Shogun8

Hello all, Let me preface what I'm about to say with the fact that I'm not one to wade into a controversy (and not that I think that this topic is particularly controversial), especially when one considers that at the end of the day, what one chooses to do with items in their collection is personal and reflects their own approach to study preservation and collecting . The subject I'm referring of course, is that of whether one should or shouldn't open an ukebari in order to examine the interior of the hachi. For many - especially it seems many here on the NMB - this is sacrilegious and tantamount to destroying part of the heritage of the kabuto itself. However, for many of us whose main focus is the study and appreciation of armour, opening an ukebari (and I do mean opening, whether it be by detaching it from the koshimaki (preferred) or gasp (!), making an incision in the precious ukebari, but not destroying it - which again many seem to think is synonymous with the aforementioned procedures), is the only way to truly gain access to the insights revealed by the interior of the hachi. Of course, the first thing that one looks for inside a kabuto is the existence of a mei. However, it is the interior of the kabuto that reveals the most information even in the absence of a mei, allowing one to deduce period, school, maker and the very history of the particular piece (i.e. repairs, alterations, enhancements made are very telling). One also has to consider that rarely is the ukebari itself ubu, with the kabuto in question likely having several replacements throughout its lifetime. So, for certain collectors of armour, it is much more important to know the kabuto than to have a perfectly pristine and intact ukebari. But, then again - to each his own...and don't get me started on the subject of shikoro...

And thanks, Dave - but too bad we can't find it in English!

Awesome, Micha - thank you!

Hi Dave, No, the sword that was featured was indeed a rapier with a very fancy hilt.

Sorry gents, but it seems that the article has been taken down for some reason. I even tried to search it with the title of this topic (which is the exact headline of the article), but to no avail. If someone knows how to retrieve it please chime in!

Not sure if this has already been posted, but just in case, I came across this interesting article: http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13068309

The mabezashi is interesting with the nawame fukurin on the inner edge only, which I have never seen before. I wonder if it once had the same fukurin on the outer edge which has since been lost (in fact, I don't recall ever seeing fukurin like this anywhere except the outer edge).

Hi Brendan and Brian, Unfortunately, I know absolutely nothing about reproduction armour (except the ability to tell that it's reproduction). I do know that there are a number of people who are more immersed in this world on Facebook and Instagram, if you don't find any help here.

Ruben, Please do post any information or images you may have!

Hi Jonas, I'm assuming that your question has not been asked tongue-in-cheek, so I will attempt to give you a serious answer. This is because ANY o-yoroi in existence is either a National Treasure, in a shrine or museum or exponentially less likely, still hidden away in some noble family's kura - they're certainly not floating around on the market, much less online. The real question is if this is even a real reproduction of an o-yoroi because even reproductions made by modern day katchushi have been known to have taken years to make with prices in the hundreds of thousands. I'm not sure what this particular example is (can't make out anything really from the pictures supplied), but it is assuredly not "real". Besides, it's from China - not the bastion of authenticity when it comes to Japanese antiques.

That's excellent, Grey and Geraint - thanks to you both!

Dear All, I'm hoping to gain some information on behalf of a very good friend who recently purchased the sword below. Unfortunately, the information is somewhat scanty with only the 3 images and the fact that the sword measures approximately 24" in length total. If someone can provide a translation of the mei for starters, that would be great. Thanks in advance.

This could explain why the plates don't show signs of taka-niku, Luc - as one would expect with a Yoshi-ryu kabuto.

Thanks for the additional detail, Gary!

Wonderful and rare armour, Gary! If the menpo is indeed signed, that would be even more special. There are other Zesai armour with similar characteristically Iwai menpo, but they are not signed.

Another interesting menpo... Please provide more pics when you have the chance...

I agree - the menpo seems unusual and interesting...

Hi Gary, Can you explain what you mean by this? John

During these times, the postal service has been incredibly slow. I had a kabuto stuck at the post office in Japan for over a month and then when it finally did leave, it got stuck again in the Canadian p.o. for over another month. USPS is just as bad, so I'd give it a little more time.

Barry, Any pics of the entire menpo?

Adam, I think you did very well with this menpo. Yes it has condition issues but as Uwe says it's a good, honest menpo, I think of the Iwai school which is one of my personal favourites. Don't know if the tare is original, but here's an image of a hanbo I have that has an original chain mail tare. One difference that I notice is that the holes of your menpo are located in the middle of the mounting plate whereas on mine the holes are near the bottom edge. The mail of your tare definitely shows some age in keeping with the age of the menpo and your menpo is definitely earlier than my hanbo, which probably dates to the late Edo.

Agreed Ian. These Western kabuto were rarely signed and I've never seen or don't know of any signed eboshi in particular.

Unfortunately, these kind of mistakes seem to be happening more often with me lately, Ian!

Hi Adam, Ian is absolutely right, the dō is of course a nuinobe dō, my eyes strayed to the other details of the dō like the muneita, waki-ita and oshitsuke-ita and I completely ignored the fact that this dō does not have the most important characteristic of the mogami type - the 4 hinges and 5 sections. Brain freeze! That's what you get when you're trying to send 3 emails, answering texts and Messenger and browsing NMB at the same time! Still, a nice example of a nuinobe dō. Apologies for my hasty and careless assessment and Ian - thanks for not jumping all over me!

Adam, When I read the first few lines of your post, I was almost afraid to see what you got for your $380. You actually did very well, IMHO. It is indeed a mogami dō, which are not common and yours is much better than most examples that I see. Yours is ubu and looks to be from the early Edo period, perhaps even late Momoyama. Well done!