Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Recent Posts

Welcome to the NEW Samurai Archives Japanese History Forum. If you have an account on the old forum (The Samurai Archives Citadel), you'll have to create a new account here. If you did have an account at the old forum, send a PM to "Samurai Archives Bot" letting us know, and we'll update your post count to reflect your activity on the old forum.

Otherwise, you're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are many features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Be sure to validate your account via the email that will be sent when you sign up, otherwise you will have very limited access to forum features.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
How common were haidate?
Topic Started: Apr 6 2015, 06:47 PM (3,444 Views)
Condottiero Magno
Member Avatar
Innkeeper
How common were haidate? Bryant says they were rarely worn, despite the benefits, yet the Ospreys, the Ritta Nakanishi's Japanese Armor Vol. 2 and Terje Solum's Saga of the Samurai series, have the majority of foot samurai clad in such in combat - perhaps as a way to differentiate from the better equipped ashigaru? - in contrast with the figures in the battle screens. Would wearing a pair on foot restrict mobility as claimed? Would teppo and yumi samurai need haidate, since their roles differed from those wielding polearms?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
J. L. Badgley
Member Avatar


I have no reason to distrust Tony's assessment. I remember talking with him, and he mentioned factors such as the haidate getting waterlogged and cumbersome while crossing rivers. Also, whole they are useful, they are probably one of the less useful pieces, and out is more weight while marching. I wouldn't say that the restrict mobility overly much, but if you are marching to the battle site, fatigue would definitely be a consideration. And, heck, humans throughout history have been known to occasionally choose comfort over protection. In Europe, we know of city militias leaving the gates fully armored, and then, as soon as they were away from the city walls, they'd start shedding arm and leg armor that they felt was too cumbersome, particularly if it wasn't custom made for you.

On top of that, there are factors of cost. If you have to supply your own armor, you might have to think about where best to invest. If someone else is supplying it, almost moreso; if I don't include haidate, can I field more men?

That said, a "full" suit would have haidate in the Sengoku Period, and so anybody who is anyone I would expect to have all the pieces.

Finally, when you are looking through books, consider that they aren't illustrating the entire army, most of the time, but just representatives. You have to do the multiplication in your head. Also, the full suits are what look good, and impressive, and have the most to talk about. Given that histories often have a tendency to treat with the exceptional rather than the commonplace, I don't find this surprising.
Edited by J. L. Badgley, Apr 9 2015, 01:14 AM.

Sengoku Daimyo.com

The Capital Area Budokai
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ltdomer98
Member Avatar
Daijo Daijin

J. L. Badgley
Apr 9 2015, 01:13 AM
And, heck, humans throughout history have been known to occasionally choose comfort over protection. In Europe, we know of city militias leaving the gates fully armored, and then, as soon as they were away from the city walls, they'd start shedding arm and leg armor that they felt was too cumbersome, particularly if it wasn't custom made for you.


Hell, we do that now. Leaving the gate in Afghanistan, you were supposed to have full helmet and body armor, to include groin protector. A groin protector is a piece that hangs down off the bottom of the body armor and flaps around over your personal bits. It's annoying. So unless important people were around, most people didn't bother with it. Shoot, I didn't wear my helmet most of the time, since instead of a military vehicle I rode around in an unmarked SUV most of the time, and the helmet just made us stick out more.

Pretty much I'd echo what JL said. Screens, etc. are artistic representations. While they can make for great sources, it's always got to be taken critically. And if haidate were a pain in the (thighs) to wear, I doubt most soldiers wore them unless they put them on right before battle.

Posted Image
Daijo Daijin Emeritus
退職させていただきます。
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Condottiero Magno
Member Avatar
Innkeeper
J. L. Badgley
 
I have no reason to distrust Tony's assessment. I remember talking with him, and he mentioned factors such as the haidate getting waterlogged and cumbersome while crossing rivers. Also, whole they are useful, they are probably one of the less useful pieces, and out is more weight while marching. I wouldn't say that the restrict mobility overly much, but if you are marching to the battle site, fatigue would definitely be a consideration. And, heck, humans throughout history have been known to occasionally choose comfort over protection. In Europe, we know of city militias leaving the gates fully armored, and then, as soon as they were away from the city walls, they'd start shedding arm and leg armor that they felt was too cumbersome, particularly if it wasn't custom made for you.

How heavy are the average haidate, taking into account the variety? Looking at the period illustrations and reconstructions, strapped to the knees, they look like knee pads worn by hockey goalies...

Why wasn't the design refined, like kusazuri attached to a belt and more form fitting, maybe articulated, like cuisses and poleyns?
J. L. Badgley
 
On top of that, there are factors of cost. If you have to supply your own armor, you might have to think about where best to invest. If someone else is supplying it, almost moreso; if I don't include haidate, can I field more men?

