The Shintō era was largely invented in Kyōto: Umetada Myōju’s workshop trained the movement, Horikawa Kunihiro raised a generation, and the Hon’ami appraisers, who held no forge, governed the meaning of famous blades.
NihontoWatchNihontoWatchThis blade was signed by Tango no Kami Kanemichi(丹後守兼道). We believe it was forged by second-gen Kanemichi, judging from its characteristics and signature. The second-gen Kanemichi mainly worked in Osaka during the early Edo period(Late 17th century). He was especially active in sword-forging during 1681-1688. There is also the record of him living in Edo city and Harima province(Hyogo prefecture) in his career. The first-gen Tango no Kami Kanemichi (丹後守兼道) was the second son of the first-gen Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi(丹波守吉道). Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi belonged to Kyoto Mishina school. Mishina school’s founder was originally from Mino province, exclusively forging blades for Shingen Takeda, a famous feudal lord. Later on, he moved to Kyoto by bringing his four sons and founded his school in Kyoto. Yoshimichi was one of his sons. The first-gen Yoshimichi was known as Kyoto Gokaji(京都五鍛冶), five prestigious swordsmiths forging in Kyoto in the early Edo period. The first-gen Kanemichi received the title of Tango no Kami in the second year of Kanei(1625) and moved to Osaka. He founded Osaka Mishina school and flourished for generations during the Edo period. We believe the son of the first-gen Kanemichi also forged this blade in Osaka in the early Edo period. The second-gen also mastered excellent craftsmanship from his father. The blades forged by the second-gen Kanemichi are categorized as Osaka Shinto. Shinto is Japanese Sword terminology that refers to the swords forged during 1596-1781. The blades made in the Osaka area during this period are called Osaka Shinto. There are many famous swordsmiths in this Osaka Shinto era. After Hideyoshi Toyotomi built Osaka castle, Osaka city flourished as a castle town and became the business center. Many swordsmiths moved to Osaka to look for better opportunities. They not only forged swords for those Samurai who lived in Osaka but also for feudal lords nationwide. One of the most notable characteristics of Osaka Shinto is its beauty in Jigane. Jigane is a visible steel surface pattern created by folding and hammering during the forging process), which made it possible by the location of Osaka. Osaka had close access to the Tamahagane(special carbon steel to make Japanese swords) production sites. The swordsmiths residing in Osaka were able to get high-quality carbon steel from these sites. *Please keep in mind that we can ship this sword to you in next mid February at earliest(2022) because we are asking the board of education to reissue a registration paper for this Japanese sword due to the aging of its original registration paper. Fuchi-Kashira Small dot-like patterns such as sand or pebbles are applied throughout this Fuchi Kashira. Its surface is worn down in places due to aging, and it shows how long time passed since it was made. There are some line sculptures that draw gentle curves; it seems these lines describe the movement of the waves. Although this Fuchi Kshira does not have a particularly gorgeous look, it is a work in which the joy of design is seen in the details. Tsuka and Menuki It is challenging to judge what the motif is of this Menuki. Seeing from the gaps of the Tsukamaki thread, we guess it might be bow and quiver. The bow and arrow were once one of the primary weapons for Samurais. So, we imagine that this motif reminded them of battlefields. In addition, as an arrow flies straight forward, Samurais regarded its figure as brave. That is also why they appreciated this design. Based on this deep relationship between the arrow and the Samurai culture, it is possible that this weapon motif was incorporated as a design for sword mountings. Tsuba and Habaki Yotsu-Mokkou-shaped Tsuba that has Kozuka and Kougai holes. Mokkou-shape, it is said its origin is a shape of eggs. When a quince (it is written as 木瓜 in Japanese) is cut into round slices, its cross-section looks similar to this shape; therefore, it was named Mokkougata Tsuba. Yotsu-Mokkougata (四ツ木瓜形, a combination of four Mokkou shapes) Tsuba is often seen as this Tsuba is categorized. This Tsuba has a symmetrical design. Line and dot patterns are engraved with the openwork and are arranged evenly. We would say it is a well-proportioned design. Instead of gorgeous decoration such as gold or silver inlay, we hope you will enjoy the fun of carving and the material’s texture. This Tsuba matches well when it is put into the handle. Authentication Paper They authenticated the blade on July 7th in the 32th year of Showa era(1957). They appraised it as Tokubetsu Kicho Token and Tokubetsu Kicho Kodogu, an old form of certificate. Registration Number The Board of Aichi in Tochigi prefecture issued a registration paper for this sword .
