The Okegawa-dou: Deconstructing Pop History

[Arthur G]

Introduction

I was encouraged by a friend to share some of our research to the general public.

When trying to think of a topic to start off with, this was the best one that came to my mind. My particular focus is on the latter half of the 16th Century with the evolution of armor and firearms technology. With the goal in mind of replicating exactly what was used in this era, I found that nearly everything I had ever learned in the past was wrong. The current popular image of arms and armor in this time is so skewed as to lack nearly anything resembling the true reality of the situation. Needless to say this was engrossing, but also disconcerting.

The most widely misrepresented piece of armor, bar none, is what is colloquially referred to as the "Okegawa-dou" nowadays. Over time, I have seen its inception pushed farther and farther back in order to authenticate either particular pieces in museums, collections, or images in media. Rather than hold these items to universal standards, the standards are shifted to verify them, which is quite backwards. Here I will demonstrate a clear and concise evolution of the armor from a technological standpoint, why it developed, as well as how and why the nomenclature has changed over time.

Nomenclature and Etymology

The origin of the name Okegawa-dou is the first thing to address. Unfortunately, the sense of the name has been misinterpreted in the Western-sphere quite egregiously. Unilaterally it seems to get translated as "tub-sided"; to the English speaking mind, this evokes a rotund image. Due to the shape of the much later Okegawa-nimai-dou, it seems to confirm this notion to many. 



Unfortunately, this is not what the name is referencing. There is a deeply engrained tendency for Westerners to base their descriptions and appraisal of Japanese items on what it looks like to their eye. This leads to a fixation on things of a decorative nature, or a deeper need to relate something truly foreign to something more familiar from their own culture.

This is what the word Oke is actually describing:


It is not referring to the appearance of the object but rather its construction! This is the case for many (thought not all) old styles of Japanese armor. 

The old fashioned Japanese tubs and buckets are made with wood slats tightly butted to each other. So, a "tub sided" dou is referring to the construction being like that of the sides of a wooden bucket or tub, being made of flat plates of steel. 

But where and when did this term originate you might ask? This will be addressed later after showing the physical evolution of the riveted plate, two section Okegawa-dou. For now though, in short, this term was originally used to describe what we now call the Mogami-dou, and was already in use no later than around 1570.

[Bugyotsuji]

Just had a quick read-up on this and learned that there were tate-hagi okegawa (vertical plates) and yokohagi (horizontal plates) okegawa, but the latter seem to have been more popular as there are few examples of tatehagi okegawa still extant.

[chris covington]

Arthur,

 

Would something like this be more accurate/appropriate? The slats of the tub, when turned to the side are like the lames of the do?

[Arthur G]

26 minutes ago, chris covington said:

Arthur,

 

Would something like this be more accurate/appropriate? The slats of the tub, when turned to the side are like the lames of the do?

Absolutely!

This is an "Okegawa-dou" in its raw, original conceptualization in terms of nomenclature.

[Arthur G]

26 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

Just had a quick read-up on this and learned that there were tate-hagi okegawa (vertical plates) and yokohagi (horizontal plates) okegawa, but the latter seem to have been more popular as there are few examples of tatehagi okegawa still extant.

I personally think the tatehagi has some relation to the evolution of the hatomune-dou, but I haven't looked into them enough to say much. I mostly avoid Edo period armor, which they fall into.

[Arthur G]

The Kindou: The First Stage of Evolution

From the Asuka period to the advent of Ko-tousei armor, Japanese cuirass construction is made up more or less unilaterally of sane in one form or another. In the Kofun period we see the Tanko and the Keiko, with the Tanko line of evolution dying out in favor of Keiko. This over time evolves into the "domaru" and "Oyoroi" of the Heian period, with domaru being quite well adapted for fighting on foot and the Oyoroi making a horse mounted archer into something relatively comparable to a modern day armored gunship.

