Re: Ellis' post about cover-up and Ueshiba
Don't have the time right now to address the questions. But, I want to clear up my point of view. I'm not arguing that Daito ryu was hidden or covered up at all. Yes, it's there in the books. My point is that Daito ryu (and Takeda) was so downplayed and marginalized that both were never shown to be the major factor in Ueshiba's training.
In other words, look at all the examples posted from the books. Stevens even goes as far as to print "Morihei -- essentially a self-taught master". Whenever Ueshiba's training was discussed in books, Daito ryu was amidst several other martial arts, some of which Ueshiba had never studied and some of which he studied for about a year.
Peter, I'm not sure of the exact dates and I'll have to do some digging for them. But, my best guess is up to the 1980s and possibly the very early 90s, the books printed here (and to answer your other question, I don't have info on what books were like outside the U.S. so I don't include them.) skewed, downplayed, or otherwise covered up the fact that Takeda's Daito ryu played the single major role on Ueshiba's martial training.
I make note of this because I think Stan's research was the pivotal point where books started to address Daito ryu as being more than just another martial art Ueshiba studied in his self taught genius.
And just as history has shown us that bringing certain things to the light of day creates the effect of a change in what was once "canon", I think it is starting to happen again -- this time with Daito ryu aiki. It's kind of interesting to watch it unfold.