Japanese Militaria at Castle-Thunder.com Forum Japanese Militaria at Castle-Thunder.com
An information board for the Collector of Nippon Militaria
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch    Back to Castle-Thunder.comCastle-Thunder.com    MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
  Castle-Thunder.com ChatLive Chat    ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Struck Mums.
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Japanese Militaria at Castle-Thunder.com Forum -> Japanese Weapons and Militaria
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Eloldehombre1
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 12:15 pm    Post subject: Struck Mums. Reply with quote

Looked at gaggle of Arisakas (99s) over the weekend. One had an "X"ed mum, another had several 'strikes' through the mum. Reported some months/years ago on the other Japanese board on a 20th 38 I observed at a B'ham show. Several strike marks forward of the mum and several on the side, mum was untouched. No doubt in my mind that the striking was done by a Japanese soldier who could not bring him self to deface his god's symbol.

Can we say from one observation that struck mums were probably done in a doy or so after surrendxer announced while ground mums done after occupation troops landed and rifles handed to homeward-bound G.I.s? Are there any more examples of receivers being struck while mum untouched???
Back to top
Gregg



Joined: Aug 24 2003
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 6:24 pm    Post subject: Marks around the MUM Reply with quote

Many moons ago, I had a T38 rifle that had a file mark below the MUM, and a file mark on either side of the MUM, sort of a triangle effect with out the file marks connecting.
That was that I figured, some soldier who could not bring himself to damage the Emperor's mark.
Like a fool, I traded it off many years ago.
Regards, Gregg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kfields



Joined: Aug 22 2003
Posts: 15

PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2003 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It always seemed to make sense to me that the completely ground mums were done when the fellows doing it had time and access to a grinder. I assume rifles coming out of arsenals or main weapons depots were more apt to be ground and probably most of the stuff that came out of the Japanese home islands probably were more apt to be ground. I'm curious if anyone has in their possession a rifle that was given to any of the U.S. sailors as a souvenir off Japan at the end of the war that is not ground? The closest I can come to that is a T99 that is X'd and came aboard the USS Miami as part of a batch of souvenir rifles somewhere North of Okinawa.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rick



Joined: Aug 24 2003
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2003 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a Type 38 carbine, Koishikawa "0" series, s/n 94981, crested, matching by assembly # 19, that came out of the Toyko arsenal in 1947. It's about 98%. I don't think it was ever fired until I got it.

My take on the mums is this; struck, peened, or hammered were surrendered in the field by troops. The ground mums were surrendered at the arsenal between August and December '45 while the Japanese were in charge of disarmament. After January '46 when the US occupation forces took over disarmament the grinding stopped. This seems to explain the above carbine and other crested weapons with '46, '47, '48, papers. Just my thoughts. Any other input?

Rick
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
gwsiii



Joined: Aug 21 2003
Posts: 2228
Location: Hayden, AL

PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2003 8:22 am    Post subject: Mums Reply with quote

My grandfather was in the occupation, around 1946 or so, and sent back a Nagoya 4th series carbine with a struck mum, I'm sort leaning towards him 'trading' for it rather than it coming out of an arsenal as the condition is not indicative of an 'arsenal/warehouse' souvenir. He died shortly after returning from the occupation so there was no way to get the history on it. It, and some of the other souvenirs that he sent back have been trickling in to me over the years from family and friends. Its the one rifle that got me started on this whole Arisaka thing.

I have another Nagoya 4th series carbine with bayonet, that the vet stated was 'x'd when he picked it up in the field after they dealt with the 'previous' owner while mopping up on one of the islands. Fact or Fiction, I can't say for sure. It does make collecting interesting though. Trey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eloldehombre1
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2003 12:10 pm    Post subject: Mum Reply with quote

Purchased an 'as new' Tokyo Artillery Arsenal (correct name) rifle and carbine at Cleveland a few years back. Seller was selling for a terminally ill neighbor. Neighbor had been one of the last to leave Japan at occupation's end. Both weapons had mums. In agreement that mum defacement/removal stopped after first year or two. Had Hirohito denounced his divinity by then? If he is not a god, why worry about the barbarians getting his rifle?