In the Nambokucho era, we see the death of the Oyoroi line of armor evolution, with the Domaru/Haramaki completely taking over. The conditions of the Nambokucho wars and changes in doctrine are what caused the death of such magnificent suits. Much of the war was fought in locations that were not conducive to cavalry, primarily hilltop forts. Horses in this time more and more became relegated to a means of transportation to a battlefield rather than something to be utilized upon it. The Oyoroi we see still being used was more and more modified for usage on foot, but in this regard it fell short in terms of practicality against the domaru and haramaki placing the weight upon the shoulders of the wearer and not being tightly fitted to the body. The form that the domaru and haramaki would take at this time would remain more or less unchanged in terms of construction, with only minor differences appearing over the next two centuries.

In terms of materials, the kozane used to make these cuirasses were made up mostly of rawhide, with steel (some would use the word iron, but this is a long side tangent better for another time) being used every other scale in places where the wearer needed extra protection i.e. the chest area and sides. From the Heian era onwards, we see the thickness of kozane, both metal and leather, declining over time. However, lacquer techniques were always developing and becoming more elaborate, with kokuso and sabi-urushi appearing. Iyozane also appear, sometime likely in the 1400's, as an alternative method of producing a piece from scales.

Sometime towards the end of the Muromachi-era, we see the development of the Kin-domaru and Kin-haramaki. Visuallly you'd be hard pressed to see any difference from the earlier forms, but on a technical level there is a very, very important difference: In this case, all of the kozane or iyozane in the body area metal, rather than alternating. Hence the name "kin", in this case meaning "metal".

As far as I can tell, this development in terms of being something produced in some significant numbers rather than one offs, seems to be in full swing sometime in the 1560's I can say conservatively. Possibly earlier, but without hard evidence for it I am more comfortable with this placement. Firearms usage had begun to proliferate more and more by this time, though not to the scale we'd later see in the 1570's. It's quite likely that if my placement is correct for this development, it is likely a response to this as well as massed spear formation warfare. It's also worth mentioning that the importation of namban-tetsu and the ramping up of localized industries in Japan to keep up with the proliferation of armed forces and escalating conflicts probably made the production of all metal armor far more feasible than it had been in the past.

Illustration of a Kin-Kozane Domaru


Black Laced Tetsu-Iyozane Haramaki:


Note the kusazuri in both cases are still made from leather kozane to reduce weight.

[Arthur G]

The Mogami-Dou: Part 1

 

The next stage in development followed quite quickly after the kindou, and in reality was not as big of a leap in design as it would seem.

 

For all intents and purposes, the Mogami-dou is a kindou that uses solid sheets instead of sane. It must be kept in mind that sane are not separate elements, but rather laced and lacquered into solid boards. Making one of these solid boards out of one piece of steel rather than a few dozen scales was a logical step. And if the industry was there to make it possible, so much the better.

When we look at the early Mogami-dou, this is in reality the only appreciable difference. The muna-ita, waki-ita, watagami, etc. are the all the same. The construction is still a boxy go-mai-dou. 

 

This becomes even more apparent when we see Kebiki laced examples. I find myself having to look very closely at these to confirm they are not in fact made of kozane.

 

Keep in mind these would have been very, very expensive armor at the time; this would have been truly cutting edge equipment. Interestingly, it seems a cheaper form was developed for lower ranking troops. Unfortunately, the gear of the common masses rarely if ever survives from this time, skewing our views of the era considerably. When one only sees the highest grade of gear, they tend to push that image towards being the norm, rather than the exception it would have been.

Here is that downgraded form. Miraculously, one example has survived to the present day. This is an all leather Mogami-dou. Note the two prior examples are of domaru construction, while this is a haramaki. Mogami-dou were made in both forms as well as both Sugake and Kebiki odoshi.

[Arthur G]

The Mogami-Dou: Part 2

The earliest reference I have ever seen to the Mogami-dou is likely this armor order from the early 1570's. In it, an "Okegaha-dou" is specified.

 

 

All evidence points to the Kin-dou and the Mogami-dou being developments in Eastern Japan, likely around the Kanto Region. However, the concept spread across the country over the next decade or so.

Inaba Yoshimichi's armor is a wonderful example. Made likely in Nara or elsewhere in the Kansai region, we know it was used towards the latter part of the Ishiyama Honganji War in the late 1570's. In it we see an interesting hybrid construction of both plates and kozane.



The example at the Royal Armouries was gifted from Satsuma to a foreign power in the early 1580's if I recall correctly. This means we know the design had made it down to the farthest Southern end of Japan by this time.



