![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,456
|
![]() Quote:
I do agree with this. There are people who like it for the age and authentic items. There are also people who like the "style" weather it is old or new. For me I wood say (although I have newly made indonesian weapons in my collection in generally) I like the old mandaus. This because they were made by the dayaks while they had very little of no influences of outside (modern) society. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 951
|
![]()
Hi Willem this is nice carving but not the old style
Ben |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,235
|
![]()
One more for the sake of conversation.
Old or new ? tourist or non tourist ? Best regards, Willem |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,229
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() "Tourist" is a term that get's thrown around alot. I usually try to avoid it if something is made in an authentic manner from within the indigenous populous. Many modern day keris are exquisitely made in a tradtional manner, but then sold directly to western collectors. I do not consider these to be "tourist" keris even though they never served an ethnographic function. I do not know if mandau are made in a similar manner for a similar market, but perhaps you can see what i am getting at. ![]() This last picture is unfortunately out of focus which only makes assessment even more difficult. To my eyes it appears to be an authentic enthnographic artifact. I am not familar enough with Dayak styles to judge it's age stylisticly, but even in the bad photo it at least appears to have some wear and age. It would be interesting to see the blade it is connected to. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 951
|
![]()
Hi Willem it is new style
Tourist if it is made for not using and decoration Ben |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,235
|
![]()
Dear David,
Fully agree that these terms need some deifinition. Although Ben had no problem interpeting these terms ![]() He has even his own terms : new style / old style. In Dajak art I think that 'old style' is a style where the motifs are strongly anthropomorphic. like leeches and elbows and arm sticking out of the design. The big hilt I posted has very clear figures, the hornbills are clearly hornbills, and the dragons are clearly dragons. No mistake about that. That is also what I feel should be considere 'new style' Anyway , the last hilt I posted is a bit of a mystery to me. It does not seem very old, but take a look at the blade... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 951
|
![]()
Hi Willem the blade is an old one it is always difficult from a pic to see the patina but dont forget handle can be broken and replaced but the style is also
new style for me is that after 1940 1950 so yours handle could be 50 60 years old but the blade is older . scabbard also newer than the blade it looks like north borneo style Regards Ben |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|