Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

VANDOO · 31st May 2006, 07:00 PM

I THINK THE KEY IS CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM RATHER THAN PICKING OUT SOME PARTS AND USING SUCH INACCURATIES TO CONDEM THE WHOLE.
WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE DIFFICULTY INVOLVED IN WRITING A REFRENCE BOOK ESPECIALLY ON SOMETHING AS COMPLICATED AS ETHINOGRAPHIC WEAPONS YOU CAN APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT GOES INTO IT. FIRST YOU WILL HAVE TO USE REFRENCES FROM PREVIOUS SOURCES AND WILL BE EXPECTED TO INCLUDE THE BEST KNOWN SPECIMINS OF THE TYPE. AMONG SCHOLARS THERE ARE OFTEN CONFLICTING VIEWS ON ALL PREVIOUS WRITEN REFRENCES AND ITEMS AND BOTH SIDES WAITING TO POUNCE IF YOUR VIEW IS DIFFERENT.
OFTEN NEW BOOKS ARE JUST A REHASHING OF PREVIOUSLY WRITTEN MATERIAL WITH NICE PICTURES AND LITTLE NEW FIELD WORK. I THINK ITS GREAT IF A AUTHOR ACTUALLY GOES OUT AND RESEARCHES NEW UNDOCUMENTED COLLECTIONS AND TRYS TO RELATE THEM TO THE BEST KNOWN AND DOCUMENTED COMPARITIVE EXAMPLES. ALL REFRENCES ON ETHINOGRAPHIC WEAPONS WILL HAVE SOME MISTAKES, OFTEN DUE TO MISENTERPRTING OR GETTING BAD INFORMATION FROM THE PEOPLE YOU ASK FOR HELP EVEN IF THEY ARE FROM A TRIBE WHO USED TO USE SUCH WEAPONS. STONES GLOSSARY HAS SUCH INACCURACYS BUT IS STILL A MONUMENTAL WORK NOT JUST A MERE REFRENCE AND HAS MORE GOOD INFORMATION THAN MISTAKES.
THE SWORD MENTIONED IN THE OTHER POST HAS BEEN TREASURED AND REVERED BY THOSE WHO BELIEVE IT TO BE THE LAST KINGS SWORD. TO BORROW A KERIS TERM THAT WOULD DEFINITELY MAKE IT A PUSAKA TO THEM AND THEIR BELIEF SHOULD BE TREATED WITH RESPECT REGARDLESS OF ITS ACCURACY. THAT BEING SAID IF THEY ARE WILLING TO LET A SCHOLAR EXAMINE THE RELIC HE CAN MAKE HIS OWN CONCLUSIONS AND PUBLISH A PAPER ON HIS FINDINGS AND HIS OPINION ON THE ITEM. I PERSONALY THINK IT IS GREAT THAT SOMEONE WOULD SPEND THEIR TIME AND MONEY TO GO DO THE REASEARCH NEEDED TO GIVE A GOOD INFORMED ASSESMENT AND OPINION ON THE SWORD.

31st May 2006, 07:00 PM	#12
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	I THINK THE KEY IS CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM RATHER THAN PICKING OUT SOME PARTS AND USING SUCH INACCURATIES TO CONDEM THE WHOLE. WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE DIFFICULTY INVOLVED IN WRITING A REFRENCE BOOK ESPECIALLY ON SOMETHING AS COMPLICATED AS ETHINOGRAPHIC WEAPONS YOU CAN APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT GOES INTO IT. FIRST YOU WILL HAVE TO USE REFRENCES FROM PREVIOUS SOURCES AND WILL BE EXPECTED TO INCLUDE THE BEST KNOWN SPECIMINS OF THE TYPE. AMONG SCHOLARS THERE ARE OFTEN CONFLICTING VIEWS ON ALL PREVIOUS WRITEN REFRENCES AND ITEMS AND BOTH SIDES WAITING TO POUNCE IF YOUR VIEW IS DIFFERENT. OFTEN NEW BOOKS ARE JUST A REHASHING OF PREVIOUSLY WRITTEN MATERIAL WITH NICE PICTURES AND LITTLE NEW FIELD WORK. I THINK ITS GREAT IF A AUTHOR ACTUALLY GOES OUT AND RESEARCHES NEW UNDOCUMENTED COLLECTIONS AND TRYS TO RELATE THEM TO THE BEST KNOWN AND DOCUMENTED COMPARITIVE EXAMPLES. ALL REFRENCES ON ETHINOGRAPHIC WEAPONS WILL HAVE SOME MISTAKES, OFTEN DUE TO MISENTERPRTING OR GETTING BAD INFORMATION FROM THE PEOPLE YOU ASK FOR HELP EVEN IF THEY ARE FROM A TRIBE WHO USED TO USE SUCH WEAPONS. STONES GLOSSARY HAS SUCH INACCURACYS BUT IS STILL A MONUMENTAL WORK NOT JUST A MERE REFRENCE AND HAS MORE GOOD INFORMATION THAN MISTAKES. THE SWORD MENTIONED IN THE OTHER POST HAS BEEN TREASURED AND REVERED BY THOSE WHO BELIEVE IT TO BE THE LAST KINGS SWORD. TO BORROW A KERIS TERM THAT WOULD DEFINITELY MAKE IT A PUSAKA TO THEM AND THEIR BELIEF SHOULD BE TREATED WITH RESPECT REGARDLESS OF ITS ACCURACY. THAT BEING SAID IF THEY ARE WILLING TO LET A SCHOLAR EXAMINE THE RELIC HE CAN MAKE HIS OWN CONCLUSIONS AND PUBLISH A PAPER ON HIS FINDINGS AND HIS OPINION ON THE ITEM. I PERSONALY THINK IT IS GREAT THAT SOMEONE WOULD SPEND THEIR TIME AND MONEY TO GO DO THE REASEARCH NEEDED TO GIVE A GOOD INFORMED ASSESMENT AND OPINION ON THE SWORD.