Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - A Kris-Tanto or hybridation as an answer

rand · 9th September 2007, 07:18 PM

Don't quite understand the concept that traditional weapons didn't cross boundries while this modern dagger does.

Influences from neighboring countries or regions that trade is done with have had an influence on culture,weapons and armor throughout history and we would have to start with the rock and stick if we wanted to give a study for reference of this.

Aesthetically the blade had a refined tribal form coupled with a ritual function, the hilt looked off balance but that may have been because of the angle the photo was taken from. Also liked the concept of using the Indonesian type of bolsa to snug the dagger into the scabbard. The designs cut into the edge of the blade carry asthetic and cultural symbols that add value to the holder/owner. Personally would have preferred seeing the drilled hole in the blade completely covered with a silver decoration with some sort of an associated design.

Most people would say the style of dagger is based on a Japanese tanto. Or is it really? We could discuss where the Japanese got their basic design from, now that would put a hitch in the road, especially if it went back to China. There was a good reason for Japan to stay so isolated, they just did it to well and too long.

Sometimes if you want to know what works when making something you need only to look at objects from history, believe a 15th century German sallet was the basis for the German 20th century helmet.

Can understand the concept of wanting to keep a discussion in a certain time period, just as one may want to have a show of antique weapons only. But then antique has to be over a hundred years old by definition. So where would one draw the line? Because thats what much of the response is doing, drawing a line in the dirt as was done outside the Alamo by Colonel Ben Milam.

Its a tough question....

For me my answer used to be the Franco Prussian War of 1870-71, because this was the first time that modern rifled firearms decimated men wearing armor(French heavy cavalry), but that left out all the great Russian metalwork on shashkas, daggers and firearms, left out the tribal weapons of the 20th century archipelgo, left out the decline of the sabre in modern armies, left out the progression of the bayonette, left out the change of materials for armor.

Where would you draw the line?

rand

9th September 2007, 07:18 PM	#18
rand Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 538	Crossing Boundries? Don't quite understand the concept that traditional weapons didn't cross boundries while this modern dagger does. Influences from neighboring countries or regions that trade is done with have had an influence on culture,weapons and armor throughout history and we would have to start with the rock and stick if we wanted to give a study for reference of this. Aesthetically the blade had a refined tribal form coupled with a ritual function, the hilt looked off balance but that may have been because of the angle the photo was taken from. Also liked the concept of using the Indonesian type of bolsa to snug the dagger into the scabbard. The designs cut into the edge of the blade carry asthetic and cultural symbols that add value to the holder/owner. Personally would have preferred seeing the drilled hole in the blade completely covered with a silver decoration with some sort of an associated design. Most people would say the style of dagger is based on a Japanese tanto. Or is it really? We could discuss where the Japanese got their basic design from, now that would put a hitch in the road, especially if it went back to China. There was a good reason for Japan to stay so isolated, they just did it to well and too long. Sometimes if you want to know what works when making something you need only to look at objects from history, believe a 15th century German sallet was the basis for the German 20th century helmet. Can understand the concept of wanting to keep a discussion in a certain time period, just as one may want to have a show of antique weapons only. But then antique has to be over a hundred years old by definition. So where would one draw the line? Because thats what much of the response is doing, drawing a line in the dirt as was done outside the Alamo by Colonel Ben Milam. Its a tough question.... For me my answer used to be the Franco Prussian War of 1870-71, because this was the first time that modern rifled firearms decimated men wearing armor(French heavy cavalry), but that left out all the great Russian metalwork on shashkas, daggers and firearms, left out the tribal weapons of the 20th century archipelgo, left out the decline of the sabre in modern armies, left out the progression of the bayonette, left out the change of materials for armor. Where would you draw the line? rand