Poke in the eye?

Tim Simmons · 19th February 2011, 07:02 PM

Barry taking on board what you say about it sometimes being hard to differentiate between tool and weapon. I have been doing a little more research.

All this is assuming that the item is not African. I did go for it on the feeling that it was not African, more something to do with the Pacific. The line marks make it hard to deny use as a weaving tool. But if we look at weaving in the Pacific and Melanesia, we could be lookig at an item from hundreds of small islands, like off the top of my head Tikopia. Then perhaps the item may have had a dual function. If a village were to suffer a suprise raid while all busy going about daily life and concetiating on weaving. You have a weapon in your hand. Here is a link that could add weight to the idea, scroll down to " Ethnographic evidence, Back strap loom "

http://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/.../010020762.pdf

This "Jstor" link is interesting but they always leave you halfway home.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3628663

Also I post an extract from "Melanesia, a short ethnography by B.A.L. Cranstone, The British Museum 1961 " As I say all assuming but could shed some light on why the item is so weapon like.

Tim Simmons · 6th May 2011, 05:21 PM

I have been working on a new display and got this out for a second look. I might just agree with Barry that it is probably a weapon. If it was a weavers sword then to make the lines it would have to be in the same place every time the weaver used thier loom. To get the threads in the same line mark all the time just seems very unlikey. The line marks could come from tight areas of binding, perhaps soaked material drying very tight in places and since lost. We have all seen marks from old tight wire binding on Southern African stuff and natural cord marks on other items. There is considerable wear to all the marks on the blade and pommel.

19th February 2011, 07:02 PM	#1
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,856	Barry taking on board what you say about it sometimes being hard to differentiate between tool and weapon. I have been doing a little more research. All this is assuming that the item is not African. I did go for it on the feeling that it was not African, more something to do with the Pacific. The line marks make it hard to deny use as a weaving tool. But if we look at weaving in the Pacific and Melanesia, we could be lookig at an item from hundreds of small islands, like off the top of my head Tikopia. Then perhaps the item may have had a dual function. If a village were to suffer a suprise raid while all busy going about daily life and concetiating on weaving. You have a weapon in your hand. Here is a link that could add weight to the idea, scroll down to " Ethnographic evidence, Back strap loom " http://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/.../010020762.pdf This "Jstor" link is interesting but they always leave you halfway home. http://www.jstor.org/pss/3628663 Also I post an extract from "Melanesia, a short ethnography by B.A.L. Cranstone, The British Museum 1961 " As I say all assuming but could shed some light on why the item is so weapon like. Attached Images

6th May 2011, 05:21 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,856	I have been working on a new display and got this out for a second look. I might just agree with Barry that it is probably a weapon. If it was a weavers sword then to make the lines it would have to be in the same place every time the weaver used thier loom. To get the threads in the same line mark all the time just seems very unlikey. The line marks could come from tight areas of binding, perhaps soaked material drying very tight in places and since lost. We have all seen marks from old tight wire binding on Southern African stuff and natural cord marks on other items. There is considerable wear to all the marks on the blade and pommel.