Iekatsu

It's a little disappointing that the organisation will be judged by the perception of a single member, an organisation mind you that includes respected members of this forum and experts in Japan. You do no have to use the services of the KNKBSK, but there is room in the world for two bodies that authenticate and certify Japanese armour and equipment. Kind regards, Thomas Sinclair

To clarify the Kokusai Nihon Katchū Bugu Shinkō Kyōkai (KNKBSK) is a new professional organisation based in Japan that provides authentication and papering services to professional dealers/bodies both within and outside of Japan. The organisation is new, but this has no bearing on the quality of the rigorous appraisal process and the certificates that the organisation issues. The certificates, which can be considered a reassurance of the authenticity and quality of a piece are only issued after being appraised by a panel of experts in Japan and have multiple security features to prevent counterfeiting. Currently the organisation does not provide certification for private collectors, for these services I recommend that you contact the Japanese Armour Society. If you have any further questions feel free to contact the organisation directly via: admin@katchushinko.org Kind regards, Thomas Sinclair

Thanks for the heads up Darrel.

Thanks for the images Alain, I agree with you, it looks like it was originally a Korean helmet that was converted into a kabuto, likely during the Momoyama period. The Shikoro looks to be a later addition?

Very nice Alain. Do you have any images of the Tehen and is any of the interior visible or is the Ukebari intact?

I agree with John sorry, It appears to be pressed sheet metal.

Showa Period, if it had to guess 1960's. If you post a profile image and one under the chin I will point out some of the things to look out for.

Very nice, could you please share an image of the interior?

Barry, I'm sure it was a typo but your kabuto is by Haruta Yoshihisa, its a nice example of the type and definitely worthy of restoration.

Not quite yesterday, likely Showa period.

I do agree that there are very few dated examples and/or examples with reliable provenance, there is also clearly crossovers in style and construction between the Late-muromachi period and Momoyama period and the presence of later modifications to contend with, which further complicates the task. While signed and/or dated examples exist, the reality is that the vast majority of work was not signed or dated in this period, which is why it is important to compare and study the stylistic features and construction methods used and compare that with known examples. You have presented examples from Joshu Norikuni, we know that Norikuni was working in this period and that there are at least two signed and dated koboshi kabuto that we can draw from (1567 and 1569), there were also other Joshu smiths likely making koboshi in the same period, Norishige for example. But these really only represent a small subset of manufacture, given the number of extant un-signed examples which align stylistically. Unfortunately most of the examples we can draw from are unsigned and do not have particularly reliable provenance, I am in the process of building a library of such examples for comparison. Are you aware of any other dated examples from this period or examples with reliable provenance?

Luc, my point was that it is not an exclusive trait, there any many Koboshi from many different smiths that have three rows of rivets on the front plate.

The Dou, all alterations aside is actually quite interesting, a relatively uncommon form, these Dou are essentially munition/Okashi grade items. The reason it is signed is because the Iwai were often tasked with and responsible for repairing and refurbishing Okashi armour in the Edo period, this is also why there are so many examples of mediocre armour bearing the Iwai inscriptions. Below is an example of similar style of Dou, and another that has an Iwai inscription that sold recently on yahoo. These examples are more indicative of what the Dou originally would have looked like.

The lacquer damage is consistent with the holes being drilled after it was lacquered, generally the surface would be lacquered and then the fittings added (this would be true even if it was refurbished in period). That fact that no lacquer remains intact around any of the fittings, that some of the fittings punch though part of the inscription, that there is evidence of other post period modifications all indicate that there was likely never any fittings originally and that the current fittings were likely added post period.

There are some serious red flags here, it is quite clear that decorative plates and fittings have been added post period. This was originally sold as part of a "set", which was cobbled together from Edo and Showa period components. The Dou has been vandalised, this is unscrupulous behaviour which needs to be condemned. https://www.catawiki.com/es/l/47534071-yoroi-cuero-hierro-forjado-seda-japans-samurai-armor-kyogoku-takatsugu-gesigneerd-1590-japon-siglo-xvi