estcrh

Here are some images that help to clarify the terms being used such as "agamaki no kan", "uketsutsu" (uked-zutsu) and "gattari". "Agamaki no kan" is the metal ring that the agamaki knot is attached to. "Uketsutsu" or more correctly "uked-zutsu" is the wood container that a flag pole would fit into, a "sashimono" (flag or banner) would then be attached to the flag pole. "Gattari" (also machi-uke) is a hinged bracket that is attached to the back of the dou / do (cuirass), the uked-zutsu is held in place by the gattari. In the image below the red arrow points to the "uked-zutsu", the yellow arrow points to the "gattati". Sashimono with pole and uked-zutsu.

Dave, I am not exactly sure what this means....."The straps coming from the sode make use of the kanamono nothing more".....Kanamono are the various metal fittings found on Japanese armor, some purely decorative, some functional. As far as I can see the straps of the sode are connected to the agamaki knot....did you mean agamaki instead of kanamono? In the image below the yellow arrow is pointing to the agamaki, the red arrows are pointing to were the sode straps are tied to the agamaki know, I do not see any kanamono involved.

Brian, I agree with you but when you have someone like Anthony Bryant and other authorities that people look up to saying things like.........."Among real historians of Japan, Perrin is considered a laughing stock---- if he's considered at all"...........you are bound to have people that end up thinking this book was not seriously researched when it actually does contain a lot of very interesting historical information. I was trying to find out if anyone who had a negative opinion about this book was basing it on inaccuracies or if they were possibly just being swayed by the negative comments they have heard about the book. I have no problem if you want to deleted any comments of mine or anyone elses that you feel distract from this review, maybe clean it up a bit.

Perrin does say that "besides these technical difficulties the Japanese also had a social problem with guns"....he goes on to explain that before the introduction of the matchlock, the Japanese had a custom of exchanging "ritual compliments" right before beginning a battle. He refers to a battle in 1548 in which a samurai force armed with matchlocks was defeated by a force that did not have matchlocks due to the fact that after exchanging these "ritual compliments" the matchlocks had not been prepared to fire and they were defeated by the force without matchlocks, he sites a source for this (#40). Perrin goes on to discuss the solution for certain technical problems as well as relating a later battle in 1575 were a force men armed witjh matchlocks not only started using their matchlocks in battle with out the previously customary ritual compliments, they also hid themselves behind breastworks. Referring to Lord Oda's forces, Perrin said this "He never even considered letting them introduce themselves-or even be honorably visible" and that this new tactic which included having three thousand matchlocks being fired in volleys of a thousand at a time led to Lord Oda being sucess. I see not problem with any of these statements or facts unless that are historically inaccurate, do you have any evidence of this?

I think both Ian and Daves comments are helpful, in the forum were this was originally posted there are no warnings so anyone reading it will not take care to scrutinize what they are reading, but as it is now anyone who reads this thread will know that this article contains some very good information and some (or a lot) of inaccuracies. This actually points how how little verifiable material there is for the average reader who is trying to make sense of the whole Japanese armor world without having to spend years doing so. I am looking forward to Dave and Ians joint publication which I am sure will be a great resource.

A good scholarly difference of opinion. I think your way off but I could be wrong, maybe some of our other more knowledgable forum member will have a few minutes of time to point out one or two of the more glaring mistakes....I am not expecting anyone to do the whole thing.

Not entirely http://nihon-no-katchu.proboards.com/board/37/nihonto

I did say ...."while not completely accurate"..... A few examples of inaccuracys could be pointed out in the same amount of time it takes to criticize, that would actually help teach people something.

Of course, an amateurs attempt to do what a much more knowledgable person probably should have done but did not (as far as I know), in the absence of a better one it is a good basic reference and as someones knowledge of the subject grows they can learn to differientiate the facts from the errors. This was written in 2007 and there is now much more information available for the next person who may attempt to do a similar write up, or they can take this one and correct the mistakes, now that would be interesting and helpful. Maybe some of the more knowledgable people here would point out the "errors", that would be helpful as well.

Here is a link to the original article, this should help. https://myarmoury.com/feature_jpn_armour.php

This article from Myarmoury is interesting and informative, it is worth taking a look at, while not completely accurate is still is a good basic guide.

"Tetsu" meaning iron and "nerigawa" meaning rawhide, although it is sometimes refered to a leather there is a difference

If he is retired shouldnt it be "we were blessed"? He used to have a web site but not any more, I think his services are no longer available to the general public.

Any idea what the term is for this type of lacing???

Here is a good example of what urushi could be hiding. This looks like a suji bachi kabuto but the peeling urushi reveals something else. If the lacquer was in good shape I think you would have to be able to see the inside of the kabuto in order to reveal the actual construction and how many plates there were.

Perrin was relating the samurai delemma of the day. When you have a weapon that just about anyone could be trained to use in a very short period of time, how do you justify your existance as a samurai? If the samurai were needed to defend the homeland but any bunch of men with guns could wipe of a much larger number of highly trained professional samurai fighters what then? Japan could have conscriped an army of commen men and armed them with guns, just as the Europeans did...no more samurai needed then. This was a real problem that was debated during that time period.

Found that as well, I will post the exacte quotes.

Ok, found it, thanks, I will try to post the exact quote.

Perrins book has several period illustrations which show SAMURAI using matchlocks...he shows mounted samurai using matchlock pistols and a group of samurai using matchock muskets, he pointed out that this group had two swords and called them "gentlemen musketeers". There are references about samurai asking for more matchlocks while fighting in Korea. He also points out the importance of swords to the samurai. He discusses both points since these were topics that were of importance in that time period.

I tried to be perfectly clear here I am not interested in discussing what some other person may have said, I am interested in discussing direct quotes (in English) from Perrins book that you disagree with, as in not being accurate, historically correct etc. I am trying to understand the basis for some of the negative comments about this book and at the same time I am trying to show that this book was written by a very competant author using a wide variety of historical texts, and verifible references. In order to do this people need to post direct quotes from the book that they disagree with...so far not one person has come up with a single sentence to discuss.

Sorry, I do not speak German, care to translate? I am not sure if page 36 in the German version is the same as the English version, what chapter is that from?

Do you have a quote from the book which backs up your statement or is this your personal opinion?? What proof do you have that this is Perrins "thesis", personal insight or fact??? So far not one person has posted any text from the book which backs up anything they say...humm.

Here is a pdf article by Clive Sinclaire about an armor that Robert restored for him a few years ago, if you look at the before and after pictures you can not believe the end result. http://to-ken.uk/onewebmedia/Diary%20of%20the%20Restoration%20of%20a%20Suit%20of%20Japanese%20Armour.pdf

Perrins book certainly does not push this particular idea as far as I know, in fact he lists at least two instances were the Japanese were introduced to more advanced firearms (flintlocks). He mentions a 1636 Dutch trading mission in which the shogun was presented with "a dozen smart new flintlock pistols" and then in 1643 when a group of samurai onboard a Dutch ship were allowed to fire the ships flintlock muskets. He mentions that the Dutch were puzzled by the Japanese "indifference to new weapons".