IanB

Our outstanding, cultured and far-sighted government are again delving into the area of restrictive legislation on 'blades weapons'. There are exceptions such as fencing foils, but in their eagerness to appear to be seen acting against the idiots using kitchen knives, antique weapons seem to have been overlooked. Ian Bottomley

All, I have had a good few arguments with dear old John Lissenden of fond memory about these intriguing items. I believe that they came to the notice of the Japanese during the invasions of Korea, being brought home as trophies of war. Those that were of that type have the 'seppa dai' of long narrow or of an ornate shape, decorated with waves etc for the simple reason that Chinese swords don't have an habaki and hence would be visible when the word was drawn. Some of these have had hitsu ana put in by the Japanese, sometimes lined with a strip of iron, but obvious since it involved cutting away part of the original design. Being popular, perhaps with people wanting to suggest they had fought in Korea, there is a second type with a more Japanese shaped seppa dai that were made specifically for the Japanese market - possibly in Japan, but just as likely in the Chinese enclave in Nagasaki (or ordered there and made in China). Some of these have hitsu ana some don't. Finally there are those that are blatantly Japanese with normal seppa dai and hitsu ana, retaining only the tendril idea as decoration. Ian Bottomley

Jack, Your helmet is a bit of a hybrid between a regular 8 plate helmet and a pointed or toppai kabuto. The concave peak suggests Haruta work and could well have been made in Kaga who employed only Haruta and independent armourers until 1800. The date could well be late 17th or 18th century it is difficult to determine without a signature. I rather like the mail cape which appears to fasten across the face rather than a regular shikoro. Altogether a very nice helmet - well done. Ian Bottomley

Paul, If you ever want a talk on armour - just ask. Ian Bottomley

I did read Dr. Orikasa's writings, which is why I acknowledged that he deserves to be recognised for all the effort he put into researching the Saotome. I would also add that nowhere in his writings, and I have read them carefully, is their any reference to six generations of Ietada's - only the one. Ian Bottomley Member of NIHON KATCHU BUGU KENKYU HOZON KAI

Fred, Rather conflicting information here. From the outset I must acknowledge the research done by Dr. Orikasa of Tokyo who has written extensively on the Saotome and their origins during which he examined some 200 examples. Only a fraction of his findings is published in the book referred to above. Apart from owning a helmet by Saotome Ietada myself, all that follows is the work of Orikasa. There appears to have been 14 generations of helmet makers who began in the early Edo period and who seem to have been been based in Hitachi province - often adding Joshu in their signatures. Most use the character.家 Ie.. as the first character of their name (which inevitably caused the Myochins to claim they were linked to Myochin Nobuie but without any foundation). Ietada is considered as having been the founder of the group and to have been working during the early decades of the Edo period and he may well have been a ronin who studied helmet making as way of surviving. (I regard the idea that there were 6 generations who signed Ietada as nonsense. If that were true, the accepted 2nd generation Iesada would have a brother called after his father, the third generation with a brother named after his grandfather (and possibly one named after his father) and so on. They would have to have bred like rabbits.) So, your helmet is made by Ietada the founder of a line of helmet makers who turned out high quality products for 14 generations and it dates to about the first 30 years or so of the 17th century. Well done Ian Bottomley

Fred, According to Dr.Orikasa, research into the Saotome armourers is a bit confused with reports of some being made about 1540 and others saying they started in the early Edo period. Dr. Orikasa is convinced they were started in the early Edo by a samurai retainer of the Lord of Shimotsuma Castle who became a ronin and then learned helmet making before starting himself as Ietada. Altogether there were perhaps another 13 generations, almost all using a name starting IE.... Ian Bottomley

You can now buy real urushi that is relatively non-toxic. I suffered in the past but I can use this without any problem whatsoever. Ian Bottomley

I can not anything more. Uwe has said it.except that it looks an extremely fine helmet with a very unusual shikoro. Ian Bottomey

For the weekend at the Japan Day bash in Manchester I took a stag-horn mounted tanto with a drawer for coins instead of a blade. There is one illustrated in the book on Edo tanto koshirae that is identical, except that mine has carved antler feathers as menuki whilst the illustrated one has coins. Ian Bottomley

