2018 ethnographic weapon

fernando · 1st August 2018, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Who can disagree with your thoughtful approach to this matter, Fernando?
Not I, that is certain.
However, that said , I do have a couple comments...

Fair enough, A.G.; and thank you for caring to respond to my simplistic approach to the subject. Still my argumentative abilities are manifestly inferior to those of the author of such excellent piece of rhetoric.
Yet is time i retire from this conversation, as having already expressed my point of view ... one that prevails, by the way.

Yours humbly !

Rick · 1st August 2018, 11:25 PM

A Smith's sub-forum wherein the artisan(s) only can show ethnographically inspired contemporary work for comments?

Or is this a...
Lead balloon?

David · 2nd August 2018, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

A Smith's sub-forum wherein the artisan(s) only can show ethnographically inspired contemporary work for comments?

Or is this a...
Lead balloon?

Well, i think there might be a limited number participating members who forge such things, but i could be wrong.

Rick · 2nd August 2018, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

Well, i think there might be a limited number participating members who forge such things, but i could be wrong.

Yes, you're probably right; and it probably would be abused by those seeking financial gain.

A. G. Maisey · 2nd August 2018, 02:35 AM

Why should a discussion group that relates to current manufacture of ethnographic weaponry be restricted to forging?

When we forge, we only create a forging that the finished blade will emerge from, most of the time and effort goes into the bench work, not the work on an anvil.

Forging only relates to the blade, the creation of the complete object involves skills other than blade work.

Perhaps consideration could be given to a division (if indeed one is needed) of current era work and historical work.

Personally I see this as more relevant to the study of weaponry using the ethnographic approach than a division based upon countries or geographically limited groups.

Consider this:- I have made a number of culturally correct Javanese keris, only one of those keris was made in Solo, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia, of the others, I forged one in Kampung Komplang, Solo, but carved it in Australia, all the rest were completely made in Australia.

We now live in a global village, old boundaries may be relevant in the context of time, but those old boundaries are no longer so relevant in the context of right now, today.

kronckew · 2nd August 2018, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

Yes, you're probably right; and it probably would be abused by those seeking financial gain.

AGM has a point.

Also, We make clear that advertising their wares is not allowed now, discussing items for sale or auction is prohibited. We can further restrict them from the established sales/trade section or give them their own subsection there and ignore them if such is your penchant...with a caveat that the forum is not responsible or involved in any sales in any way - caveat emptor. Lee cpuld even require a 'donation' for allowing them to post there to help fund the expensive to run forum.

It's also nice to have an area for post ww1 stuff so those who prefer older items can see what's being made now for comparison and authentication of the older stuff. It's hard enough to differentiate the real stuff now, searches online for examples of fakes or deceptive replicas are often non productive unless you stumble onto them, or remember a site from past searches or fingers getting burnt...i.e. I still come across 'British naval dirks' for auction at high prices that are being made in India for pennies with etched blades boasting 'real steel' on the ricasso and the infamous hex nut pommel securing the rats tail tang. epray used to have a warning page on these, but no longer. Auction houses are even less informed. That could be documented here.

Ian · 3rd August 2018, 02:34 AM

Gentlemen:

This has been a very interesting and wide ranging discussion that Thomas' weapon has generated. I fear, however, that this thread has strayed somewhat from the object of discussion, and into areas of speculation about the structure and aims of this forum.

The goals and objectives of the Ethnographic Forum have been presented on this site by Dr Lee Jones, and in my opinion Thomas' creation fits into the broad themes described for this forum--a view that I think has been expressed by Robert (the Lead Moderator of this forum).

The ideas expressed here about additional Forums are indeed interesting. It should be pointed out, however, that these pages are funded and maintained by Dr Jones, and are not without a considerable time commitment and cost for him. Some of what has been suggested would require additional resources. Furthermore, part of the success of this site has been, I believe, the conscious effort to not be "all things to all people." There are other sites that have attempted to do that, and some of those bit off more than they could chew and are essentially defunct.

There have been new pieces added over the years to this site. The Keris Warung Kopi (Keris Coffee Shop) was added in part to address the need for an English language site for serious discussion of the keris. The European Armory expanded on an early focus on Viking swords to include discussion of a much wider range of weapons and European cultures.

What this forum excels at, and I think its major strength, is its focus on key areas of edged weapons collecting and discussion. It has attracted experienced collectors, scholars, and ethnographic experts to its pages, people who would not necessarily participate in other online forums. Many, many more people visit the site than are registered members. Again, I think this reflects its appeal to serious collectors as well as those new to the field. If you are looking for bayonets, modern blade makers, contemporary or fantasy blades, then other sites probably address your areas of edged weapons collecting more completely.

These are my personal thoughts based on 20 years of participating in this site.

Ian.

A. G. Maisey · 2nd August 2018, 12:16 AM

I agree with you David, that it is nearly always a very good idea to try to fix the precise meaning of any word before relying on that word to carry a message that is intended to be clearly understood. In fact, it has been my long-standing habit to check any word that I do not use in daily colloquial communication. Additionally, it pleases me greatly that you accessed an Oxford source.