However, even by this very late date, we are quite far away from the popular image of Ashigaru all running around all clad in riveted Okegawa Nimai-dou. If this was the highest grade gear for samurai at this time, then clearly there is something very, very wrong with our image of this time.

There are still quite a few more steps to get to that design, and we will see when it likely first showed up on the battlefield afterwards.

[Arthur G]

The Riveted Kanto Dou

While other regions were adopting the mogami-dou, smiths in the Kanto region quickly began advancing the design. Seeing as the mogami-dou was already a tachi-dou, why not rivet it together?

Tachi-dou are not only held together with the odoshi we see on the surface. Underneath, there are separate holes drilled for tomegawa, a sinew lace that keeps the plates from slumping down like old armor. As the name implies, the armor stands up on its own.

In the Kanto region, some of these smiths used leather lacing lacquered over to bind the plates together while others used rivets. Here is a riveted example that seems to have been converted over from a sugake laced Mogami-dou. The lacing holes appear to have been filled in. Note the top lames of the kusazuri have survived, being made out of metal, whereas the missing lower lames and the right and rear sets are completely missing; it is more than likely they were leather.



From here we can see exactly how the Yukinoshita-dou evolved. Yukinoshita Denshichirou Hisaie created his infamous design as early as 1573 by some estimations, but it wouldn't be truly adopted en masse until the early 1580's when the Date clan found themselves quite enamoured with the design.

When comparing it to the riveted Kanto Dou, it's an obvious step in the design evolution. Rather than using multiple plates riveted together to form the body, single large plates are used.



Once again however, we do not see any drastic changes to the overall geometry of the suit. The Muna-ita and Waki-ita are still the same old shape, and the overall construction is a gomai-do. We are still nowhere near the Okegawa Nimai-dou.

[Bugyotsuji]

This is all fascinating stuff, Arthur. My brain is struggling to take it all in.

 

PS In Mogami no.2 above you mention Inaba Yoshimichi but the paperwork says 春田光定 Haruta Mitsusada.

[Arthur G]

The Transitional Mogami-dou and the Nuinobe-dou

The Mogami-dou went through some refinements in the 1580's. We see the muna-ita become clipped at the top, creating a flatter profile. The waki-ita developed more elegant and rounded shapes, often with a mountain shape in the middle below the armpit. This did exist in the preceding decades but is far less common than what we see in the 1580's. A built up and striated surface pattern is created with lacquer quite commonly in this period as well.

Here is a great example of what my group refers to as a "transitional" mogami-dou. Note the iyozane kusazuri as well. There are many other fascinating features of this armor, but I am going to keep this thread focussed. Especially worthy of note is the overall shape of the armor. While it is still a go-maiedou, we are seeing the beginnings of a more rounded shape forming.



At this time we also see the Nuinobe-dou soaring in popularity. 

This example is of particular note. Gifted from Toyotomi Hideyoshi to Date Masamune in 1587, we are now truly seeing the beginnings of the round shape people are so familiar with.



However it seems many nuinobe-dou well into the 1590's were still of a go-mai-dou construction.

Mori Takamasa's armor used in the second invasion of Korea is a great example of this. However, there is something quite modern here that is very important to note.


We can clearly now see the later style of Muna-ita and Waki-ita, and can firmly place it in the 1590's.

Finally, all of the ingredients are there for the modern Okegawa Nimai-dou. All it takes is the right person to combine everything together...

[Arthur G]

9 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

This is all fascinating stuff, Arthur. My brain is struggling to take it all in.

 

PS In Mogami no.2 above you mention Inaba Yoshimichi but the paperwork says 春田光定 Haruta Mitsusada.

Ah, Inaba Yoshimichi was the wearer! Haruta Mitsusada the smith (well, for the kabuto at least).

He's not of particular note historically, but his armor certainly is.

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/稲葉良通

[Arthur G]

The Anti-Climactic Conclusion

So, when did the modern Okegawa-dou really show up? Who was the brilliant man that put the pieces all together?

Truth be told, my group and I have no idea. We have been able to trace each element of it, and we know more or less when they show up to within the span of a few years in most cases. We can trace it all geographically as well with a high degree of certainty.

