Why did the army revive the Samurai sword design in 1934 for officers?

[DaveR]

You might find this informative and relevant.....

Nihonto performance lessens in cold weather

It is very worth while perusing this site, lots of informative and authoritive articles here.

[Nick Komiya]

The reason for nationalistic Samurai rhetoric behind the Type 94 and 95 Guntos

I already stated that quoting nationalism as the reason for adopting the Type 94 design is incorrect, as that was clearly not why Hirohito signed the Edict, but perhaps this gave readers the impression that I am totally dismissing the role nationalism played in the revival of the Samurai design. That is not so.

Yes, there was indeed an overwhelming amount of nationalistic Samurai rhetoric attached to the new Gunto designs in period literature, so one has to be blind to say nationalism played no role. The point is that the choice to switch to a two-hand grip, slashing style of sword wielding was a pure field requirement, but once they got the idea to turn the clock back by centuries to revisit old traditions, there would have been factions within the army opposing such a “backward” move. To appease these dissidents and make them swallow the new pill, they needed some Samurai pep talk.

This dissident element within the army would have primarily been the cavalry people. Adoption of the Samurai style design was only one of the revolutionary aspects of the new Gunto design, the other revolutionary change was that they finally abolished the unique cavalry sword, not to forget they also abolished design features unique to the rank of the wearer. To stop those griping about such loss of historically won privileges, they needed the slogan “One Sword for All, the Sword of our Forefathers”. That was when they switched on the nationalistic Samurai propaganda.

The IJA cavalry had long been a pampered branch. Yoshifuru Akiyama, the Father of the IJA cavalry bucked the army’s trend of adopting Prussian ways and insisted on training his men in the French style. Under his strong leadership, he won the cavalry war against the Russian Cosacks during the Russo-Japanese War, which would give them a huge amount of fame and clout for years to come.

Shown below is a case in point. This is how the Type 32 swords were originally launched. Nowadays collectors talk of Type 32s as if they were one model, but in truth there were two models, one for the infantry and another with minor differences for the cavalry. It is almost shocking how close they were, but still they could not unify them into one design.

[Nick Komiya]

If you read my development story about the Type 95 sword, you will see how this infantry vs. cavalry rivalry made the development work drag on forever, almost to a vexing degree, while the cavalry kept changing their minds about things like the need for a hand-guard as present on the Type 32s. Luckily for the developers of the NCO sword, international treaties on armament reduction reduced the number of cavalry regiments and many of them also got reorganized into armored reconnaissance units. Thus freed from the need to wield their swords single-handed on horseback, the cavalry gradually lost their reason for insisting on unique handle designs for their swords.

The Type 94 officer sword design came at a time when the Type 95 design was still being held up, due to the bickering from the cavalry. Thus they decided to first get the officers onboard the “One sword for all” scheme, and once that got settled, the nationalistic propaganda smoothed the way for the Type 95.

[Kiipu]

The point is that the choice to switch to a two-hand grip, slashing style of sword wielding was a pure field requirement, but once they got the idea to turn the clock back by centuries to revisit old traditions, there would have been factions within the army opposing such a “backward” move.

Thank you Nick for an excellent article on the introduction of the Type 94 Military Sword. I enjoy reading all your sword related articles very much even though it is a sideline to your other collecting interests.

While little known in the West, the switch to two-handed officer's swords 両手軍刀術, with the exception of cavalry swords, began in 1916 courtesy of the Toyama Physical Training School 陸軍戸山学校. Prior to that time, the Imperial Japanese Army only used one-handed swords 片手軍刀術.

This change in swordsmanship style required the lengthening of the hilt on Japanese army swords to accommodate an extra hand.

両手軍刀術
両手軍刀術 - Wikipedia

銃剣術両手軍刀術教育法ノ範例
国立国会図書館オンライン | National Diet Library Online

[Nick Komiya]

First to come back was the Samurai Sword blade

Here is part of the sword improvement report compiled by the special Commission organized by General Oyama after the Sino-Japanese War.

As shown below, the Sino-Japanese War had already taught them that they needed to return to Samurai sword blades, but the thought of regaining the two-handed Samurai grip was still not on the horizon at this time 1n 1897.

The Samurai sword blade was revived as a result of experience in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894/95, but the return of the grip design had to wait for the Manchurian Incident. Nationalism helped making going back palatable, but was no driving motive in the revival of the Samurai sword.

[Nick Komiya]

I will add, for future reference, planned production figures of officer swords for the 1944 business year (April 1944-March 1945). The remarks column explains the teamwork logistics between the arsenals.

[Bruce Pennington]

Thanks for that beautifully translated chart! Is it from this chart you posted earlier on another thread? If so, your translation sheds a different light on the Koa Isshin blades furnished to Tokyo. I had assumed from the earlier chart that they were being transfered from the SMR Mantetsu factory. But your new chart shows that the Koa Isshin were coming from Nanman! That is significant to our study of the Mantetsu production!

[Watchdog]

Hmmm.......... " XXX " is wrong with you Anderson???

Totally out of order!

Disagreement is an essential ingredient of debate. Direct personal and profane insult is not!

Oh, and whilst we are at it, 157 posts in 8 years, hmmm, who pulled your chain?

Mark

[Nick Komiya]

Yes, Bruce, the same chart, but translated with more attention to details, which I learned were of interest to sword guys. Particularly blade supply to other arsenals that will affect stamping combinations found on examples.

[Larry C]

Stegel ...please take it easy and have more of an open mind to what is being shared about this topic..and you will understand why posts related to the thread topic are being made. Anderson meant no negative discourse and I would suggest the same also for yourself ( Minus the abusive language ) ..there is no need for that here.
Dont let it persist.

Regards Larry