Jareth, if you are reading this, $500???
Back to top
Earl



Joined: Sep 01 2003
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2003 9:50 pm    Post subject: They didn't grind/strike them all at the very beginning. Reply with quote

kfields wrote:
It always seemed to make sense to me that the completely ground mums were done when the fellows doing it had time and access to a grinder. I assume rifles coming out of arsenals or main weapons depots were more apt to be ground and probably most of the stuff that came out of the Japanese home islands probably were more apt to be ground. I'm curious if anyone has in their possession a rifle that was given to any of the U.S. sailors as a souvenir off Japan at the end of the war that is not ground? The closest I can come to that is a T99 that is X'd and came aboard the USS Miami as part of a batch of souvenir rifles somewhere North of Okinawa.


None of the examples I have from right at the end of the war have been struck or ground. The best example I have is the 8th series T99 that was aquired by a sailor I researched on the USS Alabama the day of the surrender in Tokyo Bay.

I also have a T44 mint with mum that was brought back in '46 with paperwork from the vet. He was involved in their destruction and had salvaged this one hence the reason it most likely still retained the mum - it came right out of the pile to be dumped in Tokyo Bay.

Other examples I have/had were a 30th series from Truk, a 2nd series from Truk - both matching, complete mum, and even had matching DC's.

Earl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
riceone



Joined: Aug 22 2003
Posts: 86
Location: Mississippi Delta

PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2003 5:43 am    Post subject: Struck Mums Reply with quote

I have a neighbor who was sent to an arsenal near Tokyo at the war's end and he found brand new T 38 carbines. He was allowed to pick one out but there was a guy with a grinder that ground the mum before he could leave. riceone
_________________
Most people who preach tolerance are very intolerate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
kfields



Joined: Aug 22 2003
Posts: 15

PostPosted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 3:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This whole business about defaced mums is a curious one to me. Everyone who collects Japanese rifles knows why this was done but it sure seems odd to me that the smoking gun command or directive that authorized this to be done still hasn't surfaced. It was so pervasively done that one would presume a document or order or an acknowledgement order out of McArthurs command will eventually surface to bring some closure to this question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Quigley



Joined: Sep 21 2003
Posts: 1
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2003 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Friends,

I have been thinking about the mums on rifles in my collection, and my time in Tokyo during the occupation as an Army brat.

Each rifle in my collection that has clear documentation as a capture piece has an intact mum. The school pieces have the mums over struck with small zeros. One of the Concentric Circle receivers looks as if the mum got removed in a lathe.
The rest of the rifles have mums slightly touched by the grind stone, ground out, crossed through, or cross hatched with chisel marks. These marks suggest an order to deface the mum in any way available.

It makes no sense to me that any US order to remove the mum would be so fully carried out if we cannot document that order today.

Let me suggest an alternate explanation. I consider this a hypothesis to get rejected by those more knowledgeable than I.

At the end of the war, the transfer to the occupation government was remarkable in its cooperation from the Japanese. The Japanese continued most of their standard practices. The occupation forces were treated as a new, interim government, not a conquering culture. I recall that as teenagers, we were expected to honor the Japanese culture, not "diss" it.
I suggest that the military system acknowledged the governmental change (Imperial Japan to Occupied Japan) by removal of the old military mark, the mum.
The new governmental mark had yet to emerge, but when the rifles got taken into the old system, the mum got removed. If the rifles came into an area with power and grinding wheels, then ground; if neither power nor grinder, then chiseled.
We see various markings on non-Japanese rifles denoting acceptance into the system. We know that the Japanese army removed mums for rifles released from active service, so why not mum removal for rifles when the army was removed from service?

Any thoughts?

Quigley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
kfields



Joined: Aug 22 2003
Posts: 15

PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2003 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"It makes no sense to me that any US order to remove the mum would be so fully carried out if we cannot document that order today. "

I agree with the statement to a point. Funny a document hasn't been found yet. However since the Japanese were under the command of the Americans and since the Japanese no longer had control of the arsenals of weapons (especially after the larger introduction of American troops sometime after September 10th or so), can one assume that if the Japanese had wanted to formally take the rifles out of service by defacement of the Mum, they would have to have asked? If so, there should be some order issued by the Americans authorizing this action to occur. Perhaps something even on a division or lower level directing weapons to be destroyed or set aside for souvenirs after being ground. On the other hand, is it possible the orders were issued by Japanese commanders sometime after the cessation of hostilities but before the large scale introduction of U.S. troops into previously held Japanese territory about September 10? Perhaps that can help to explain the inability to find any U.S. orders and the somewhat hurried and crude grinding and hacking away at the mum. Just a thought.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CW
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Sep 25, 2003 9:16 am    Post subject: Struck/Defaced Mums Reply with quote