The issue is we can't truly pinpoint the exact moment this form took shape. We all came to the conclusion that there was likely an early form of it present at Sekigahara amongst some of the highest ranking staff, but beyond that we're not quite sure.

The deeper we dug into the origins of various famous suits of armor, the more we found they defied any hard evidence or logical evolution of Tousei-gusoku. We were able to find clear points where typologies had been distorted in order to justify descriptions of said suits of armor with rather dubious provenances.

Taking a step back, and approaching it all logically, we have gone ahead with things we can see fit an obvious, logical typology, and pay little attention to stories told about things that would have required a time machine.

All of the building blocks were there by the 1590's for the Okegawa-nimai-dou to show up; it's merely a matter of when and where it occurred. With the amount of dubious armor out there muddling things, especially when it comes to the era from 1590-1615, it's a somewhat hopeless endeavor. We can confidently say it shows up sometime in that time frame and most likely in the late 1590's however.

Now, does this mean ashigaru were running around in this armor in the form most often imagined? Of course not.

But we know for a fact that in the following decades they clearly were. Zohyo Monogatari illustrates it quite thoroughly, and this was produced around the time of the Shimabara Rebellion. It's possible some armies had implemented it by the time of the Siege of Osaka as well! But as of this time we are not quite sure. Interestingly you are hard pressed to even find an illustration of an Okegawa-nimai-dou until after that campaign. A couple of our members searched through all of the contemporary artwork and could not find a single portrayal of one until after 1615.

I hope one day the public will begin to envision this era as it truly was, rather than the sleek post-modern image that has taken over. Then again, it's possible the reality is just a bit too unglamarous for most...



In the next write up I do, if people enjoyed this one, I will talk about the evolution of the zunari kabuto. The Hineno-zunari goes hand in hand with the Okegawa-dou, as it follows along the same exact lines of development and woefully incorrect pop culture portrayal. 

Until then, I hope this generates some conversation and steers people in the right direction.

As a bonus, I'd like to include this link to Taro Saemon's blog. There is some great further reading in here for anyone interested in the topic!
https://ameblo.jp/saemon-taro/entry-12431101080.html

 

[Bazza]

Loved all this Arthur et al.  Looking forward to the zunari write up as I have one by Haruta Yoshihisa.

 

Barry Thomas

aka BaZZa.

[Bugyotsuji]

What the man above ☝ said! 

 

Who does those illustrations, Arthur? The guy on the left looks surprisingly like Mr T, one of the members of our Teppotai! 

[Arthur G]

10 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

What the man above ☝ said! 

 

Who does those illustrations, Arthur? The guy on the left looks surprisingly like Mr T, one of the members of our Teppotai! 

Let me go reverse image search that one. There are a few guys that illustrate this period as it really was.

What's funny is my little group on our own came to the exact same conclusions as some others. Needless to say we were overjoyed when we started making contact with some of them. Most are younger, in our age group, so I do have some hope for the next couple of generations when it comes to studying this era.

 

[Arthur G]

22 minutes ago, Bazza said:

Loved all this Arthur et al.  Looking forward to the zunari write up as I have one by Haruta Yoshihisa.

 

Barry Thomas

aka BaZZa.

If you don't mind my asking, when was Yoshihisa active? And could you post some photos?

[Arthur G]

Ok I think I found that illustrator
 

 

[chris covington]

7 hours ago, Arthur G said:

When comparing it to the riveted Kanto Dou, it's an obvious step in the design evolution. Rather than using multiple plates riveted together to form the body, single large plates are used.


 

Arthur,

 

There is a lot to unpack and process here. Thanks for these write ups! 

 

So this dou used a fairly large single plate, instead of the lames that made up other styles of armor. The example in the picture clearly shows the front plate is large, the side plate is large, and I'd assume the back plates are very large as well. Would this have caused problems forging and sourcing such large plates? I've heard the stories that these large plated armor, like hotoke do (at least in appearance), were inspired by foreign armor, but I'm not sure I totally believe that, in light of the evolutionary process you just clearly showed. It feels more like convergent evolution, the Japanese smiths, even though they had been exposed to western armor for decades, developed in their own way. Maybe the idea came in the most tangential or abstract of ways, but I don't think you can really support direct evolution from Namban armor. 

