Bocastephen, what other people are trying to point out is that edomae simply reply refers to the style of sushi that is also known as nigirizushi, historically using fish that was fished "edomae". This is copied today globally in the same way that mass produced beer today is pilsener.

It was "invented" in the late Edo period as a fast food and the innovation was it did not use fermented or otherwise highly cured fish like other types of sushi and also placing the fish on a rice ball made by closing ones hand (nigiru). A key distinction today in Japan is, for example, edomae vs. oshizushi. The latter being a traditional preserved sushi from the Kansai region. The latter is served (rarely) in foreign sushi restaurants. In Japan there are lots of non-fish sushi types like inarisushi and futomaki.

In the 1800s the edomae fish probably was not usually raw but lightly cooked or cured in vinegar. I suppose if the fish was available for immediate consumption it may have been served raw. There are modern developments from the 20th century like gunkanmaki (uni or ikura). Is this edomae? I don't think so if you are upholding the tradition. Your edomae restaurant of choice probably served gunkanmaki.

Also the Norwegians claim to have brought salmon into the sushi world by a large marketing push and it did not appear until 1995!
http://www.nortrade.com/sectors/arti...ushi-to-japan/

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Zanmai is as much edomae as Jiro.

Also going back to earlier discussion:

You seem to fancy yourself as a sushi connoisseur (I don't claim to be one myself) but you don't know your basics about fish. Chutoro and ootoro are two premium "cuts" of northern bluefin (honmaguro). The only exception could be a kaiten joint serving indomaguro. If you eat at Jiro then you will with 99% certainty get wild caught, fresh bluefin, which you don't claim to eat. In addition to the aforementioned they probably served you an akami (lean) cut as well. The 1% chance is that the joint is a complete scam.