I'm not sure how many of you read "1000 Days in Siberia", but I was suprised that the author made no mention of defacing mums when they surrendered their rifles to the Soviets. They simply pitched their rifles on a pile and surrendered. I know the book is light on details, but I would think the author would remember something so strongly symbolic like defacing a mum as worthy enough to mention.
-Chris
Back to top
Eloldehombre1
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:10 am    Post subject: Mum defacement Reply with quote

There are at least two reports in B'ZAI over the years by former Japanese soldiers on mum defacement. One, reported by Gary Nila and Ken Radman was of a conversation they had with a former IJA vet at the Great Western. As I remember he told them on surrendering the Emporer's symbol was to be 'removed' Another was in answer to a question on a missisng metal star from a cap. The former soldier who answered noted that caps did not have metal stars and mums were defaced before the rifles were surrendered. There may be a third that had to do with the writer being at an aairfield in ??? When the surrender was announced the order was given to deface the Emporer's symbol.

My belief (and only my belief) is that during the surrender conferences (remembeer the two green-painted Bettys with white crosses on the wings?) the Japanese requested that the chrysanthemum be removed from equi;ment turned over to the Americans. Since it was no skin off our backsides and we wanted to get along with the Japanese as well as possible the request was Oked. Perhaps orders stayed verbal rather than written since someone was afraid that the military could be acquised of 'bowing' to the enemys wishes if a writen order on mum removal fell into thw wrong hands. Far fetched? Yes, but...???
Back to top
kfields



Joined: Aug 22 2003
Posts: 15

PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you think the mum defacement occurred prior to the Americans taking control of the arsenals and weapons turn-ins or afterwards? Do you think large scale mum defacement occurred after the Americans took control? If prior to the Americans taking control, wouldn't that put the mum defacement prior to the surrender of units outside of the home islands and prior to the introduction of large amounts of U.S. troops into the home islands, sometime before Sept 10-12?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
gwsiii



Joined: Aug 21 2003
Posts: 2228
Location: Hayden, AL

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2003 8:32 am    Post subject: Mums Reply with quote

This subject is one of the more interesting ones surrounding Japanese Rifles. These are my observations and guesses, which generate some more questions:

Prior to the end of WWII, most surplus rifles for export had mums overstruck or defaced in some way to be indentified for non-Japanese Military Use. Does this mesh with everyone elses observations?

I have seen Muratas, T30s, T38s, T99 Long and Shorts with overstruck mums that are not CC markings. I haven't seen enough T35s to make an observation.

Many early school marked T38s have had the mums thoroughly removed or been overstamped prior/post to reworking for issue to schools. I seldom see a full mummed, reworked school marked gun.

We don't know much about double circle markings (CC rifles), we accept that they:
(1) Were not for Military use.
(2) Have been found on obsolete Muratas and T30s, and on what appear to be special production T38 Long Rifles, T99 Short rifles that do not appear to be obsolete. I don't know if any have been reported on Type 35s.
(3) On the special production T38s and 99s, they are frequently found with the mum ground, and overstamped with the CC mark, which is sometimes found to have been ground at or off as well.

How many true Japanese Naval marked rifles (beyond reproach) are truly mummed and matching?

I have a few rifles with struck, filed, bashed, hammered, poked, and prodded mums that were reportedly picked up in the field that way.

While this isn't much to go on, it makes me lean towards a Japanese Army 'Standard' prior to late 1945, when the Japanese Gov't and Military were in full control. Therefore there might be little or no mention of this practice in war era documents and such. I'm sure, somewhere there is mention of this. Our government has 'procedures' for everything, and I'm sure, somewhere, there is a procedure for souvenirs, we just haven't found it yet. I think it has ties to a previous guidelines already in place by the Japanese for removing a weapon from Japanese Military Service for export or some sort of non-military use.

There are always exceptions to the rule, I have a Type 35 imported from Finland that has a perfect Chrysanthemum and no indication it was exported from Japan, so the questions and theorizing will continue. Just my thoughts, Trey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Japanese Militaria at Castle-Thunder.com Forum -> Japanese Weapons and Militaria All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group