That said, a "full" suit would have haidate in the Sengoku Period, and so anybody who is anyone I would expect to have all the pieces.

Wouldn't mid to late Sengoku munition armor supplied to ashigaru be cheap, as it's made or acquired in bulk? I'd think haidate wouldn't be as time consuming to produce, compared with the other components. Are there records of what was required and supplied to ashigaru?
J. L. Badgley
 
Finally, when you are looking through books, consider that they aren't illustrating the entire army, most of the time, but just representatives. You have to do the multiplication in your head. Also, the full suits are what look good, and impressive, and have the most to talk about. Given that histories often have a tendency to treat with the exceptional rather than the commonplace, I don't find this surprising.

Saga of the Samurai 5 has plates from the Kawanakajima (1561) screen there's nary a haidate, plenty of samurai with sode, with a few exceptions mounted and on foot - Bryant also said that these weren't that common, even the diminutive ones, combatants relying on kote. Could it be a way of differentiating between (lesser) samurai and ashigaru?
ltdomer98
Apr 9 2015, 01:54 AM
J. L. Badgley
Apr 9 2015, 01:13 AM
And, heck, humans throughout history have been known to occasionally choose comfort over protection. In Europe, we know of city militias leaving the gates fully armored, and then, as soon as they were away from the city walls, they'd start shedding arm and leg armor that they felt was too cumbersome, particularly if it wasn't custom made for you.


Hell, we do that now. Leaving the gate in Afghanistan, you were supposed to have full helmet and body armor, to include groin protector. A groin protector is a piece that hangs down off the bottom of the body armor and flaps around over your personal bits. It's annoying. So unless important people were around, most people didn't bother with it. Shoot, I didn't wear my helmet most of the time, since instead of a military vehicle I rode around in an unmarked SUV most of the time, and the helmet just made us stick out more.

Isn't there an alternative to the flap, IIRC a detachable "cod-piece"?
ltdomer98
 
Pretty much I'd echo what JL said. Screens, etc. are artistic representations. While they can make for great sources, it's always got to be taken critically. And if haidate were a pain in the (thighs) to wear, I doubt most soldiers wore them unless they put them on right before battle.

This is why I limited my searches to images near and/or contemporary as possible, as Edo Period and the few from the Meiji era have all samurai in complete harness. Terje Solum's reconstructions have samurai mounted and on foot with haidate, even if the latter are wielding yumi or teppo. On the mainland, missile troops, like arquebusiers, would forgo leg armor for mobility, as they'd be skirmishing.

My interest is partially due to taking part in the Steel Fist Kickstarter...

To back up 40 yari and other polearm wielding samurai, I'll be purchasing twenty of these:

Posted Image

I was told teppo samurai is in the works, but since the heads are separate, I thought I'd go ahead and replace these heads with kabuto, along with maedate.

Posted Image

How would I further differentiate these from teppo ashigaru?
Edited by Condottiero Magno, Apr 28 2015, 07:00 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ltdomer98
Member Avatar
Daijo Daijin

Condottiero Magno
Apr 28 2015, 06:29 PM
Isn't there an alternative to the flap, IIRC a detachable "cod-piece"?


That's the "flap" I'm talking about.

Posted Image

The bottom pieces in the front (groin protector) and back are detachable (as are the arm pieces). And so, they'd often be discarded, because they are annoying.

Posted Image
Daijo Daijin Emeritus
退職させていただきます。
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Condottiero Magno
Member Avatar
Innkeeper
ltdomer98
Apr 29 2015, 02:56 AM
Condottiero Magno
Apr 28 2015, 06:29 PM
Isn't there an alternative to the flap, IIRC a detachable "cod-piece"?


That's the "flap" I'm talking about.

Posted Image

The bottom pieces in the front (groin protector) and back are detachable (as are the arm pieces). And so, they'd often be discarded, because they are annoying.

Didn't know about the sleeves, but I've seen the flap in media pics from Afghanistan and Iraq. Is the one in the pic another way of wearing the same thing or is it the alternative I mentioned?

Military Unveils Latest Body Armor: ‘Ballistic Groin Protection’

:unsure:

Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ltdomer98
Member Avatar
Daijo Daijin

No, that's different--haven't used that one before.
Posted Image
Daijo Daijin Emeritus
退職させていただきます。
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
evalerio
Member Avatar
Izumi no kami
I have been illustrating and sculpting samurai armour for the past 30 years. In recent years I have used a 'rule of thumb' to show samurai at a particular time in the Sengoku period.

More mounted samurai wearing haidate up to the unification of Japan under Hideyoshi. As more samurai dismounted to fight on foot, I depict the haidate less. The haidate is visible in my artwork and sculpture at Kawanakajima, but less so at Sekigahara, and not at all at Osaka.