Offered by Samurai Museum
This piece has sold
Get an email when a new Mishina Kanemichi piece hits the market.
Mishina school, Osaka (Tango-no-kami Kanemichi line, second generation) · Settsu · around 1681-1704
Fujishiro Chu-jo saku · Tōken Taikan top 76%
2 pieces on the market now
A katana in the forty-first Jūyō session carries the date Genroku 14, the year 1701, cut on the reverse of the nakago beneath a bold five-character signature, Tango-no-kami Kanemichi, and it is one of the very few year-dated blades by which his active span can be fixed at all. This is the second-generation Tango-no-kami Kanemichi, called Kiheiji, who worked at Ōsaka about the Genroku and Hōei years and is recorded as having forged in Edo as well. The published sources transmit him as the son of the first Tango-no-kami Kanemichi, in the received account the second son of the Kyōto second-generation Tanba-no-kami Yoshimichi, and so a branch of the Mishina school that Kanemichi the Mino-Seki smith carried into Kyōto. The first Tango-no-kami, named Mishina Kihei and signing at first as Naomichi, settled in Ōsaka and was known for the sudare-ba and the chōji-tinged gunome that were the family specialty. His son took a deliberately different course, and that divergence is the spine of his identity on the blade.
Where the first generation tempered the sudare-ba and the chōji-laden gunome that the published sources call the house specialty, the second cast off the chōji and turned to a flamboyant tōran-style large gunome that mirrors the Ōsaka shintō fashion of his day. His most particular tell is constructive rather than decorative. Across the upper and lower halves of the ha he forges gunome in alternating linked sequences, two joined and then three joined, repeating one against the other so that the tōran gathers its variety from the pattern itself. Of one such blade the published sources write that 「互の目の二つ連れた刃と三つ連れた刃とが相互に交じる点に大きな特色が見られる」, that the great distinguishing feature lies precisely in this mutual mixing of two-joined and three-joined gunome, and of his matched daishō, on which the long and short blades reverse the order of the joined groups, that the variation shows 「彼の工夫の跡」, the trace of his own contrivance. Ashi enter thickly into this temper, the nioi runs deep, the nie lies thick and at times coarse, sunagashi and kinsuji play through it, tobiyaki appear with the mune tempered, and the nioiguchi stays bright.
The jigane beneath this showy temper is quiet and clean, the true Ōsaka steel. He forges a tightly gathered ko-itame in which the ji-nie settles dust-fine and chikei enter finely, the surface closing rather than standing, a jigane that distinguishes the second generation from the more standing itame of the older Mino-rooted Mishina work. Over it the temper opens always from a straight yakidashi at the machi, the Ōsaka shintō base from which both his manners rise, before it widens into the tōran. The bōshi answers the ha: it comes to a ko-maru, returns rather deeply, and brushes into hakikake, with a faint pointed tendency on the wider blades. The horimono, where present, are a plain bōhi run to a rounded finish with an accompanying soebi. The sugata is heavy and forceful in the Genroku taste, wide in the mihaba, thick in the kasane, with a sense of funbari, the curve deep and the kissaki extended, a build the published sources note recurs among smiths of the Jōkyō and Genroku years.
