Kanemitsu Tanto

[JonP]

Recently I purchase this beautiful piece. I wonder if anyone out there might know which of the Kanemitsu line this belongs to. I can attest to its sharpness, the stitches in my hand come out in a few more days. {had to catch it, couldn't let it drop on the floor}. Here is a discription.

Known as a "Yori Doshi" this style of Tanto was constructed with an unusually THICK & ROBUST blade designed to be able to PIERCE Samurai armour

 

ANTIQUE hand forged "layered & folded" blade produced Circa 1450 - 1550

 

Blade signed by maker Kanemitsu

 

There are only 13 sword makers recorded that utilised this signature, several can be eliminated as working too early, & several for being long after manufacture

 

Shirasaya inscription reads "Noshu Ju Kanemitsu" (Kanemitsu living in Mino province)

 

The blade shows unmistakeable Mino manufacture traits in the "Taka no Ha Yasuremei" (Swordsmith's signature file-mark pattern) While incredibly feint, after 500 yrs, they can be still positively identified

 

The blade shows VERY STRONG tempering clearly throughout most of its length & exhibits a very RARE trait "Utsuri" (temperline shadow reflection) Found ONLY when a sword is tempered by heating & quenching at the OPTIMUM temperature

 

Only the most experienced and SKILLED sword makers were able to produce Utsuri in their blades. The ability to do so "at will" was LOST around the 17th Century, & only re-gained in 1972 by Yoshindo Yoshihara (elevated to the status of "living national treasure" soon afterwards)

 

There are "Hadaware" (minor forging flaws) in the form of poorly adhered welds after MANY sharpening & polishings throughout it's working life. 95% of ALL Koto swords display Hadaware they are little detraction to knowledgable collectors of KOTO era swords.

 

Blade length 8.5" along back edge & MASSIVE 7.75 mm thick @ Habakimoto (IE as THICK as any Katana !)

 

Tang is "Ubu" (As made 500 years ago)

 

Jon

[JonP]

Here are 2 more.

Jon

[Brian]

Jon,

 

I can't pin down which Kanemitsu made your blade, but looks like a nice yoroi doshi...very similar to my mumei one. Mine is still a hefty 11mm thick though, and this makes them very forward heavy when out of the tsuka, and they do tend to want to nosedive when handling them. Have to be very careful when handling them with their smaller nakago, as you have already discovered :D

I still need to date mine, and will try and post some pics soon.

 

Regards,

Brian

[Mike]

Hard to the mei from the photo, but I have very similar one, though width at hamachi is 10mm. It dates to ca 1500, and has nijimei, the first kanji is Yoshi and on the second one the mekugi ana is punched I still have to researched it. Mike

[JonP]

Hi Mike, what part of I srael do you live in? I visited there and worked on Kibbtuz (sp) Dorot back in 81. A wonderful gentleman, German survivor, taught me to drive a tractor, and the value of a good work ethic. Loved the country, particularly old Jerusalem. I learned how to Scuba in Eilat. Great memories. Would be good to see pics of your tanto if you get the chance.

 

Jon

[Mike]

Hi Jon, Thanks for your kind words. I live near Tel-Aviv and Iam glad you have great memories from Israel, we have many greatplaces here . Here is a photo of my yoroi-doshi. Mike

[JonP]

Very nice Mike. Sadly my kissaki has been sharpened some years ago and that messed the old polish on the boshi a bit. At least it made the tanto affordable for me.

Be safe.

Jon

[Ed]

Jon,

Hawley's lists a number on "Kanemitsu", as you know. Unfortunately there is not a lot of information beyond the first two generations.

 

There is not much information to gather from the photos of the blade itself, as they are not clear enough. The shirasaya states, Noshu seki ju kanemitsu, but really is not a reliable source of info.

 

Looking only at the mei it is definitely not the shodai's "kane" and is styled after the Nidai. However, there are several points which give me cause for concern. Basically the entire "kane" character looks wrong. The first point is placement of the mei. Comparing it to oshigata of the first two generations, the placement does not look right. Next are the strokes of the "Kane" kanji. The top stroke looks weak but could be due to deterioration. The two dots beside this stroke on yours are at 9 o'clock, whereas the nidai cut these at 7-8 O'clock. The box on yours is to square and neither of the first two cut the far left vertical stroke on the box as your displays. The small "legs" at the bottom on yours are pointed down, whereas on the known good example they are pointed up.

 

Please note I am not implying that yours is gimei, simply that it doesn't look to be either of the first two generations of Kanemitsu (I hope I am wrong). Also, it may well be a good example of a later Kanemitsu. Only submission to shinsa will give you a reliable opinion. My opinion is merely based on my own observations, and is likely worth about as much as I am charging for it.

[JonP]

Thanks for your thoughts. I guess to me when I look at the blades I own or would like to own, my first requirement is that they are real and made by a skilled craftsman. The workmanship on the tanto is beautiful no matter who made it. I have no interest in reproductions, the real fascination is in what happened after they were made. Who owned them, what battles did get wielded in, was history made by those using them. These pieces we all collect and admire were made for a purpose and it wasn't for hanging on a wall. So to me the real value would be to find out what happened with them, sadly the chances of that are very slim. Though for sure somewhere in Japan the descendants of the users of these weapons go about their lives.

I enjoy looking at the skillful artwork of the design but I'd love it if they could tell me their stories.

Jon