Bizen Kanemitsu (備前兼光)


Kanemitsu was born into a completely unique family of smiths, and was one of the so-called Masamune no Jittetsu, Sōden-Bizen style founder.

Bizen Osafune Kanemitsu (備前長船兼光) was born into a completely unique family of smiths, and, certainly, hardly any one else can boast of such a prestigious smithing ancestry. His father, Kagemitsu (景光), was a grand master of the Bizen Osafune School, who produced 3 works of Kokuhō status and 15 works of Jūyō Bunkazai status. Kagemitsu’s father was Nagamitsu (長光), who created 6 Kokuhō works and 29 Jūyō Bunkazai works. Nagamitsu, in turn, was the eldest son of the Bizen Osafune School’s founder, Mitsutada (光忠), who forged 3 Kokuhō works and 15 Jūyō Bunkazai works. It is sufficient to say that Mitsutada was especially revered by Oda Nobunaga, the famous military leader, who, according to various chronicles, had 25 of Mitsutada’s swords in his own collection.

The Edo-era manuscript Kotō Meizukushi Taizen states that during the Gen’ō era (元応, 1319–1321), Kanemitsu was in his 42nd year. The master was born in the 1st year of the Kōan era (弘安, 1278) and died in his 83rd year in the 5th year of the Enbun era (延文, 1360). In the 2nd year of the Gen’ō era (1320), he became, according to the same book, Masamune’s disciple (he was one of the so-called Masamune no Jittetsu). Kanemitsu was Kagemitsu’s eldest son and heir. At birth, he was given the name Saemon (no) Jō (左衛門尉). He had a younger brother, Yoshimitsu (義光), who was born in the 4th year of the Kōan era (弘安, 1281) and died in his 75th year in the 4th year of the Bunna era (文和, 1355). As for Kagemitsu, the same manuscript determines his lifetime from the 3rd year of the Kenchō era (建長, 1251) to the 2nd year of the Genkō era (元享, 1322). Obviously, the information in the Kotō Meizukushi Taizen is not always reliable and sometimes contains inaccuracies, errors, and inconsistencies, but it should be considered when we determine the origin of a smith. In the case of Kanemitsu, it provides absolutely consistent and relevant information that makes it possible for us to construct a corresponding genealogical line and offer some factual data for an analysis of the following theories.

Thus, representatives of the main line of the Kanemitsu clan are the grand masters who founded one of the most esteemed smithing schools in Japan—that of Bizen Osafune, which existed for a fairly long time. A lot of Osafune Kanemitsu’s works have survived until modern times—more than of the other “Masamune no Jittetsu” members. Among these pieces of smithing art are many signed and dated swords. The following are some of Kanemitsu’s earliest dated works:

- Tantō, dated the 3rd month of the 1st year of Genkō (元享, 1321)—Jūyō No. 52; 

- Ken, dated the 3rd year (the month number is illegible) of Genkō (元享, 1323)—Jūyō No. 47;

- Tantō, dated the 2nd month of the 1st year of Shōkyō (正慶, 1332)—Jūyō Bijutsuhin No. 676, 

- Nakago oshigata of a lost tantō, Kōzan Oshigata, Volume 坤, p. 67/2, dated the 7th month of the 1st year of Kareki (嘉暦, 1326). 

Summarizing these data, we can say that the early period of the master’s creativity fell at the end of the Kamakura period.

<.....> Kanemitsu’s surviving later works with dates of manufacture include:

- A wakizashi, dated the 8th month of the 5th year of Jōji (貞治, 1366)—Jūyō No. 33;

- A tantō, of which a nakago oshigata can be found in the Kōzan Oshigata, Volume 坤, p. 41/1, dated the 2nd month of the 7th year of Jōji (貞治, 1368).

Some sources also mention a sword dated the 7th year of the Ōan era (応安, 1374), with no more detailed information preserved. Nevertheless, these data are sufficient to determine the end of Kanemitsu’s creative output as the last part of the second third of the Nanbokuchō period. In this way, the total duration of the master’s smithing career is determined to be a 50-year period. This is not the only extended creative career in the history of Japanese smithing art, but it is one of the longest, which makes it rather controversial and questionable.

At present, there are two basic theories regarding Kanemitsu’s period of creative activity: 

Theory No. 1 is supported mainly by modern experts, such as Dr. Honma Junji. The core of the theory is the alleged existence of two smithing generations signing as “Bizen Osafune Kanemitsu” or other variants of this signature. Early works (the 1st generation) that appeared at the end of the Kamakura period were similar to those by Kanemitsu’s father, Kagemitsu, and had a sugata typical for swords of the Kamakura period, as well as a kataochi-gunome hamon (片落ち互の目) based on nioi. Adherents of this theory refer to the 1st-generation smith as “Ō-Kanemitsu.” Sometimes for his designation they use the name “Kenmu-Kanemitsu” because the majority of these dated works refer to the Kenmu era (建武, 1334–1336). These works, for example, include Jūyō Nos. 17 and 18 swords, two Jūyō Bijutsuhin swords, and two Jūyō Bunkazai swords. 