 

Chris 

[Bugyotsuji]

We are constantly looking for armours for members of our *expanding Teppotai to wear. One of the many deciding factors is weight. Yukishita Do tend to be monstrously heavy, though! 

 

*Actually older people tend to keep their armo(u)r after they retire, so we have to source more for younger applicants.

[chris covington]

3 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

We are constantly looking for armours for members of our *expanding Teppotai to wear. One of the many deciding factors is weight. Yukishita Do tend to be monstrously heavy, though! 

 

*Actually older people tend to keep their armo(u)r after they retire, so we have to source more for younger applicants.

Mr. Piers,

 

Wouldn't Yukinoshita dou have been more popular with cavalry units than guys on foot with guns? I had always heard that the eastern armies favored mounted units so they tended to have thicker and heavier armor, since they'd been on horseback. In the west they'd use horses to get to the battlefield and then dismount and fight on foot, thus lighter armors.  

 

All the best,

Chris

[Bugyotsuji]

Chris, this is a good question, with many facets. Horses back then were more like ponies, tough, but not particularly suited to 'cavalry' charges as we think of it. I think a Bushi who could afford a horse and such a suit of armour with kabuto might realize that on a horse of any size he would would be an easier target for gunners. (Think Battle of Shitaragahara, Nagashino) The horse though, would indeed take any extra weight that was considered necessary for protection from ballistic weapons. Did Date Masamune use mounted cavalry in great numbers?

 

In the case of our gunnery unit, you are absolutely correct, and the reaction of people when they pick up a Yukishita-do proves it. Not popular when the *city authorites ask us to march around the city center before our display. 

 

*Himeji for example.

[FrenchBreadPrime]

13 hours ago, Arthur G said:

I personally think the tatehagi has some relation to the evolution of the hatomune-dou, but I haven't looked into them enough to say much. I mostly avoid Edo period armor, which they fall into.

It's likely that Tatehagi made it easier to construct Hatomune Dou, though Hatomune appear to be very rare. Most of the examples of Hatomune I have seen were on ichi-mai ita where the parts were made from single plates, or on wasei-namban dou, and also a few go-mai dou (in those case, tatehagi, but there are more recent yokohagi go-mai do featuring a pigeon breast, I haven't been able to see older ones in this exact style, but they're rare to find in general.).

Pic related is an example of Hatomune Tatehagi Go-Mai Dou 

 

On the note of Tatehagi/Yokohagi, I also feel that Tatehagi are the closest to fitting the idea of "Okegawa", but on another hand it would be hard to fit vertical plates without riveting them together, so naturally yokohagi is the better option when taking into account that the Japanese started using rivets on chestplates remarkably late. Interestingly enough, there are examples of tanko armors from the Kofun period featuring vertical plates. 

On a similar note, Tatehagi appears to have been useful to the development of new concepts of armors, I'd like to mention an Okegawa San-Mai Dou that was in a way just a reinforced Okegawa Nimai Dou, featuring one ushiro dou but two mae-dou, an inner one that uses Tatehagi ita, and an outer one that uses Yokohagi ita. The final result when worn would look like a normal Okegawa Ni-mai dou, but it would provide great protection to the wearer against shots due to the variation in construction and layers. I wish I had a picture, but even without one, I am certain a lot of you guys have already seen it; there aren't many San-mai dou and that one is a special case.

[Luc T]

4 hours ago, chris covington said:

Mr. Piers,

 

Wouldn't Yukinoshita dou have been more popular with cavalry units than guys on foot with guns? I had always heard that the eastern armies favored mounted units so they tended to have thicker and heavier armor, since they'd been on horseback. In the west they'd use horses to get to the battlefield and then dismount and fight on foot, thus lighter armors.  

 

All the best,

Chris

A yukinoshita is indeed a cavalry armor, way to heavy and not very flexible

[Arthur G]

I don't think this is the right way to perceive Yukinoshita/Sendai-dou.

It comes down to thickness of the body plates and the arrangement of the kusazuri.

The fact that the Date were able to outfit their entire fighting force in them should speak volumes. Quite obviously, the quality of the lower grades would not be the same as that worn by the higher ranks or specialists such as cavalry. Even an Eastern army at this time would mostly be made up of infantry. It would be farfetched to consider it a cavalry only armor I think.

