Quote:
Originally Posted by Edster
David,
Good point. On the surface I would agree. BUT many if not most weapons were initially produced in an industrialized environment, even the Kassala sword market, and used within a cultural context. Many utility knives became weapons when needed. In this case the US Army's M1942 machete was made in several places during WW2 including Australia and used as necessary. And afterward adapted as a commercial tool including in Central/South America even until today.
Martin's machete is a survival of its origin and used within the ethnic culture of its owners. We may even Wokely call it a "cultural appropriation", but I think it's still ethnographically valid.
|
Just because a tool or weapon migrates into a particular culture that does not make it an ethnographic artifact of that culture. This is a mass produced military issue machete. Not my definition of ethnographic at least. We will have to agree to disagree here i'm afraid.
