Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

VVV · 8th March 2006, 06:05 PM

I have now been able to check the source of the link that Alam Shah shared

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ran_pekaka.htm

It's seems to my eyes as if the article from Cédric Le Dauphin is using the pictures from the old web site of D A Henkel on Peninsular Keris as illustration on the evolution of the Tajong?
BUT one hilt is then mislabeled and that's the one resembling mine which is dated 17th C at DA Henkel's site and 18th C in the article of Le Dauphin?
In the book Spirit of Wood it's dated pre 18th C.
I presume the change of dates is based on C Le Dauphin's own research and that he disagrees with the conclusions of D A Henkel, Nik Rashidin Nik Hussein as well as the authors of the book?
The article of Le Dauphin is very well written and impressive so I guess he has his reasons for changing the dating?

Michael

8th March 2006, 06:05 PM	#8
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	I have now been able to check the source of the link that Alam Shah shared http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ran_pekaka.htm It's seems to my eyes as if the article from Cédric Le Dauphin is using the pictures from the old web site of D A Henkel on Peninsular Keris as illustration on the evolution of the Tajong? BUT one hilt is then mislabeled and that's the one resembling mine which is dated 17th C at DA Henkel's site and 18th C in the article of Le Dauphin? In the book Spirit of Wood it's dated pre 18th C. I presume the change of dates is based on C Le Dauphin's own research and that he disagrees with the conclusions of D A Henkel, Nik Rashidin Nik Hussein as well as the authors of the book? The article of Le Dauphin is very well written and impressive so I guess he has his reasons for changing the dating? Michael