SPANDAU BALLET

[David]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

This section of the Forum has always included non weapons and as Jim says above, maybe a renaming of this section would be of help, and non weapons to be included even if they are not necessarily "Ethnic". The European Armoury section often includes relatively modern weapons without any negative comment, so why is this section limited? It would be fair to say that most items posted in any of our sections are mostly true Ethnic (native) and could also be fairly described as "Antique", but there are also those which perhaps do not fall accurately into either category. Examples would be native jewellery and other accessary items such as native headwear/helmets etc.
Those of us who collect, generally have other items which they seek comment or information on,..... items which do not fall exactly into the categorys offered
This Forum is very informative and maybe a further section could be added to cover the above.
The knowledge held by present Members is absolute gold, and should be shared openly with those who come after us. As we know there has been untold information lost for ever when the older Members pass.
Perhaps the Moderators could look at this.
Stu

Stu, i wasn't making a negative comment, simply pointing out that a military machine gun is not an ethnographic weapon. No one is limiting you on what is being discussed here and no one but you have brought up the question of forum "rules". If it was my intention to suggest this discussion should be shut down i would have clearly said so in very clear language. There is also a huge difference in the meaning of "ethnic" vs "ethnographic" and Ethnographic is the category that this forum is dedicated to. Still, this is the Miscellaneous Forum so there is certainly room for discuss on items beyond our usual purview. But purely for discussion's sake let's be real here. Simply because a weapon has been made in a country that has a unique ethnicity does not mean that the weapon in question displays that unique ethnicity in it's design or function. There is nothing in the design of the Spandau machine gun that speaks specifically to German culture.
As for those who collect military weapons and memorabilia, there are tons of forums out there dedicated to such discussions. I don't think we are at risk of seeing information on such weapons being lost at any point in the immediate future.
But please, carry on. As i clearly pointed out before, WWI air warfare has always been a personal interest of mine and i am enjoy this thread, especially all the images of the aircraft you posted.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by David

Stu, i wasn't making a negative comment, simply pointing out that a military machine gun is not an ethnographic weapon. No one is limiting you on what is being discussed here and no one but you have brought up the question of forum "rules". If it was my intention to suggest this discussion should be shut down i would have clearly said so in very clear language. There is also a huge difference in the meaning of "ethnic" vs "ethnographic" and Ethnographic is the category that this forum is dedicated to. Still, this is the Miscellaneous Forum so there is certainly room for discuss on items beyond our usual purview. But purely for discussion's sake let's be real here. Simply because a weapon has been made in a country that has a unique ethnicity does not mean that the weapon in question displays that unique ethnicity in it's design or function. There is nothing in the design of the Spandau machine gun that speaks specifically to German culture.
As for those who collect military weapons and memorabilia, there are tons of forums out there dedicated to such discussions. I don't think we are at risk of seeing information on such weapons being lost at any point in the immediate future.
But please, carry on. As i clearly pointed out before, WWI air warfare has always been a personal interest of mine and i am enjoy this thread, especially all the images of the aircraft you posted.

Thank you David. I am not in the business of trying to stir up trouble or argue the views of the Moderators, but simply trying to point out that IMHO the Miscellaneous section conveys to me that it is just that...Miscellaneous. I am perhaps afraid that as our older Member pass (I am about to turn 81) large amounts of knowledge for those who follow us will be lost. Maybe the Moderators would seriously consider either changing the title of this section, or as an alternative add a further category which would allow discussion of more recently (but still ANTIQUE) items to be openly discussed.
I accept that the title of the Website is "Ethnographic" and not "Ethnic" and there are other sites which deal in what I would call modern weapons, but I would like to think that items produced up to the late 19th century could perhaps be included here. Some are already, in the European Armoury section such as military swords so where does one draw the line?
I respect the Rules as they exist, but wonder if perhaps with the passing of time that they maybe could be revisited to possibly include a wider range of items accepted for discussion.
Stu

[David]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Thank you David. I am not in the business of trying to stir up trouble or argue the views of the Moderators, but simply trying to point out that IMHO the Miscellaneous section conveys to me that it is just that...Miscellaneous. I am perhaps afraid that as our older Member pass (I am about to turn 81) large amounts of knowledge for those who follow us will be lost. Maybe the Moderators would seriously consider either changing the title of this section, or as an alternative add a further category which would allow discussion of more recently (but still ANTIQUE) items to be openly discussed.
I accept that the title of the Website is "Ethnographic" and not "Ethnic" and there are other sites which deal in what I would call modern weapons, but I would like to think that items produced up to the late 19th century could perhaps be included here. Some are already, in the European Armoury section such as military swords so where does one draw the line?
I respect the Rules as they exist, but wonder if perhaps with the passing of time that they maybe could be revisited to possibly include a wider range of items accepted for discussion.
Stu