The published sources draw his work into two registers. The principal one is the tōran-style large gunome just described, the manner in which they find this smith's distinctive hand and which they tie directly to the contemporary Ōsaka taste. The second is quieter and, they are careful to note, one the first generation did not leave: a deep-nioi suguha. Here the straight yakidashi opens into a broadly tempered suguha base, shallowly notare, ashi entering vigorously, the nioi deep, the nie thick with some coarse grains, the upper half showing a two-stepped futasuji-fu effect, kinsuji and sunagashi running well. Of a blade in this register the published sources write that it 「真改風の作柄をあらわしている」, that it shows a workmanship in the manner of Shinkai, and the comparison is exact: it is the deep-nioi, thickly nie-laden straight temper of Inoue Shinkai, the great Ōsaka master, that this calmer face most nearly approaches. The two registers are not a chronology but a range, the same Ōsaka hand stated once as spectacle and once as restraint.
What places him is the careful distinction the published sources draw between the two generations, a distinction that is itself the kantei. The first Tango-no-kami cut a chrysanthemum crest and the character ichi below the machi on much of his work and leaned to the family sudare-ba and chōji-tinged gunome; the second carries neither crest nor character and turns instead to the deep-nioi suguha and the tōran-style large gunome that reflect the fashion of his time. His distinction is therefore best drawn by his own grounded traits rather than by his father's: the alternating joined-gunome tōran, the bright deep-nioi temper read as Shinkai's, the clean dust-fine ko-itame and the straight Ōsaka yakidashi set him apart within the Mishina line and within his own family, and of his large-gunome work the published sources say plainly that 「この工の特徴」, this smith's characteristic, is to be read in the very shape of those linked gunome. He stands as a competent and individual second generation, faithful to the Ōsaka idiom of his day while working a constructive variation that is recognizably his own.
Kanemichi is rated Chū-jō saku in the Fujishiro ranking, and five of his blades hold the rank of Jūyō-Tōken, all of them signed, with no National Treasure or Important Cultural Property among them; his is the record of a sound and individual Ōsaka shintō master rather than a great national name. The body that survives in this designated tier is small and wholly signed, which for a shintō smith is itself a documentary virtue, the name fixed rather than appraised. One of his katana descends from the Aoyama house, the wardens of Ōsaka castle, and the published sources, calling it 「大坂城代青山家伝来の一口」, note that long blades of just this kind are repeatedly met among that house's old swords and were likely forged to its order, a thread of daimyō provenance that ties his work to the city he served. A matched daishō of his also survives, the published sources calling such a pair from the second generation extremely rare and of documentary value. For a collector his work sits among the more attainable of the Ōsaka shintō masters: most of his designated blades rest in the Jūyō tier rather than locked away as patrimony, and a signed, dated example such as the Genroku 14 katana, which fixes both the hand and the year, is the rarer and more desirable encounter, coming to light from time to time and rewarding patience.
Where Kanemichi stands among comparable artisans: across all of nihontō, and within tradition, era, and period. The tiers (Foremost · Leading · Major · Notable) weigh official designations from the NBTHK and Japan's Agency for Cultural Affairs, together with historical honors of lasting repute such as the Sansaku and Meibutsu-chō.
Select a lens to see how it's measured.