A mounted samurai has the upper legs sticking out of the protection of the kusazuri, presenting an opponent with a perfect target. A haidate is needed for protection. On foot the kusazuri protects most of the upper legs and the haidate can be discarded.

Samurai infantry from the earliest time are often shown without them. I may be asked to sculpt Teppo samurai infantry. I would do them without haidate. I may also do dismounted Teppo samurai circa Sekigahara and Osaka. I would also do them without haidate. I do not show the haidate on samurai involved in castle sieges or boarding parties in naval warfare.

It is a matter of personal choice when I depict famous commanders or daimyo with haidate, just because they look more colorful with them. But surviving examples of armour show that parts of the set were most likely no longer used by later periods by certain individuals. The set worn by Kimata Morikatsu, vanguard commander of the Ii Red Devils, does not have a haidate. Armour worn by Honda Tadakatsu has a haidate, but is missing the sode. Contemporary illustration and present reconstruction show the sode as huge and cumbersome like those in the Gempei period. I can see why Tadakatsu may have discarded them.
Edited by evalerio, May 1 2015, 10:59 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Condottiero Magno
Member Avatar
Innkeeper
evalerio
 
I have been illustrating and sculpting samurai armour for the past 30 years. In recent years I have used a 'rule of thumb' to show samurai at a particular time in the Sengoku period.

More mounted samurai wearing haidate up to the unification of Japan under Hideyoshi. As more samurai dismounted to fight on foot, I depict the haidate less. The haidate is visible in my artwork and sculpture at Kawanakajima, but less so at Sekigahara, and not at all at Osaka.

Didn't samurai, who could afford a horse, prefer to fight on foot most of the time during the Sengoku period? I don't recall mass cavalry engagements, like on the continent, nor cavalry reserves, aside from maybe the occasional deployment by the Takeda.
evalerio
 
A mounted samurai has the upper legs sticking out of the protection of the kusazuri, presenting an opponent with a perfect target. A haidate is needed for protection. On foot the kusazuri protects most of the upper legs and the haidate can be discarded.

If haidate were as difficult to put on and remove, in contrast with tassets, would it have been a matter of individual choice?

Posted Image

Ritta Nakanishi illustrated variants and I found the above on Bryant's site. Reminds me of chausses attached to a belt or arming doublet and wonder why this style wasn't as common as the version secured by ropes.
evalerio
 
Samurai infantry from the earliest time are often shown without them. I may be asked to sculpt Teppo samurai infantry. I would do them without haidate. I may also do dismounted Teppo samurai circa Sekigahara and Osaka. I would also do them without haidate. I do not show the haidate on samurai involved in castle sieges or boarding parties in naval warfare.

Japanese Armor Vol. 1 has a caption "early haidate" on the Muromachi period page and other than improvised one offs, I don't think it would've been needed when the samurai were mounted archers.

How would one go about differentiating foot samurai and better equipped ashigaru, in a variety of roles? In the above pic of Steel Fist's teppo ashigaru, would simply swapping the jingasa with kabuto work, since haidate and sode would've been rarely worn? The figures do have sculpted sashimono holders, but this wasn't consistently worn, based on the period illustrations.
evalerio
 
It is a matter of personal choice when I depict famous commanders or daimyo with haidate, just because they look more colorful with them. But surviving examples of armour show that parts of the set were most likely no longer used by later periods by certain individuals. The set worn by Kimata Morikatsu, vanguard commander of the Ii Red Devils, does not have a haidate. Armour worn by Honda Tadakatsu has a haidate, but is missing the sode. Contemporary illustration and present reconstruction show the sode as huge and cumbersome like those in the Gempei period. I can see why Tadakatsu may have discarded them.

There are also shrunken sode, in some of the same illustrations, with daimyo and other important figures having the larger and older versions - maybe a means of depicting importance, like a halo.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
evalerio
Member Avatar
Izumi no kami
The choice of wearing or not wearing a haidate would most likely have been made before battle, or even before a campaign.

Daimyo and their generals would more likely keep them as they would often mount to command or lead men into battle.

Tsukaiban, mounted messengers operating within the army could choose not to wear haidate, but mounted scouts operating outside the safety of the main army would wear them for full protection as they might have to fight their way out of ambush or fight their way back.

Some mounted samurai were infantry commanders. Their choice to wear them or not. Some stayed mounted during combat leading their infantry. Some chose to fight on foot leading their infantry.

Mounted samurai arquebusiers would dismount for battle. They might choose not to wear them at all. Mounted archers on the other hand might wear them as they stayed mounted in combat.

