kaneyoshi

[John A Stuart]

Hi All, This is for those who like to delve into the geneology of swordsmiths. Mino kaji are notoriously difficult to unravel sometimes and I could use some help or comments. Recently I have posted about a Kaneyoshi tanto and am now researching it further. It is signed 兼良. A more common mei is 兼吉 and quite a few smiths used it. When we look at the Nanaryu of the Sekikaji the Senjuinryu is also known as the Nararyu, Narashi being 奈良市 or Nara as 奈良. Could this smith be using the 良 kanji to show his affiliation with the Nararyu? I believe the progenitor of these Sekikaji was originally a Tegairyu smith named Kaneshige 金重 of Echizen who moved to Seki and was a contemporary of Kaneuji. Later the descendants split and the Nanaryu was born. It was when Kanenaga 兼永 the son of Kaneshige's son Kaneyuki 包行 moved to Seki that the 金 'kin' kanji was dropped in favour of the Seki more common 兼 occured. Comments? John

[Brian]

Phew John, that hurt my head reading it

I think I'll have to study geneology a bit and research many of those terms before I can get my head around it.

 

Regards,

Brian

[John A Stuart]

:lol: Imagine the trouble I had writing it Brian. What it boils down to is, the Kaneyoshi who used this style of kanji: was he of the Senjuinryu? That is one of the faults I find with papering swords. It is good to know the piece is legitimate, but, how was the decision reached? and specifics are lacking. Even a time period could help pinpoint who the smith was. Even more frustrating is when the attribution is 'den' which can span a couple of hundred years. At least that is reasonable for mumei swords somewhat. A paper attests that it is thought that the mei is shoshin on a particular piece, and if so who was it?, should be attested to as well. Nevermind that though, I was hoping others, that are Mino fans, may have their thoughts on this Kaneyoshi. Thanks, John