Beginning from the period 1352–1356, Kanemitsu’s style seriously changed, and we must admit that those changes were significant. Most of the changes affected Kanemitsu’s sugata. This happened, most likely, under the influence of revised requirements for swords because the nature of warfare also underwent changes at that time. The master’s methods and techniques in forging also began to vary. This period is called the 2nd generation, and the master’s name is indicated as “Enbun-Kanemitsu,” because the Enbun era (延文, 1356–1361) was the period when this generation created the most works with dates inscribed. Tokubetsu Jūyō Nos. 5, 9, 13, 17, 20, and 24 and two Jūyō Bunkazai works can be considered examples of the 2nd generation. 

Dr. Honma acknowledged that all the old sources compiled in the Muromachi and Edo periods state that none of Kanemitsu’s disciples used his signature or even one of a similar type after he died. This contrasted with the practice of many other masters’ disciples who, when the master died, continued to sign works with his name, thus creating confusion about the length of that master’s period of creativity. Therefore, the doctor explained his adherence to this theory that there were two masters by giving a detailed analysis of the first master’s changed style and overly long period of creativity. Dr. Honma noted that Kanemitsu’s sugata, as well as the forging methods and techniques he applied, did experience changes. In addition, the general level of mastery of the 1st-generation master is considered to be higher than that of the 2nd one.

To complete the description of the theory about several generations of smiths known as Kanemitsu, we should quote the opinion of the Kōsei Kotō Meikan (校正古刀銘鑑), written by Hon’ami Nagane (本阿弥長根) in 1830. There, the author singles out three generations of the master:

- The 1st generation: from 1321 to 1352

- The 2nd generation: from 1356 to 1374 

- The 3rd generation: from 1394 to 1428

Theory No. 2 was supported mainly by the authors of the so-called old school, including Fujishiro Yoshio. It is described in great detail in his book Nihōn Tōkō Jiten, in the chapter on Kanemitsu. By the way, this is the largest chapter in this book dedicated to a particular smith. Fujishiro believed that it was impossible to say there were two generations of the smith, especially when basing this mainly on a change in his working style. In his opinion, the change in style did occur, but the style did not become as different as would the styles between a teacher and his disciple or between the first and second generations. In the case of Kanemitsu’s swords, Fujishiro believed that the master changed his style under the influence of new requirements imposed on swords, particularly on their shapes and sizes. The master simply followed the trends of the time.

As a confirmation of this opinion, it should be noted that in addition to standard-sized swords, Kanemitsu started forging tantō with sakizori (a wide blade with a thin kasane and curvature at the top of the blade) and tachi with a wide mihaba, as well as 78.8–84.8 cm nagamaki and 97.0–100.0 cm ōdachi. These massive blades were in demand by the soldiers of that time. For example, “Big Kanemitsu” katana (which has Jūyō Bunkazai status No. 525), in the possession of the Sano Museum, has very impressive dimensions: the nagasa equals 83.4 cm and the nakago nagasa equals 27.7 cm.

To justify the theory that there was only one generation of the master, Fujishiro gave an analysis of the change in style that occurred over time in how he signed his works. The point is that the common feature in Kanemitsu’s extant swords with signatures is how similar his style of signing his name is to his father’s (Kagemitsu’s). The master usually made his signature very skillfully and with a small kanji. The main differences in his writing technique are found on the master’s early works. In his early period, there was a significant change in how he wrote the lower part of the first “Kane” kanji. Approximately by the end of the Gentoku era (元徳, 1329–1331), when Kanemitsu wrote the lower part of the “Kane” kanji, he began to use a long parallel line and a slightly different formation for the four bottom lines. Later, there were no more significant changes in how he wrote the “Kane” kanji.

Figure 1: Examples of Kanemitsu’s signature during different stages of his creative activity. Nihōn Tōkō Jiten, Volume “Kotō”, p. 29.

<.....> Fujishiro’s theory seems preferable because when we analyze the question of Kanemitsu’s changing style, it is first necessary to divide the changes that occurred into two main types. It is important to remember that the sugata of his swords at the beginning of the Nanbokuchō period changed dramatically for a short period of time. Kanemitsu followed these new tendencies, and this was not his individual decision but a general trend in all smithing art of this era. The changes were dictated by the samurais’ demands. The requirements for changes affected all masters and all schools and, in fact, had nothing to do with their own tastes and preferences. Therefore, the changing sugata of Kanemitsu’s long swords cannot be regarded as an argument in favor of the “two generations” theory, because the changes were due to a general trend based on military demands. Regarding short swords, tantō and wakizashi, we can see the same trend that occurred with long swords. These types of swords by Kanemitsu, although they did not resemble Hiromitsu’s and Akihiro’s ko-wakizashi, underwent the above changes to become visibly elongated and slightly curved. Examples include the swords Jūyō No. 12 (1351), Jūyō No. 19 (1353), Jūyō No. 35 (1346 and 1352), and Tokubetsu Jūyō No. 13 (1356).