[Arthur G]

13 hours ago, chris covington said:

Arthur,

 

There is a lot to unpack and process here. Thanks for these write ups! 

 

So this dou used a fairly large single plate, instead of the lames that made up other styles of armor. The example in the picture clearly shows the front plate is large, the side plate is large, and I'd assume the back plates are Would this have caused problems forging and sourcing such large plates? I've heard the stories that these large plated armor, like hotoke do (at least in appearance), were inspired by foreign armor, but I'm not sure I totally believe that, in light of the evolutionary process you just clearly showed. It feels more like convergent evolution, the Japanese smiths, even though they had been exposed to western armor for decades, developed in their own way. in the most tangential or abstract of ways, but I don't think you can really support direct evolution from Namban armor. 

 

Chris 

You've brought up the most important point of all.

I will try not to let this turn into a long rant.

There is a very strong tendency since the post-war era of robbing Japan of its agency. Foreign powers have been quite desperate to reshape Japan into a globalized society. This even goes into Japanese history, and how it is subtly rewritten over time.

Many in the matchlock community I have made contact with have been quite surprised about my discoveries with the Japanese matchlock, and how it is truly something uniquely Japanese. Nowadays it is seen as something foreign, and usually used in the context of pushing a narrative of a very open and globalized Japan in the 16th century. However this was never truly the case. When one starts reproducing a matchlock and studying earlier examples, it becomes glaringly obvious that there is not a thing Western about them by a few decades after their introduction.

The same goes for armor.

The idea that Tousei-gusoku is inspired by imported European armor has little to no technical basis and rather lives in the realm of vaguery and conjecture in my humble opinion.

Sure, when we get into the early 1600's with the Hatomune-dou and the transitional flat top munai-ita, I'll concede that point. Both of these features barely caught on is the issue. And looking at the simple roadmap I posted up there, it's quite clear how the Okegawa-dou evolved on its own in Japan.

When I write up the Zunari thread I think it will become even more clear.

A final nail in the "western influence" coffin I think is the relative rareness and obscurity of Western armor at this time, with only a couple of examples even being noted, albeit anecdotally. Import in any appreciable numbers does not seem to happen until the 1590's and early 1600's. If it were all inspired by Western armor, then how would kacchushi across the country develop their own concepts and lines of evolution using plates while never having even seen an example of Western armor? 

The plate construction and methodology itself is so wildly different that there is almost no technological commonality.

At the end of the day, this field of study is about Japan. I think people need to stop seeking ownership over Japanese culture (or self inserting for the sake of feeling represented) and instead learn to appreciate it as what it is.

[Luc T]

23 hours ago, Arthur G said:

The Transitional Mogami-dou and the Nuinobe-dou

The Mogami-dou went through some refinements in the 1580's. We see the muna-ita become clipped at the top, creating a flatter profile. The waki-ita developed more elegant and rounded shapes, often with a mountain shape in the middle below the armpit. This did exist in the preceding decades but is far less common than what we see in the 1580's. A built up and striated surface pattern is created with lacquer quite commonly in this period as well.

Here is a great example of what my group refers to as a "transitional" mogami-dou. Note the iyozane kusazuri as well. There are many other fascinating features of this armor, but I am going to keep this thread focussed. Especially worthy of note is the overall shape of the armor. While it is still a go-maiedou, we are seeing the beginnings of a more rounded shape forming.



At this time we also see the Nuinobe-dou soaring in popularity. 

This example is of particular note. Gifted from Toyotomi Hideyoshi to Date Masamune in 1587, we are now truly seeing the beginnings of the round shape people are so familiar with.



However it seems many nuinobe-dou well into the 1590's were still of a go-mai-dou construction.

Mori Takamasa's armor used in the second invasion of Korea is a great example of this. However, there is something quite modern here that is very important to note.


We can clearly now see the later style of Muna-ita and Waki-ita, and can firmly place it in the 1590's.

Finally, all of the ingredients are there for the modern Okegawa Nimai-dou. All it takes is the right person to combine everything together...