Mounted samurai who were expected to be the main combat troops, whether fighting on horseback or dismounting to fight could likely be wearing them at all times. Mounted samurai did not engage in cavalry charges as in Napoleonic cavalry battles. More like mounted infantry engaging in close combat melee against both mounted opponents and enemy infantry.

If laying siege to a castle or fighting at sea, haidate were likely not worn.

The different looks between an ashigaru and a foot samurai could tell you the specific time of the Sengoku period up to the Edo period.

As to how to differentiate the look of well-armoured ashigaru to foot samurai. There were no set rules at the start. Smaller armies at the beginning of the Sengoku period, the ashigaru and the foot samurai wore the same types of armour, including the wearing of kabuto and tachi swords. As armies got bigger, cheaper armour were worn by large numbers of ashigaru recruited to expand the size of armies. The jingasa becoming almost an iconic mark of an ashigaru. BUT, 'elite' ashigaru, those permanently on duty as part of the hatamoto were almost indistinguishable from foot samurai. In better equipped armies, ashigaru wore good quality armour, with sode, kabuto and tachi swords. At some point ashigaru meant 'infantry' which included samurai infantry. Yari ashigaru and Teppo ashigaru squads in later times were equipped as those of their samurai.

By the Edo period all infantry began to look like the classical Sengoku period ashigaru with jingasa. Even samurai on horseback wore jingasa.

Edited by evalerio, May 5 2015, 01:14 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
worldantiques
No Avatar
Peasant
Condottiero Magno
Apr 6 2015, 06:47 PM
How common were haidate?
When talking about armors being sold, no armor would be considered as being complete without haidate except ashigaru armors which often never had haidate. Of course the majority of armors being sold are Edo period.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
narukagami
Member Avatar
Togishi
worldantiques
May 7 2015, 10:17 PM
Condottiero Magno
Apr 6 2015, 06:47 PM
How common were haidate?
When talking about armors being sold, no armor would be considered as being complete without haidate except ashigaru armors which often never had haidate. Of course the majority of armors being sold are Edo period.
By modern definitions.

A "complete" suit, IIRC, was just Do, kusazuri, sode, and kabuto in period. Everything else was auxiliary, not that anyone wouldn't be caught dead without certain auxiliary pieces. Or would they? (Because its armor, so they'd be lacking protection... and die.... get it? Get it? Hahaaaaaaa, I got jokes.)
Edited by narukagami, May 8 2015, 01:40 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
worldantiques
No Avatar
Peasant
narukagami
May 8 2015, 01:38 AM
Condottiero Magno
Apr 6 2015, 06:47 PM
How common were haidate? A "complete" suit, IIRC, was just Do, kusazuri, sode, and kabuto in period. Everything else was auxiliary, not that anyone wouldn't be caught dead without certain auxiliary pieces.


In my opinion from what I can see from available images that is incorrect, were did you get this info? What period are you talking about exactly, you are saying that not even suneate were included with the average samurai armor?

Here is a pre-Edo period armor supposedly belonging to Ieyasu Tokugawa, it has all of the parts you say would be "auxiliary". "Auxilary" armors were armor items that would have not been included with the average samurai armor and would have had to be ordered as an extra item when it was being made or afterwards as an additional item. Some examples of auxilary armor items would be kata-ate, nodowa, guruwa, kogake, manchira, wakibiki, Kyusho-ate, yoroi hakama.

Posted Image
Condottiero Magno
May 4 2015, 06:25 PM
evalerio
 


I found the above on Bryant's site. Reminds me of chausses attached to a belt or arming doublet and wonder why this style wasn't as common as the version secured by ropes.


Posted Image
Those are actually yoroi kobakama, a type of short pants with armor attached to the front and/or back.


Here is another example.

Posted Image

Edited by worldantiques, May 10 2015, 05:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
worldantiques
No Avatar
Peasant
Condottiero Magno
Apr 6 2015, 06:47 PM
How common were haidate? Bryant says they were rarely worn, despite the benefits, yet the Ospreys, the Ritta Nakanishi's Japanese Armor Vol. 2 and Terje Solum's Saga of the Samurai series, have the majority of foot samurai clad in such in combat - perhaps as a way to differentiate from the better equipped ashigaru? - in contrast with the figures in the battle screens. Would wearing a pair on foot restrict mobility as claimed? Would teppo and yumi samurai need haidate, since their roles differed from those wielding polearms?
The use of facial armor (men-yoroi / men-gu) is questionable as well based on period screens of various battles, it is very rare to see images of them being worn.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
« Previous Topic · Arms and Armor · Next Topic »
Add Reply

  Board Index

Samurai Archives is (C)2015 by C.E. West & F.W. Seal. Samurai Archives online since September 1st, 1999. The current Samurai Archives forum online since March 4th, 2015.