Help in identifying age and any other information on Armor

[cameoking]

Any help in the age of this armor and any other facts that may be useful would be appreciated. Thank you Alex

[IanB]

Dear Alex, The photographs you show appear to be of a 62 (?) plate helmet with some of the plates covered by gilt copper decorated with shinodare - the pendant, applied arrow-like strips. That, together with the crests and crest holder, the shape of the neck guard and the framing around the edge of the fukigayeshi (turn-backs of the neck guard) suggest the helmet was assembled during either the late 18th or 19th century. It is quite possible. and indeed likely, that the helmet bowl itself is older, but the quality of the photographs is insufficient to be more precise.

Ian Bottomley

[cameoking]

Thank you! today I will post better pics thx Alex

[cameoking]

Here are some more pictures Thx Alex

[Shogun8]

Ian, correct me if I'm wrong, but the hachi seems rather higher than the normal 62 plate suji bachi, don't you think? I'm not sure if I'd go so far to say it's topai or shiinari, but I'd be interesting to hear your (or anyone else's) view on this.

 

John

[Brian]

Hi "JWT"

Please remember to sign every post with at least a real first name.

 

Thanks,

Brian

[Shogun8]

Sorry, Brian - just did!

 

John

[IanB]

John, Alex,

I agree it is a bit tall for a regular 62 plate bachi. There are a few details that worry me regarding the age of the present assembly. Firstly the kamon on the fukigayeshi. Anything that resembles kiku immediately puts me off. Next the yellow agemaki is a favourite with modern repro armour makers. Also, since there isn't a shot that shows it clearly I'm not sure I am seeing it correctly, but normally the uname toji and the hishinui should be staggered on the lower plate of the shikoro. These seem to line up one above the other - not unknown, but not common. On the plus side, the leathers on the peak seem to be separated by fusegumi rather than jabara - a very time consuming technique that you don't see on copies.

Alex, could you take some really clear close-ups of the lower part of the peak and crest holder, a good side view of the helmet bowl itself and a close-up of the lacing on the lowest plate of the shikoro? There are so many good copies of old helmets - some as old as the Meiji period, never mind the thousands of modern ones, it is only when one can see the small details that a judgement can be made.

Ian Bottomley

[cameoking]

the yellow is because of the flash it is a red orange will try to show in a new pic. Ok have added more Hope these help and again thx for your help... Alex Montague

[cameoking]

one more close up of side view Thank you Again Alex

[cameoking]

one more pic of copper metal work beautiful attention to detail i just noticed for first time Thx Alex

[estcrh]

The shikoro looks to be older than the bowl, it is leather laced and the outer edges have nice detail work, the tehen kanamono does not look like it was fitted to the ridges of the helmet, it just seems to sit on top, I would expect to see a better fit on a 62 plate kabuto. Something just looks funny about the bowl to me.

[IanB]

Alex, My suspicions are allayed - you have a very unusual and genuine helmet. As Eric said, leather laced shikoro with both the uname toji and hishinui in leather as well. The roped rims (nawa fukurin) to the upper edges of the plates had me scratching my head. They are not uncommon around plates covered with stencilled leather, but to see them on other plates is unusual. I had been struggling to grasp what I was looking at and then noticed on the upper edge of the hishinui no ita that the whole shikoro is leather covered! That explained the odd texture and colour. I note the armourer has also covered the upper edge of the koshimaki with a roped fukurin as well - a style copied from European armour.

As for the shape of the bowl, it would appear to be a Muromachi period akoda nari. That would accord with the almost vertical peak. Normally these bowls were black lacquered and fitted with fukurin on the suji and igaki (or higaki) around the base. These may have been removed when the bowl was adapted into its present form. So, What I think you have is a Muromachi period bowl remounted later. The tehen kanamono looks later Edo period and so do the fukigayeshi. The kiku ornaments on the fukigayeshi may well have been added as replacements when the original owner sold the helmet and took off his kamon.

Ian Bottomley

[cameoking]

Thank you again for your insight. Where would one look for the signature if there is to be one of the Kabuto. Should the item be insured and like other antiques should not be cleaned? Thx Alex

[IanB]

Alex, If it is Muromachi as I suspect (accepting that working from photographs is always subject to caveats) it will not be signed. Signatures did npt really appear on armour until the mid 16th century.

Ian

[cameoking]

Then leave it alone and no cleaning of any kind Alex

[estcrh]

I had been struggling to grasp what I was looking at and then noticed on the upper edge of the hishinui no ita that the whole shikoro is leather covered! That explained the odd texture and colour.................... So, What I think you have is a Muromachi period bowl remounted later. The tehen kanamono looks later Edo period and so do the fukigayeshi. The kiku ornaments on the fukigayeshi may well have been added as replacements when the original owner sold the helmet and took off his kamon.

Ian Bottomley

You have a good eye Ian, it may be that the bowl itself was not re-lacquered when at some point it was updated, leather covered shikoro would make sense as a new lacquered shikoro would look strange when mounted on an old helmet bowl with old lacquer.