Type 95 Gunto overstamping on serial?
Hello again!
I'm interested in your opinions on this stamping and on this sword generally. To me it appears the first number of the serial number, an 8, was botched and then the Nagoya inspection mark was placed right beside it. I've looked at dozens, if not hundreds of pictures of Type 95 serials and I haven't seen this sort of thing before. How does the rest of the sword look in terms of match? The scabbard is non-matching. Thanks!
John,
You definitely have a legit Type 95 there. I also have never seen something like this. Maybe you can get StuW, or Stegel, or Shamsy to have a look. They are the big-time experts on 95s.
The "8" must be part of the serial number. Without it, there would only be "5383", which we know isn't possible as that would put the blade in the copper-handle category. So the number is likely 85383. Why the "Na" is there is a mystery. To add, the kanji doesn't look stamped, but etched, or chisled in by hand. It's possible that it's a post-war bubba-job. But I've seen enough variations, miss-strikes, etc, to know that this could also be something done during the war.
Hopefully one of the experts will opine. Thanks for showing it to us!
Thanks Bruce!
Anybody else have any opinions? I'm very interested to hear what the experts think
Interesting that the ‘8’ is engraved, while the rest are stamped...
Might it be that an earlier blade was re-used and the number duly modified, Bruce?
Cheers,
Bob
Sorry,by Kohima
I might have said that in a confusing way - the "8" is stamped; the "Na" is engraved. Though, after a re-look, the first 8 does seem to have been struck by a different hand than the rest of the numbers. This is a real odd-ball, for sure!
I saved some of the pictures from this sale and the scabbard is marked as 名85383. It would thus seem to match the blade serial number. It is unusual to see the final inspection stamped over the first digit of the serial number though. However, human error always creeps into the production line no matter how well trained the workforce is.
If you really zoom in on the first pic, I think you can see an 8 toward the edge of the blade closest to the groove. That could have been the original strike which is not very clear. Most of the bottom part of the 8 is visible, but only a small amount of the top part it is. I think it is a matching Type 95.
Here's a pic.
I also think the stamp could be upside down.
There have been previous discussions on Serial number stampings on blades, where the actual manufacturing process was looked at. Nagoya produced blades are noted for 'deeper' stampings, unlike Tokyo blades.
I believe that they may have stamped their blades prior to the tempering (hardening) stage, whereas, Tokyo did most of theirs after, hence the more normal and in some instances lighter stampings as can be seen here for the first digit 8.
Looking at records shows that the only possible S/N range for this blade (coming from this Arsenal, & considering the Saya S/N) is in fact 85383, so it is correct.
As Kiipu stated it is unusual to see the inspection stamp over the first digit, but there are many instances of stampings being unusual -so human error comes into play here as he correctly stated.
I also tend to agree with Russ in that the first digit 8 may also be upside down.
The actual stamp size on the scabbard shows the 5 to be of a larger size, so again we have another unusual occurance here.
Here's some pics from a previous sale with different angles.
Seems the omission of the initial digit of the serial number was not discovered until after the blade hardening and final inspection then. And when discovered, there was no room for the 8 so it was stamped slightly to the left of the 名.
Last edited by Kiipu; 10-04-2021 at 03:30 PM.
Similar Threads
Posting Permissions
.
Bookmarks