However, the dictionary meaning of any word is only the beginning of an understanding.

For instance, we all know and use without hesitation the word "occupy". It is a word that was avoided in the 17th & 18th centuries, because in Shakespeare's time it could get you time in the stocks if you were heard using it in public, as it had some particularly vulgar connotations --- well, connotations deemed to be vulgar at that time, perhaps not quite so vulgar now.

The way in which words are used changes constantly, just as society itself changes constantly. The only time a language does not change is when it is dead, as is the case with Latin, which in a sense can be a useful quality in a language, as it certainly prevents misunderstanding, possibly one of the reasons why a medical practitioner in past times would use Latin to convey instructions for treatment.

So, the message is clear:- language that is unchanging is dead, and language being an indicator of health for a society, any society that fails to change can also be considered dead, and dead things simply disappear and sink into oblivion.

Another quality of language is that meanings can and do change, dependent upon context.

Although we can produce a dictionary definition of a word, indeed, in the case of "ethnography" we can produce a very large number of dictionary definitions, all of which are similar, but all of which could be debated upon the variations in their similarity. Thus, for an understanding of current usage of a word, we need to go a little beyond the limitations of a two line dictionary entry. Because of the changing nature of language, lexicographers are in a sense, historians:- they record the meaning of words in the past, not necessarily in the present. The dictionary is the place that we start when investigating correct and current understanding of a word, but it is not the place where we finish, in fact, in real life the true meaning of a two letter word could well find itself argued in front of the highest court in the land.

I would like to make this post as short as I reasonably can, so rather than write a multi-page presentation on the way in which the word "ethnography" can be understood, I will provide this link:-

http://www.americanethnography.com/ethnography.php

In David's dictionary definition of "ethnography" we can see that this word is defined as a "scientific description". I most humbly suggest that if we were to use this definition as the basis for a decision upon whether or not a particular subject presented for discussion in the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum was acceptable or not, we would very probably need to disallow the vast bulk of all threads and posts to every sub-forum.

Since this has not happened, and since it is clear that the dictionary meaning is known and understood, then it is very obvious that the strict dictionary meaning of "ethnology" is not at all relevant to the matters that have been, and that continue to be, discussed in this Forum.

Rather, what does seem to be relevant to an understanding of the word "ethnographic" is the way in which various academics who practice and teach ethnography understand the word. Those who care to investigate university course descriptions, and text books that deal with the subject will find that my comment in Post #23 is very close to a generalised understanding of the concept of "ethnographic", across the academic world.

In short, the ethnographic approach to understanding humanity, its cultures and societies is a hands-on method that amongst other things permits the examination of inter-societal exchange enabling a better focussed understanding of a society, its culture, and the people within it.

The work of Thomas Hauschild as presented in this thread exemplifies this academic context, and as such should be considered as a serious contribution to an understanding of cross-cultural exchange.

What we can see in Thomas' work is ethnographic examination in action.

Earlier in this post I commented on the way in which societies and languages that do not change eventually die. I feel it is reasonable to think of this Forum as a sort of sub-culture within a segment of society. Kronckew has suggested that perhaps the time is ripe for some changes to take place in the sub-culture that we inhabit. I do tend to agree with him. I am certain that the last thing that any of us wish to see is the death and disappearance of this Forum.

A review of Forum activity during past times, in comparison with Forum activity at present should convince anybody that we do need an increase in interest.

2nd August 2018, 02:35 AM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	Why should a discussion group that relates to current manufacture of ethnographic weaponry be restricted to forging? When we forge, we only create a forging that the finished blade will emerge from, most of the time and effort goes into the bench work, not the work on an anvil. Forging only relates to the blade, the creation of the complete object involves skills other than blade work. Perhaps consideration could be given to a division (if indeed one is needed) of current era work and historical work. Personally I see this as more relevant to the study of weaponry using the ethnographic approach than a division based upon countries or geographically limited groups. Consider this:- I have made a number of culturally correct Javanese keris, only one of those keris was made in Solo, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia, of the others, I forged one in Kampung Komplang, Solo, but carved it in Australia, all the rest were completely made in Australia. We now live in a global village, old boundaries may be relevant in the context of time, but those old boundaries are no longer so relevant in the context of right now, today. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 2nd August 2018 at 08:49 AM. Reason: clarity