With the foregoing as background, we may conclude that Osafune Kanemitsu is most likely to have lived a long life, about 83 years, with a very long and fruitful period of creativity lasting more than 50 years. Perhaps, at the age of 42, he came to Sagami Province and became Masamune’s disciple in the last years of his teacher’s life. One of the oldest sources to state this is Kokon Wakan Banpō Zensho (1694). We can find information on Kanemitsu in Volume 11 (2) on p. 55/2.

Kanemitsu’s swords have two very distinct elements associated with his name, which are characteristic features of his work as a smith. The first of such elements is the previously mentioned “Kanemitsu Bōshi”, known by the terms “candle flame” and “candle wick”: Rōsoku-bōshi (蝋燭帽子) and rōsoku no shin (蝋燭の芯), respectively. The second element often present in the master’s works is the so-called semi-hada (蝉肌)—that is, elliptical sections on the itame-hada that have a slightly different angle of light reflection, which makes them noticeable. Their structure is similar to a cicada’s wings (this large insect has wings that feature characteristic veins).


The swords forged during the early period of Kanemitsu’s creative activity have the following features:

Sugata: Long swords have a large-enough sori, a narrow mihaba, and a kissaki of standard size (the pure characteristics of Bizen Osafune). Kanemitsu’s tachi have a high iori-mune, although some feature a mitsu-mune. The tantō are narrow and short, 27 cm at most, with uchizori (a weak inward curve) and even muzori (straight, without a sori)—an estimated timeline for when the sugata changed to a wide mihaba and ō-kissaki is 1345–1350.

Ji-hada: A dense mokume-hada with ji-utsuri or bō-utsuri

Hamon: Based on nioi; sometimes suguha mixed with ko-midare (and even, sometimes, kataochi-gunome), but mostly gunome, different from Mitsutada’s and Nagamitsu’s, in smoother waves. 

Bōshi: Mostly midare-komi with an easy togari and a deep kaeri, and sometimes ko-maru.

In works of the late Kanemitsu period, the strong influence of the Sōshū School resulted in the following features: 

Sugata: Long swords with a small sori; a wide mihaba, with a narrow kasane; a long kissaki; a fukura with a smaller angle of rounding. Wakizashi are almost never found—only single specimens. Tantō (ko-wakizashi) are predominantly long (about 30–35 cm), with a wide mihaba and a narrow kasane; most of them have a sori. Very often, the works of this period have horimono.

Jitetsu: The influence of the Sōshū School is detectable; itame-hada, slightly larger than traditional; there are midare-utsuri and bō-utsuri, as well as chikei

Hamon: Notare based on nie grains, mixed with a smooth gunome.

Bōshi: A specific form of midare-komi with a small kaeri, called “Kanemitsu Bōshi”; at the turning point of the bōshi tempering line, there are a lot of nioi grains that make the tip look like a candle flame.

<....> As for the signature of Kanemitsu, we should point out the information presented in one of the earliest sources, the Ōseki Shō (往昔抄, 1519), pp. 18–19. Regarding Kanemitsu’s signature, the source stipulates that the master signed his swords as “Bishū Osafune-jū Kanemitsu” (備州長船住兼光) on the haki-omote side. The signature began in the sabi-giwa area (錆際—the place right after the polish finishing line) under the habaki and passed through the first mekugi-ana. The signature was chiseled with rather deep strokes. Variants of the signature, beginning with “Bizen (no) Kuni . . .” (備前国), are called questionable in the Ōseki Shō

Thus, we can guess why quite a lot of swords with Kanemitsu’s signature have survived. The master, disregarding the risk of the sword cracking and even breaking in the habaki area, due to high shock loads, placed his signature as high as possible—right under the habaki. In addition, kanji were made with very deep strokes. Such a method did not contribute to the final strength of the sword, but it certainly had a positive effect on the preservation of master’s signature. Most of his swords were long enough to preserve the signature when shortened. 

The opinion presented in the Ōseki Shō should be taken into account when we analyze Kanemitsu’s signed works. There are 104 surviving signed works of the master, 84 of which are “properly” signed as “Bishū Osafune-jū Kanemitsu.” Among the rest, there are different variants of the signature, including niji-mei “Kane Mitsu.”

Figure 2. Kanemitsu's elements of activity layout. Kokon Meizukushi Taizen, vol. 5, p. 29/2.


(excerpt from Chapter 13, pp. 312-329, of the Japanese Swords: Sōshū-den Masterpieces )

Original content Copyright © 2019 Dmitry Pechalov