Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

A. G. Maisey · 3rd August 2017, 01:21 PM

Gustav
In respect of this:- " We are still speaking about the same Greneng variation, which you deemed as a "These corruptions of form are most definitely not (sic?) younger forms of keris enhancement. They are clearly, obviously and logically demonstrable corruptions. They do not appear in the Bali keris, and that tells us exactly what they are."
Yes, typo, the 'not' is out of place, residue of a deletion.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thank you so very much Gustav for your extensive quotes from previous posts to this thread. I have read through your entire post #33 several times, and I must confess that you have almost totally lost me. I was confused about where you were going before I read your post #33, after reading it I am even more confused.

It's my problem Gustav, no fault of yours. I never was particularly tolerant of this style of debate where things keep going in circles. Children and young adults do often seem to enjoy this type of exchange, I do not, and although I can understand the need for some people to engage in such exchanges it is really not something of which I like to be a part. I apologise for not withdrawing from this fruitless waste of words earlier. I admit, I do tend to be a bit long-winded when I write, this happens because I try to make things as clear as possible in order to prevent useless exchanges, but it appears that my efforts to reduce pointless text have resulted in a superfluity of such text.

I do appreciate your fixation on this tri partite element in the greneng, and your posted images are of interest. When I do further work on the greneng I will certainly pay attention to this variant.

However, after reading your most recent post I have come to a slightly different conclusion to your own. My opinion is that rather than a parade of isolated quotes, what we really need are some pointed questions and answers.

If I can get an understanding of what you are trying to do by continually re-enforcing my own ideas it would help me to make relevant contributions to this discussion. If I have written something in a previous post to this thread that you do not understand, or that you would like me to clarify, please ask me a direct question and I'll do my best to give a concise, relevant response.

Here below are some questions that you may or may not choose to answer. If you do choose to answer, please provide an answer that is to the point, not an extended quote, and make it a straight answer, not a sliding sideways answer that avoids the thrust of the question. If you cannot answer, or choose not to answer, I'm quite OK with that too, but please advise that you have chosen not to respond.

It would be really nice if you could make your answers concise and pointed. Where possible 'yes', 'no', 'no response', 'don't know' would all be very much appreciated.

My "system" : what is my "system"?

My "hypothesis" : what is my "hypothesis"?

Is the hilt shown as image #3 in your post #33 stylistically North Coast Javanese or not? If it is not stylistically North Coast Javanese, then what area would you associate this style with?

Have I stated that I have never published any hypothesis that relates to the greneng? Yes, I have used the word "greneng", yes, I have discussed the greneng, but have I published any hypothesis that addresses the form of the greneng?

Have I made it clear that the ron dha is to be regarded as only one element of the greneng?

Have I made it clear that the elements of which the greneng is composed do vary?

Are the tri-partite elements that you identify in the greneng, elements of greneng composition that vary from greneng composition which is regarded as the normative model?

Have I limited my hypothesis in respect of elements of the greneng to only the ron dha?

In your opinion, are the 6 keris that you have shown as examples in post #33 all from the period after 1500?

Do you consider the greneng elements indicated in image #4, post #33 to be the same as the greneng elements indicated in the other 5 images included in post #33?

What are you attempting to demonstrate by repeatedly posting examples of greneng variation ?

I said earlier that I am confused by the direction you have taken, hopefully your responses, if you choose to respond, will help to relieve that confusion.

3rd August 2017, 01:21 PM	#34
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,701	Gustav In respect of this:- " We are still speaking about the same Greneng variation, which you deemed as a "These corruptions of form are most definitely not (sic?) younger forms of keris enhancement. They are clearly, obviously and logically demonstrable corruptions. They do not appear in the Bali keris, and that tells us exactly what they are." Yes, typo, the 'not' is out of place, residue of a deletion. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Thank you so very much Gustav for your extensive quotes from previous posts to this thread. I have read through your entire post #33 several times, and I must confess that you have almost totally lost me. I was confused about where you were going before I read your post #33, after reading it I am even more confused. It's my problem Gustav, no fault of yours. I never was particularly tolerant of this style of debate where things keep going in circles. Children and young adults do often seem to enjoy this type of exchange, I do not, and although I can understand the need for some people to engage in such exchanges it is really not something of which I like to be a part. I apologise for not withdrawing from this fruitless waste of words earlier. I admit, I do tend to be a bit long-winded when I write, this happens because I try to make things as clear as possible in order to prevent useless exchanges, but it appears that my efforts to reduce pointless text have resulted in a superfluity of such text. I do appreciate your fixation on this tri partite element in the greneng, and your posted images are of interest. When I do further work on the greneng I will certainly pay attention to this variant. However, after reading your most recent post I have come to a slightly different conclusion to your own. My opinion is that rather than a parade of isolated quotes, what we really need are some pointed questions and answers. If I can get an understanding of what you are trying to do by continually re-enforcing my own ideas it would help me to make relevant contributions to this discussion. If I have written something in a previous post to this thread that you do not understand, or that you would like me to clarify, please ask me a direct question and I'll do my best to give a concise, relevant response. Here below are some questions that you may or may not choose to answer. If you do choose to answer, please provide an answer that is to the point, not an extended quote, and make it a straight answer, not a sliding sideways answer that avoids the thrust of the question. If you cannot answer, or choose not to answer, I'm quite OK with that too, but please advise that you have chosen not to respond. It would be really nice if you could make your answers concise and pointed. Where possible 'yes', 'no', 'no response', 'don't know' would all be very much appreciated. My "system" : what is my "system"? My "hypothesis" : what is my "hypothesis"? Is the hilt shown as image #3 in your post #33 stylistically North Coast Javanese or not? If it is not stylistically North Coast Javanese, then what area would you associate this style with? Have I stated that I have never published any hypothesis that relates to the greneng? Yes, I have used the word "greneng", yes, I have discussed the greneng, but have I published any hypothesis that addresses the form of the greneng? Have I made it clear that the ron dha is to be regarded as only one element of the greneng? Have I made it clear that the elements of which the greneng is composed do vary? Are the tri-partite elements that you identify in the greneng, elements of greneng composition that vary from greneng composition which is regarded as the normative model? Have I limited my hypothesis in respect of elements of the greneng to only the ron dha? In your opinion, are the 6 keris that you have shown as examples in post #33 all from the period after 1500? Do you consider the greneng elements indicated in image #4, post #33 to be the same as the greneng elements indicated in the other 5 images included in post #33? What are you attempting to demonstrate by repeatedly posting examples of greneng variation ? I said earlier that I am confused by the direction you have taken, hopefully your responses, if you choose to respond, will help to relieve that confusion.