3rd August 2018, 02:34 AM	#7
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,470	Some personal observations about this topic Gentlemen: This has been a very interesting and wide ranging discussion that Thomas' weapon has generated. I fear, however, that this thread has strayed somewhat from the object of discussion, and into areas of speculation about the structure and aims of this forum. The goals and objectives of the Ethnographic Forum have been presented on this site by Dr Lee Jones, and in my opinion Thomas' creation fits into the broad themes described for this forum--a view that I think has been expressed by Robert (the Lead Moderator of this forum). The ideas expressed here about additional Forums are indeed interesting. It should be pointed out, however, that these pages are funded and maintained by Dr Jones, and are not without a considerable time commitment and cost for him. Some of what has been suggested would require additional resources. Furthermore, part of the success of this site has been, I believe, the conscious effort to not be "all things to all people." There are other sites that have attempted to do that, and some of those bit off more than they could chew and are essentially defunct. There have been new pieces added over the years to this site. The Keris Warung Kopi (Keris Coffee Shop) was added in part to address the need for an English language site for serious discussion of the keris. The European Armory expanded on an early focus on Viking swords to include discussion of a much wider range of weapons and European cultures. What this forum excels at, and I think its major strength, is its focus on key areas of edged weapons collecting and discussion. It has attracted experienced collectors, scholars, and ethnographic experts to its pages, people who would not necessarily participate in other online forums. Many, many more people visit the site than are registered members. Again, I think this reflects its appeal to serious collectors as well as those new to the field. If you are looking for bayonets, modern blade makers, contemporary or fantasy blades, then other sites probably address your areas of edged weapons collecting more completely. These are my personal thoughts based on 20 years of participating in this site. Ian.

1st August 2018, 11:25 PM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,365	How About? A Smith's sub-forum wherein the artisan(s) only can show ethnographically inspired contemporary work for comments? Or is this a... Lead balloon?

2nd August 2018, 12:16 AM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	I agree with you David, that it is nearly always a very good idea to try to fix the precise meaning of any word before relying on that word to carry a message that is intended to be clearly understood. In fact, it has been my long-standing habit to check any word that I do not use in daily colloquial communication. Additionally, it pleases me greatly that you accessed an Oxford source. However, the dictionary meaning of any word is only the beginning of an understanding. For instance, we all know and use without hesitation the word "occupy". It is a word that was avoided in the 17th & 18th centuries, because in Shakespeare's time it could get you time in the stocks if you were heard using it in public, as it had some particularly vulgar connotations --- well, connotations deemed to be vulgar at that time, perhaps not quite so vulgar now. The way in which words are used changes constantly, just as society itself changes constantly. The only time a language does not change is when it is dead, as is the case with Latin, which in a sense can be a useful quality in a language, as it certainly prevents misunderstanding, possibly one of the reasons why a medical practitioner in past times would use Latin to convey instructions for treatment. So, the message is clear:- language that is unchanging is dead, and language being an indicator of health for a society, any society that fails to change can also be considered dead, and dead things simply disappear and sink into oblivion. Another quality of language is that meanings can and do change, dependent upon context. Although we can produce a dictionary definition of a word, indeed, in the case of "ethnography" we can produce a very large number of dictionary definitions, all of which are similar, but all of which could be debated upon the variations in their similarity. Thus, for an understanding of current usage of a word, we need to go a little beyond the limitations of a two line dictionary entry. Because of the changing nature of language, lexicographers are in a sense, historians:- they record the meaning of words in the past, not necessarily in the present. The dictionary is the place that we start when investigating correct and current understanding of a word, but it is not the place where we finish, in fact, in real life the true meaning of a two letter word could well find itself argued in front of the highest court in the land. I would like to make this post as short as I reasonably can, so rather than write a multi-page presentation on the way in which the word "ethnography" can be understood, I will provide this link:- http://www.americanethnography.com/ethnography.php In David's dictionary definition of "ethnography" we can see that this word is defined as a "scientific description". I most humbly suggest that if we were to use this definition as the basis for a decision upon whether or not a particular subject presented for discussion in the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum was acceptable or not, we would very probably need to disallow the vast bulk of all threads and posts to every sub-forum. Since this has not happened, and since it is clear that the dictionary meaning is known and understood, then it is very obvious that the strict dictionary meaning of "ethnology" is not at all relevant to the matters that have been, and that continue to be, discussed in this Forum. Rather, what does seem to be relevant to an understanding of the word "ethnographic" is the way in which various academics who practice and teach ethnography understand the word. Those who care to investigate university course descriptions, and text books that deal with the subject will find that my comment in Post #23 is very close to a generalised understanding of the concept of "ethnographic", across the academic world. In short, the ethnographic approach to understanding humanity, its cultures and societies is a hands-on method that amongst other things permits the examination of inter-societal exchange enabling a better focussed understanding of a society, its culture, and the people within it. The work of Thomas Hauschild as presented in this thread exemplifies this academic context, and as such should be considered as a serious contribution to an understanding of cross-cultural exchange. What we can see in Thomas' work is ethnographic examination in action. Earlier in this post I commented on the way in which societies and languages that do not change eventually die. I feel it is reasonable to think of this Forum as a sort of sub-culture within a segment of society. Kronckew has suggested that perhaps the time is ripe for some changes to take place in the sub-culture that we inhabit. I do tend to agree with him. I am certain that the last thing that any of us wish to see is the death and disappearance of this Forum. A review of Forum activity during past times, in comparison with Forum activity at present should convince anybody that we do need an increase in interest.