The Sinhalese Kastane: Its Development, Decoration and Symbolism

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by David

Forgive me for mentioning this Ibrahiim…but isn't this Wikipedia entry written by YOURSELF? If so how can it unveil to you a culminating note in your own research?

Salaams David... In fact, no, it is not all my work though of course I am a contributor and why should I not be..and you already know this so why are you questioning in such a way? Indeed you pointed to the fact a month or two ago... though I couldnt understand why your tone was unsupportive then and I am baffled by it now... Wikepedia is the world wide webs encyclopedia... not mine... I just contribute freely. I find it extremely useful and since it is continually updated ..very current and accurate. It does, in fact, do exactly as I have penned ~ do you not agree?

I add that since my involvement as a contributor on Forum to this subject that the Wikepedia entry has been considerably and accurately updated with the latest current information researched by me. It stands therefor as a pinnacle of finely tuned detail in parallel with the latest doctrine on the subject...

Surely you would be delighted with that..from the Forum viewpoint?

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[David]

Wikipedia is what it is. It is neither good or bad, accurate or incorrect. It is only as good as the information presented and the reference material used to back up that information. It is regulated by its users so an entity really has absolutely no academic integrity beyond its own bibliography, which isn't to say that there are not some very well researched and documented Wikipedia entries. The Kastane entry, i am afraid, is not one of them. It is hardly the "pinnacle of finely tuned detail" that you would make it out to be. This is not because the information is necessarily wrong, though so of it might be, but because the entry has no footnotes or academically reliable references to follow through on. All that are provided at the bottom of the page are a group of links to images on the Oriental Arms page and other sales sites, a youtube video of a kastane on the Antiques Roadshow (and i can assure you that these guys notoriously get their info on swords from these regions wrong) and an article on the use of the kastane as a belly dancing sword written by a guy who was banned from this site long ago. So my complaint here Ibrahiim is that it is rather self-serving for you to present the info on this page as being some kind of "unveiled culminating note" when it is mostly written by you without much academic backing. This has been a wonderful and no doubt useful exercise in speculation and conjecture so far. Don't get me wrong, i am not being sarcastic when i call it useful as i believe that speculation is a very useful tool in the process of discover, and we have certainly seen and read a lot of pertinent material in these many threads on the subject. But until we can nail some of our speculative thinking down to actual fact i don't think we have anything to congratulate ourselves over.
By the way, since you are so keen on fine tuning your Wikipedia page on the subject, you might, as i previously suggested, want to reconsider the use of the term "Deity hilt". The lion, makara, serapendiya or whatever mythical beasts we wish to believe are represented on these swords are not, AFAIK, considered to be "deities" per se. Many Hindu deities do in fact incorporate various animal features in their depiction (Ganesha, Hanuman, etc.), but these mythical beasts are only associated with specific deities (i.e. a makara is often associated as the vehicle for the river goddess Ganga and the sea god Varuna) but are not seen as deities themselves.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by David...The lion, makara, serapendiya or whatever mythical beasts we wish to believe are represented on these swords are not, AFAIK, considered to be "deities" per se. Many Hindu deities do in fact incorporate various animal features in their depiction (Ganesha, Hanuman, etc.), but these mythical beasts are only associated with specific deities (i.e. a makara is often associated as the vehicle for the river goddess Ganga and the sea god Varuna) but are not seen as deities themselves.[/QUOTE]


Salaams David. I believe that they are in fact Deities and that you have mixed them up with the religious Deities of India. The Buddhist/Hindu mixture in Sri Lanka is slightly different. The Kastane hilt is filled with Deities. One of the main Deities is the Makara not only associated with one aspect but across the whole spectrum ... On water spouts ...supporting doorways...associated with the Kurtimukta and minor humano crocodile form, On Jewellery, Door knockers, Weapon adornment, artwork, Gunpowder containers, tobacco pipes etc.

Where the main feature appears lion like ... it too has a mythical story behind it. The point about myth and legend coupled with the Kastane is not so much centred around whether XYZ is a Deity but whether these forms were introduced at an earlier stage than European intervention in the Indian Ocean...Naturally with so few early examples it should not try the brain cells over much to realise that certain logical appreciations are needed to ascertain what may have taken place...

Nobody is trying to slam-dunk the Kastane problem and I disagree entirely that anyone would have left the discussion because of some disagreement... Is that not the basis upon which Forum feeds... I disagree... I put in the evidence... Member X disagrees and counters with his/her proof... A consensus is then arrived at and discussed... or arrives in the vicinity of the plausible truth. Of course where people cant take the heat... they get out of the kitchen... Whereas that ought not to happen it is always sad... but anyway they can just as easily rejoin the discussion when they are ready..

Comments are always welcome provided they are constructive no?

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.