Hello Alan,
our posts crossed.
Quote:
|
Not everything in this world fits into its own nice, neat, little box, particularly so in the region that we are now concerned with.
|
D'accord. There sure are ensembles of mixed origins and often enough the hilt and scabbard will be considerably younger than the blade and at best represent the culture where the blade got used before it moved overseas to Europe/etc. And, yes, blades got traded widely or got captured; and people moved all over the place. Yup, granted.
Quote:
it is a regrettable fact of life that not every hilt was made by the same person, living in the same place, at the same time, and from the same material.
If we live outside of a society, and in a different period, the best we can access is a tiny sample of total production of anything. Tiny samples of anything are useless for the purpose of forming supportable opinions. We might be able to hypothesise upon the basis of small, isolated samples, but in the case of tools, or weapons, where most people make their own hilts and scabbards, and only follow a general overall pattern --- if they follow any pattern at all --- how is it possible to acknowledge that an overall pattern applies to a particular location, but because of detail it cannot possibly be from that location?
|
Often enough this may not be possible, indeed.
However, by concentrating on (often minute) details, it often is possible to narrow down the origin of a given hilt or scabbard. Just like for an experienced kerisophile like you, it is often possible to narrow down the origin of a keris blade which less experienced folks won't be able to form any well-founded opinion on.
I realize why most collectors will first think of northern Sumatra. I've examined a fair share of Sumatran blades with special attention to Aceh, Gayo, Alas, Karo, Pakpak, Toba, etc. - trust me, no part of this ensemble is Sumatran...
Regards,
Kai