I would place this ‘marudou’ rather between 1570-1580.   I have one,   And c14 tests confirm this.

[Viper6924]

A lot of info to process, Arthur  New input on old ”ideas” are always welcome. When it comes to history, be it Japanese or other, we can’t afford to    stop investigating. Otherwise stagnation sets in. Looking back at books written 10-15 years ago, reveals that the process of gaining new ground, indeed moves in the right direction. Albeit slow at times…

When we comes to the topic about what is of Japanese true origin, the one important thing that comes to mind is Shinto. Apart from that, I like to think of the Japanese as the unrivaled masters at incorporating forriegn ideas. They tried and tested everything coming in from the mainland. Bad ideas not in par with the Japanese mindset, was discarded quicker than you can say sayonara. But if the ”import” took root in the heart of the locals, with locals I of course mean the top 1-2% of the community, assimilation and more importantly, development followed. We see this local improvement everywhere in Japanese culture. This is fact plain and simple.

Of course this also had an huge impact on the development of Japanese arms and armor development. Everything from the curve of a blade, horsemanship and general development of arms and armor came from abroad. But it was in many areas developed by the skillful Japanese artisans into something better and much more effective.

I have a 10 monme Kishu matchlock made in 1863. It’s the absolute pinnacle of perfection when it comes to matchlocks. Compare it to the western version would be like comparing a rusty bike to a Ferrari

It’s of course another question if this stubborn attachment to matchlocks was a sound policy, whilst the west was producing Winchester repeating rifles during the same period.

Nothing creates develpment like war. Nothing! Look at Ukraine. The locals brought in forreign technology in the form of harmless drones, which you can pick up in any tech-store for a few hundred dollars to spy on your neighbours and changed them into ”messangers of death” for the invaders. Just like the Japanese been doing for over a thousand years.

I will keep following this and other threads like it with great interest, as there are nuggets of gold within that will carry history forward.

So keep at it, Arthur 😉

 

Jan

 

 

 

 

 

 

[chris covington]

6 hours ago, Luc T said:

I would place this ‘marudou’ rather between 1570-1580.   I have one,   And c14 tests confirm this.

 

Mr. Taelman,

 

I haven’t studied archaeology since undergrad, and it was only an intro class (we only briefly reviewed carbon dating), so forgive the questions. What part of the armor do they radio carbon date? I assume it would either be a bit of fabric or the urushi? If it is the urushi it should really help to nail stuff down (fabric could be reused from older projects, not the case with urushi). Like I said, I haven’t studied this stuff in a long time (1990s). How accurate is the process these days? I assume they’ve probably gotten better at it than they were 30 years ago. Do the labs still give confidence scores and date ranges. Sorry for the dumb questions. I’m trying to dust off memories long buried. 

 

Best regards,

Chris

[Luc T]

46 minutes ago, chris covington said:

 

Mr. Taelman,

 

I haven’t studied archaeology since undergrad, and it was only an intro class (we only briefly reviewed carbon dating), so forgive the questions. What part of the armor do they radio carbon date? I assume it would either be a bit of fabric or the urushi? If it is the urushi it should really help to nail stuff down (fabric could be reused from older projects, not the case with urushi). Like I said, I haven’t studied this stuff in a long time (1990s). How accurate is the process these days? I assume they’ve probably gotten better at it than they were 30 years ago. Do the labs still give confidence scores and date ranges. Sorry for the dumb questions. I’m trying to dust off memories long buried. 

 

Best regards,

Chris

Hi Chris,

normally, I use a piece of flaking urushi.   This is the best part i think.  Or a piece of kawa kozane, but these can be older reused kozane.    The lab gives an average timespan, withe a certainty of +-80%.

C14 is not 100% waterproof, but is is, as I said, to confirm my thoughts.

This dou is comparable withe the golden one of Maeda Toshiie.  1570-1580.

I tend to date armor on their style, proven reference material, and scientific examination.  Not one of these 3 is an axioma, but the 3 together give a good impression of the reality.

btw, i c14 tested almost all my pre-momoyama armors.   After 1640, these tests are useless due to sun fluctuations.

 

btw, the earlier Mori Takamasa's armor differs indeed qua muna ita and waki ita.  i have to come back on my words, it may be later than 1580.