Hi Stu. I believe you are operating under a misconception. AFAIK, the word "antique" doesn't appear anywhere in the forum titles or the general rules about posting. Not only are items produced in the late 19th century quite often included on our forums, but on the Keris Forum at least, we frequently discuss 20th and 21st century keris, even ones made just yesterday. So there is no line there at all. Ethnographic has nothing to do with the age of the weapon. They are simply weapons that are specific to a particular culture that reflect the values, craft and design that are a unique part of those cultures. And for the most part they are not factory made items such as modern military weaponry.
Now again, i am not stating this to squash the current discussion here. Please continue as it seems you and others (and even myself in some aspects) are enjoying this threads and it does appear in the Miscellaneous Section after all. However, i see no reason to drop the "Ethnographic" from the name of this particular forum as we are indeed a website dedicated specifically to ethnographic weapons and armour. As i mentioned before, there are tons of sites out there that focus on modern Military weaponry, bith very specifically and generally that are doing a great job preserving the knowledge of WWI and WWII guns and aircraft. That simply is not the focus of this website. And just as you mention the passing of members and your own age, we moderators are just as antique as some of the weapons we post. As i'm sure you know we just lost one of our beloved team and are understaffed as it is. So expanding and adding new categories outside of the scope of Ethnographic Weapons is not really feasible or practical. Asking a forum that is focussed on Ethnographic Weapons to open up a new forum for people to discuss manufactured military machine guns is like asking a forum for Folk Music to add a section to discuss Prog Rock. There is a place for everything.
I would ask at this point that if you wish to continue discussing this further that you make a PM directly to members of the Moderation Team rather than continuing it here. Forum policy is not to be discussed in the open forums. Thanks!

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by David

Hi Stu. I believe you are operating under a misconception. AFAIK, the word "antique" doesn't appear anywhere in the forum titles or the general rules about posting. Not only are items produced in the late 19th century quite often included on our forums, but on the Keris Forum at least, we frequently discuss 20th and 21st century keris, even ones made just yesterday. So there is no line there at all. Ethnographic has nothing to do with the age of the weapon. They are simply weapons that are specific to a particular culture that reflect the values, craft and design that are a unique part of those cultures. And for the most part they are not factory made items such as modern military weaponry.
Now again, i am not stating this to squash the current discussion here. Please continue as it seems you and others (and even myself in some aspects) are enjoying this threads and it does appear in the Miscellaneous Section after all. However, i see no reason to drop the "Ethnographic" from the name of this particular forum as we are indeed a website dedicated specifically to ethnographic weapons and armour. As i mentioned before, there are tons of sites out there that focus on modern Military weaponry, bith very specifically and generally that are doing a great job preserving the knowledge of WWI and WWII guns and aircraft. That simply is not the focus of this website. And just as you mention the passing of members and your own age, we moderators are just as antique as some of the weapons we post. As i'm sure you know we just lost one of our beloved team and are understaffed as it is. So expanding and adding new categories outside of the scope of Ethnographic Weapons is not really feasible or practical. Asking a forum that is focussed on Ethnographic Weapons to open up a new forum for people to discuss manufactured military machine guns is like asking a forum for Folk Music to add a section to discuss Prog Rock. There is a place for everything.
I would ask at this point that if you wish to continue discussing this further that you make a PM directly to members of the Moderation Team rather than continuing it here. Forum policy is not to be discussed in the open forums. Thanks!

Thank you David for your patience regarding the above discussions.
I would just like to clarify, and seek clarification on the following two points before I close my ramblings.
I use, and have always used the term ANTIQUE, purely to describe items either over 100 years old or made before 1900. There was no intention on my part to suggest that this Forum dealt in Antiques as such, or changed anything in the Rules to include the word Antique.
In one of the replies above it was stated that a Spandau was not an Ethnographic item as it was factory produced, so how can a German/Austrian/English/French sword or other items which are also factory produced, and discussed in the European Armoury, be described as Ethnographic?
I leave you with these thoughts and thank you for your tolerance.
Stu

[Lee]

Back before there was a forum component on this site - just over a quarter of a century ago - I wrote this:

Ethnographic arms and armour describes weapons and combat protective devices other than the standardized military models of the past few centuries and is likely a product of an individual artisan working according to traditional patterns as opposed to a product of modern mass industrial production. Militaria is thereby excluded by our definition. While modern custom work would qualify as an artifact of our own culture under this definition, such items are not considered here, as they are better represented elsewhere.