Thomas, it is by a Bizen Munetsugu who would appear to be a shinto smith hence the rather uncharacteristic shape of the tang. You see so many Bizen blades made in the late 16th C. which have a more parallel tang with a rounded nakago jiri. Ian Bottomley

Jason, They are modern copies and that is what they will always be. You would be better buying a real armour which for $35,000 couldbe really good. Ian Bottomley

Luc, Yes there were some armourers who were highly respected and whose products were much desired, but as a group they were shunned - as people who work in shoe shops today are treated a bit differently. Contrast the vast amount that is recorded about swordsmiths, and who signed their work, with someone like Yoshimichi. What do we really know about him? To be given a Yoshimichi helmet would be an honour - to visit his workshop would be defiling because of the leather and skins there. Ian B

Uwe, Hirata is a common surname written as 平田. I don't think it gets us any further. Ian B

Right. Sasama mentions a zunari signed Hirata Kaneyuki and then says nothing is known of him. I would guess he may have been an independent armourer of which they were many. It is possible he studied under Asai Tomoyuki but let us recognise that armourers were not like swordsmiths and most people would cross the street rather than go near them. Ian B

John, I am not making any connection - simply quoting from Dr. Orikasa's work. However, much of all this confusion arises from the system of names used in Japan which is more than a bit confusing.. For a fuller account I refer you to Koop and Inada, 'Japanese Names and How to Read Them' , Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1923,. ISBN 0 7100 1707 3. page 67 et seq. Prior to 1870, only court nobles, members of the buke and those craftsmen privileged to do so were allowed to use a family name. Every one else had to use a name describing their occupation. Individuals had a succession of names starting with a boy's name or yomio that changed at 15 to a zokumio by which they were ordinarily known. The higher ranks and specially privileged lower classes could also use a nanori - a name restricted for use on special occasions such as in a signature. Craftspeople and artists could, totally independent of the family name and never used with it, could also use an 'Art name' or go. So what we are dealing with here is a family, associated with the armour making group called Haruta, had a founder who had the privilege of using a surname, Asai,浅井 and who had the personal name Jubei 重兵衛. It was he who moved to Kanazawa in 1623.. He signed his work with the nanori Katsumitsu 勝光. He was followed by, either his son or grandson, who was Asai Dosuke 浅井動助 who used the nanori Mitsunao 光尚. However Mitsunao also chose to use an 'Art name' Unkai 雲海. So when his wife was shouting for him to stop drinking sake she would use Dosuke, but when he signed a helmet he would use either just Mitsunao or he could add his art name as well and sign Unkai Mitsunao. He would never use Asai Mitsunao or Unkai Dosuke which mixes up two different name systems. While it was common for a pupil to be granted the use of a character from the nanori of his master, the fact that several smiths, with say the character Mitsu, does not necessarily mean they were linked in any way Haruta. Ian Bottomley

Uwe, Yes you can trust the details about the Asai family, who were Haruta smiths. The history was discovered by Dr.Orikasa in the Maeda papers in Kanezawa library. The Asai Dentaro family started with Jubei who signed Katsumitsu who moved from Kyoto to Kanezawa in 1623 Followed by another Katsumitsu who had a pupil Sonoki Tazaemon (Since the dates when these two died are unknown, I suspect they may be one and the same) Mitsunao (Unkai) died 1708 students- Mitsuyasu, Matsunaga Shiroe. Toshinao died 1727 students - Naohira and Haruta Chujiro Naotomo called Gorokuro, died 1735 Mitsutomo died 1781 Mitsunaga died 1805 stated to be ordinary craftsman as opposed to Dosuke (I think this means head of the workshop) Mitsusada died 1807 ordinary craftsman Mitsutaka died 1870 ordinary craftsmen Ian Bottomley

I missed Uve's post - interesting. Sadly we don't know the range at which this helmet was hit. Years ago the Royal Armouries did tests, all on 2mm mild steel at 30m range and found a 80lb draw long bow failed to pierce the sheet, a powerful crossbow (I think it was 800lb from memory) broke the sheet but the bolt did not penetrate while a matchlock using low grade powder pierced two sheets and dented a third one. An order of magnitude difference was the conclusion. I add an image which speaks for itself. (not a bullet but flying masonry) Ian Bottomley

