation. The key to the history of this sword is the non-standard replacement parts. Unfortunately no pictures were taken of the hilt showing the lack of the menuki and the hole for the mekugi. I would suggest taking some pictures of the tsuba, front and back, for the record. At the end of the day, the sword is interesting in its own right.
Now i'm curious about the horrible tsuka again so i'll remove the cover again for you guys so fingers crossed the leather can take being restitched one more time.
The handle is probably poorly cast.
These NCO swords were very reasonably priced (aka affordable). A poor condition one was under $200. A mutt, you wouldn't be able to give away. It's almost like the prices took off just overnight! I'm glad I was able to buy several when I was at the right place at the right time.
Here are the new pictures showing the tsuka in all of its glory (lol), the seppa that came originally is also included in the pictures but the habaki is still missing so I hope my sketch of how it was originally put together may help. If you need any more pictures I'm happy to provide them.
The hilt looks to be a spare that armorers would have handy for replacement purposes. This opinion is based solely upon the lack of a mekugi hole in the hilt; unless of course it has somehow been filled in. Looking at the top, the forward part of the hilt is notched for the scabbard release mechanism. The hilt has been ground/sanded down and all protrusions removed. I think the recesses have been deepened as well, including removal of the menuki. I think the reason for these changes was for the leather cover to fit like a glove. Keep in mind, this is merely the opinion of one collector and there is little doubt others will come to different conclusions.
For me it's just a fake ..
The tip of the blade looks like the classic one of Chinese fakes and the tsuka too.
I have some doubts only about the copper ferrule, but it could also be an original part adapted later ..
If only talking about the blade, the blade is as genuine as they get. The fakes won't go the extra mile to have such file marks and stamps, especially at where they are normally unseen.
The ferrule aka habaki is a replacement by the user. He made it.
Uhmm...
Here we have a kissaki that is too short and rounded, blade with streaked metal that looking too poor even for a 95 and misaligned numbers that appear to be hand-stamped and not machine-printed. Tsuka clearly made in china, Tsuba with side holes that are too wide and reach to the edge, scabbard with different serial numbers, Fuki missing (in my previous post I was talking about "Fuki", non Habaki), missing Chuso with anomalous housing in the tsuka, and a strange W mark on the nakago.
Basically we can say that there is nothing here that is as it should be in an original 95 ..
Obviously I absolutely respect your and others opinions, but to me it remains a fake, and not even one of the best I've seen.
I'm really sorry.
The kissaki (blade tip) could be worn and/or reshaped. The metal could be resharpened badly. Even the machi (habaki area) maybe altered. Some one or people did a number of damaging work to this blade. But, it's still a Japanese made blade. I can't say the same about the tsuka.
If I were the owner of this sword, I'd only use the blade. Make new tsuka. Find a tsuba from my stash. And, call it a day.
P.S. Need a new and proper habaki badly.
The strange W is the military acceptance stamp. It's like the P stamp on the top of the slide of a 1911A1 pistol.
I'm not sure what Fuki is.
Similar Threads
Posting Permissions
.
Bookmarks