Years he was demonstrably active, proven by signed-and-dated blades
Shinto · Yamashiro
55 pieces on the market now
The Mishina school (三品), one of the two dominant smithing groups of early Edo Kyoto beside the Horikawa, grew from the late-Mino workshop of Kanemichi of Seki, whose dated blades run through the Tenbun, Eiroku, and Tenshō eras. During the closing decades of the sixteenth century Kanemichi came up to the capital with his four sons and settled at Nishinotōin Ebisugawa, where the eldest, Iga no Kami Kinmichi, is recorded as having greatly raised the name of the line. The brothers, Kinmichi together with Izumi no Kami Rai Kinmichi, Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi, and Etchū no Kami Masatoshi, became known collectively as the Sanpin (三品) makers, and the published sources count Kinmichi head of the Kyō go-kaji, the five Kyoto smiths. From the second generation the house held a hereditary right to recommend smiths to the court for their titles and added that by-line to its signatures. The name continued under the same appellation to the end of the Tokugawa period, throwing off branches that included the Tango no Kami line working at Ōsaka into the Genroku years, though the published record consistently holds the founding generation the most outstanding of the line. Beneath every branch lies a shared vocabulary carried up from Mino-Seki. The jigane is the constant: an itame mixed with mokume that flows into nagare-hada and tends toward masame near the mune, the grain standing, with thick fine ji-nie and frequent chikei. Over it the Mino-derived gunome and togariba are refined toward a Kyoto manner, the nie strong and at times coarse, gathering unevenly, kinsuji and vigorous striped sunagashi running throughout. Two tells bind the house. The first is the Mishina bōshi, a notare or midare run-in pointed at the tip and swept with vigorous hakikake, the form Masatoshi shows at its clearest, described as if drawn from a picture. The second is sudareba, the bamboo-blind temper in which layered sunagashi and yubashiri stripe into parallel bands; Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi devised it, and the first-generation hand keeps it a free, semi-cursive disorder where his heirs would regularize it into a fixed lattice.
The lines diverge from that common ground. Kinmichi and his younger brother Masatoshi both excelled in a Shizu manner, the large midare of Mino grafted onto Sōshū nie, with Masatoshi the most versatile, ranging across Shizu, Mino sanbon-sugi, Yamato suguha, and Sōshū hitatsura. The later Ōsaka Tanba branch held to the sudareba alone, opening from a straight yakidashi, while the second Tango no Kami Kanemichi cast off the family chōji for a flamboyant tōran-style large gunome in alternating two-joined and three-joined groups, and a deep-nioi suguha read in the manner of Inoue Shinkai. To kantei Mishina is to read these two house marks first. The pointed, hakikake-swept bōshi and the striped sudareba, set over a standing itame that flows to masame, place a blade within the line before any signature is weighed; the sunagashi, far heavier than on a Bizen ji, is the very material from which the temper is built. Within the house the founding generation sets the standard. Fujishiro grades Kinmichi and Masatoshi Jō-jō saku, the Ōsaka Tanba shodai Jō-saku, and the second Tango no Kami Chū-jō saku, the sources judging the later Kyoto and Ōsaka generations markedly inferior to the founders as the manner thinned toward a single uniform pattern. Provenance on record runs through samurai and collector hands rather than great museums: a Kinmichi katana among the cherished swords of Tani Tateki, a Yoshimichi katana made for Naitō Kuroemon and another now in the Kyoto National Museum, Masatoshi blades passing through Oda Urakusai and the Imperial household, and a second Tango no Kami katana descending from the Aoyama wardens of Ōsaka castle. The brothers' blades are signed and knowable, dated examples rare, so the manner of the mei joins the workmanship in placing them; for the Ōsaka and Kyoto branches the cut of the character 守 separates one hand from the next. Most designated work is held rather than traded, so a signed founding-generation Mishina blade comes to light only from time to time, and with it the temper in which one of the most recognizable hamon of the Shintō era was first being worked out. Learn more →
| Smith | Era | Designated |
|---|---|---|
| Kinmichi金道 | 1596-1615 | 25 |
| Yoshimichi吉道 | 1596-1615 | 36 |
| Masatoshi正俊 | 1596-1615 | 29 |
| Kanemichi兼道 | 1681-1704 | 5 |
| Eisen来栄泉 | 1673-1688 | 3 |
Kyōto: the revival workshop
The Shintō era was largely invented in Kyōto: Umetada Myōju’s workshop trained the movement, Horikawa Kunihiro raised a generation, and the Hon’ami appraisers, who held no forge, governed the meaning of famous blades.
This work carries older NBTHK “Kichō”-era papers, which the NBTHK no longer issues and largely disavows today. To confirm the attribution, submission to an official Japanese examination body (such as the NBTHK or NTHK) for modern certification could be considered.
Returns/exchanges limited to defects caused by shipping (except willful misconduct or gross negligence by the company); customers must contact within 72 hours of receiving the product.