I have on another thread published a picture of my 8 plate Yoshimichi which is of heavy plates and John Anderson also illustrates an 8 plate Yoshimich helmet. Clearly there was a demand for helmets with heavier and fewer plates. There is however a problem in that we don't know when he worked or whether the 8 plate helmets are later or earlier or indeed contemporary with his 32 and 62 plate ones. If we take his generally accepted dates as being around the 1530's / 40's this is too early to worry about bullets - so why make these helmets? If however he was really working say 20 years later they make sense. One other factor is that many of the big named warriors of the period had more than one armour. I am thinking here of Ii Naomasa whose fighting armour has a zunari helmet, a hoate mask and a namban style dou. However, he also owned an armour with a suji bachi. Honda Tadakatsu wore a toppai kabuto in action and Sakai Tadatsugu wore a 12 plate helmet, but he also owned a very nice dou-maru with an akoda nari. The fact that ko-boshi helmets and regular suji bachi were still being made is not the point. What matters is the type they wore in battle. As for evidence of what effect a bullet has, I have already published images of a Nambokucho helmet of mine that has been hit by a bullet. This helmet is very heavy yet it has torn away the plate along the line of the rivets. The only reason this helmet is still around is that the dent was knocked out. If armour gets really damaged it is scrapped so you cannot expect to see much with severe battle damage. Ian Bottomley.

Here you are - finally managed it: Ian Bottomley

Yes but I have failed to find out how to post it here. Ian B

OK, let us have a go at the inscription. The trouble with these shumei inscriptions is that they seem to have written them with their finger and bits of the red lacquer drops off - however I can see here: first kanji is like 上 but with side stroke on the left. I cannot find anything like this　 二 十　Ni Ju - twelve 番 ban - a guard or watch.四 shi - four ? So in effect it states that the helmet is for use by ? of the twelfth guard, fourth ? That is all I can get. Ian Bottomley

Following on from Uve's suggest I thought a thread about Yoshimichi was well worth doing. To the best of our current knowledge, Yoshimichi was the first armour maker to actually sign his work. ( For the benefit of you sword buffs it is worth saying that armourers were regarded as 'unclean' because they handled skins and rawhide, and as a consequence they were not written about by the rest of society.) Other than the fact that he worked during the 16th century we know almost nothing about him. He is said by Sasama to have lived around 1530 but I suspect this is rather too early. There are a considerable number of 32 and 62 plate high-sided helmets with the plates between the suji hammered outwards slightly to leave a gap where the plates overlap. This feature was copied during the early Edo period by the Saotome smiths. As expected the Myochin claimed he was one of theirs but there is is no evidence whatsoever since he only ever used the two character name. Sasama also mentions that there is an 8 plate helmet with his signature in Japan. I have a similar one, of very heavy plates that had a sword cut on top near the tehen that shows it never had a tehen kanamono. This to me suggests a later date, possibly around the 1570-80's and that he may have started making these simpler but heavier helmets after the introduction of guns. If this is true his working dates would be say 1550 - 1580. Apart from that there is little more I can add. I would be interested to hear other views. Ian Bottomley

Javier, They look like military unit markings - these were common when large numbers of helmets would be stored in a castle. Uwe, I agree it would be a great thread but unfortunately Yoshimichi only ever signed with the two characters of his name. Ian B

Javier, Not all zunari kabuto were cheap. During the Sengoku Jdai they were one of the styles of helmet to have - there are two armours in Shizuoka with zunari made for Tokugawa Ieyasu and plenty of other high ranking people at the time owned them. These helmets, together with momonari kabuto and a few other types like saiga kabuto were considered best against bullets since there were fewer riveted joints. Imagine a 62 plate suji kabuto being hit, especially on the side. There are so many joints, with the rivets so close to the edge of the plates, they would tear like paper. I have an eight plate helmet by Yoshimichi (Gitsu). He used to make 32 and 62 plate helmet bowls, but changed to 8 plates towards the end of the 16th C. because the plates can be made thicker and there are fewer joints to fail. Ian Bottomley