Osafune Kanemitsu Possible 2nd or 3rd Gen

[Utopianarian]

Trying to gather as much information as possible to determine the generation of Kanemitsu of Osafune. Signed and dated Bishu Osafune Kanemitsu, first character on date damaged but may be Oei 2. Measurements: Nagasa 58cm, Nakago 16.5, Moto-haba 2.9cm, Saki-haba 2.1cm, Moto- kasane 0.8cm, saki-kasane 0.6cm, Kissaki 3.3cm, Sori 1.3cm, with funbari, niku, and ubu. 1 mekugi-Ana. Flame tipped boshi. Semi-hada when reflected in right light angle appears like cicadas wing structure that features characteristic veins. Hamon based in nioi, saguha with sunagashi with much sweeping areas with tiny elements of occasional eyes or swirls at top of hamon. A lot of oxidation and hard to make out in most areas due to condition. Iori mune. Signature high sabi-giwa chiseled in deep strokes. Heavy dark patina on nakago. I know there is controversy on the 1st and 2nd generation debate. This is prob later generation what do you think.

Edited June 25, 2021 by Utopianarian
Added info

[Utopianarian]

More pics

[Utopianarian]

Very pronounced midare utsuri also present along entire length of sword very well done and clear. Also bright nioiguchi line

Edited June 25, 2021 by Utopianarian
Additional data

[Ray Singer]

Unfortunately I think it is likely this is gimei. 

[Utopianarian]

It’s hard to capture in pics but I got this pic from online that best shows hada and hamon generally present

[Utopianarian]

Thank you Ray, yes signature does look suspect but they did it on a sword that has many features very very similar to Kanemitsu. They were either very knowledgeable or randomly picked the perfect fit to do a gimei on which would be very remarkable 

[Utopianarian]

I was always told look at sword/features first then signature 

[Ray Singer]

No offense intended towards your sword, but even if the workmanship were identical to authentic examples I don't think you can overlook that this is mei is a tremendous departure from the way that he signed his works. 

[Ray Singer]

As your sword appears to be ubu, I would both compare with ubu Kanemitsu and also look into the possibility of this being a much later work. (Ie. the sugata looks Shinto) 

[Utopianarian]

Yes I agree 100%. I have read that there are many different types of mei with Kanemitsu signatures but I agree I have seen none similar to this one and that is my thought as well that signature doesn’t match known examples 

[Utopianarian]

I disagree with Shinto. The shinogi ji has fine mokume pattern not masame like in most Shinto work

[Utopianarian]

I know there are cases of utsuri in Shinto work but from what I read quite rare

[Ray Singer]

You can have tsukare-utsuri, and utsuri-like effect seen in tired swords, from any time period.

[Toryu2020]

George -

Remember they don't put gimei on poor swords generally and it you want to gussy up a mumei blade it makes sense (cents) to put a Bizen name on a Bizen sword - stick with the workmanship as has been said ignore this signature...

-t

[Utopianarian]

Here is the best pics I can get of the utsuri. It is much more clear and bright in hand. Not tired blade. Still much meat and niku

[Utopianarian]

More pics utsuri

[Utopianarian]

Thomas yes you are right. Thank you for the info. I will ignore signature and focus more on the blade

[NewB]

While I am no expert comparable to the folks that have chimed in already but - to me it looks a bit odd at a first glance. Signatures even by the illiterate smiths of the era show a bit more 'character' in the art of chiseling of the nakago should we say. Of course Many exceptions to my statement however at the first glance I mentioned, I feel that something is off. 

 

I agree with Ray Singer that tired blades exhibit utsuri however yours is too thick to be tired IMHO. So be it as it may your best guess is to send it off to Japan (not sure whether to do it with this signature) since NTHK shinsa won't happen in SF this year (😪)

 

 

John

[Jacques D.]

As the sugata don't match the first generation (shinogi zukuri wakizashi didn't exist at that time), we can eliminate him. The nihonto meikan lists 4 others Kanemitsu, all are low ranked smiths. 

 

George, don't believe that that kind of pictures are useful. It's already difficult to judge an unpolished blade (even polished) when you have it in hands; so, based on a few bad pictures it's divinatory art, nothing else.

[Hoshi]

Afraid it is gimei. I think shinto, kanbun period likely. I am doubtful if this is utsuri, it appears too bright on the photos. It certainly isn't Bizen Osafune midare Utsuri. I can barely take photos of Utsuri on a mint Osafune school sword however hard I try personally, and certainly not at the top-down angle. I think it is a polishing effect, similar to the ones you see on Yahoo JP! once and a while. 

 

 

[Ray Singer]

4 hours ago, Valric said:

I think shinto, kanbun period likely.

 

Agreed, as said above. This really is a textbook sugata of an ubu Shinto blade. 

[Utopianarian]

I will definitely consider that. The fact that also it is an ubu wakizashi is telling. Especially the fact that I bought it on eBay for $600 I assumed that it was gimei. The tiredness or polishing effect does run the length of the blade and can be viewed directly overhead it is bright and sparkles and quite clear. It is very hard to capture that effect in a picture. I will definitely consider all points of view.

[Jacques D.]

No Bizen Kanemitsu in Shinto times. I tend to think of a kazu-uchimono.

[Ray Singer]

To clarify Jacques, are you saying that this is an authentic inscription of a late Muromachi Sue-Bizen Kanemitsu? The date on the nakago appears to read Oei 2 (1395). The inscription is unfortunately entirely fanciful. 

[Utopianarian]

If that’s the case then the smith probably got fired for wasting way too much time on this blade 

[Utopianarian]

I agree on the inscription definitely wishful thinking on that

[Utopianarian]

The forging doesn’t appear like a bundle sword. I have one and it’s roughly forged

[Utopianarian]

I don’t think this sword is much but definitely not kazu-uchimono. 

[Jacques D.]

On 6/26/2021 at 5:52 PM, Ray Singer said:

To clarify Jacques, are you saying that this is an authentic inscription of a late Muromachi Sue-Bizen Kanemitsu? The date on the nakago appears to read Oei 2 (1395). The inscription is unfortunately entirely fanciful. 

 

As I don't have any oshigata of these smiths as reference I can't exclude the fact that the signature is valid. I always base my opinion on factual information, not on a simple opinion.

[Utopianarian]

Thank you for that Jacques. You guys have an amazing amount of reference material that one cannot easily find online along with much knowledge to interpret what you are looking at. I don’t have a lot of confidence in this blade but none the less worth studying and has some interesting characteristics. The part that seems odd is the placement of where the date is signed is odd which was discussed