My attitude has not changed. I did and do acknowledge that the interests of the forum community that developed would not be constrained by my arbitrary definitions and would be as irregularly broad as are my own interests. The Miscellanea section was later added to accommodate discussions of other artifacts specifically of the cultures that created the edged weapons primarily considered here, acknowledging these broader interests. I have tolerated occasional diversions into militaria as I understand that the interests of many of us do extend into that realm, but such materials and discussions lie outside of the intended focus of this project.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Lee

Back before there was a forum component on this site - just over a quarter of a century ago - I wrote this: My attitude has not changed. I did and do acknowledge that the interests of the forum community that developed would not be constrained by my arbitrary definitions and would be as irregularly broad as are my own interests. The Miscellanea section was later added to accommodate discussions of other artifacts specifically of the cultures that created the edged weapons primarily considered here, acknowledging these broader interests. I have tolerated occasional diversions into militaria as I understand that the interests of many of us do extend into that realm, but such materials and discussions lie outside of the intended focus of this project.

Thank you for this Lee. Perhaps with your clarification above as to what is acceptable for discussion, you could please address the question I raised above regarding Factory produced swords of fairly recent vintage being included and discussed in the European Armoury Section. Under the definition you give, these surely can not be classed as Ethnographic?
Stu

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

...
In one of the replies above it was stated that a Spandau was not an Ethnographic item as it was factory produced, ...
Stu

The 'Spandau' machine guns were produced in Germany based on the designs of the Maxim machine guns of Hiram KMaxim from 1884, and licensed accordingly. They were produced for a 'German' 7.62 mm cartridge rather than .30-06. That's about the only 'ethnic' difference.


It kinda reminds me of the Indonesian Dutch 'klewang', designed by Europeans for use by indigenous troops in the 19c, produced in Hembrug, and in Solingen, and MILSCO in the USA, used by all the major combatants in WW1/2, as well as 'ancient' sharp pointy things STILL in use by civilians and military,like kris/khukuri/ginunting/barongs/machetes/daab, and a host of others still used as tools AND when needed, weapons.


Ethnographic kinda means 'Eastern' and 'European' kinda means 'Western', with fuzzy overlaps.We rightly, don't discuss modern/vintage 'replicas', tho they are sometimes useful as illustrations or caveats. I would limit those to fairly accurate 'museum' grade replicas. As in Experimental 'archeology'.



All-in-all, I do not envy the Mods/Admins, the arbiters of who does what to whom, and where. I occasionally disagree with them, but they run things here.


'Ethnographic' in the banner at the page top is a bit fuzzy, but I can't think of a replacement at present...


I suggest we just use a bit of common sense (not very common any more), discretion and tolerance. I also think we don't need any 'new' sub-forums. I look to us being a store-room of knowledge, and of instruction for the new collectors, as well as tthe old ones.

[David]

Gentlemen, i don't want to sound like a broken record, but again, discussions or explanations regarding forum policies have no place in the open forums. If anyone wishes to continue to question why one thing has been permitted fair for discussion in the forums while another thing has not or you would like further clarification question the meaning of "Ethnographic" or the origin or current intent of this website's forum i suggest to PM the moderation team. This forum is and always has been Lee's baby, but even though over the years the moderation team has helped work out the specifics of how we operate, we are all, regardless of our advancing years, just teenagers living in our parent's house.
From the Rules page for all forums.
I want to complain about a forum policy: These fora are managed by a volunteer Moderator Team and each moderator has a vote on fora policies. Concerns may be directed to any of the moderators (or to webmaster@vikingsword.com) for presentation to and consideration by the Moderator Team. Do not create a thread in the forums for your grievance or suggestion, unless you wish to risk being banned.

[Jim McDougall]

Actually I agree that administrative matters should entirely be discussed privately as on threads these kinds of diversions not only derail discussion but can often obstruct it. As I am the one who began this thread and it seems inadvertently entered a topic which is by definition outside forum parameters, I bear responsibility for this situation.

However I am grateful for the forbearance of the staff in permitting the discussion and entries which seem to indeed reveal the common interest many of us share in the elements of WWI aviation and the weaponry used. In the future I will check with staff before posting a thread which may fall into potentially controversial category. As seen, sometimes these topics do have merit, and can bring useful discussion and sharing of knowledge without compromising the general content here.
The primary objective of certain regulation is understood to avoid having our pages fall into the quagmire of content including militaria and modern reproductions of weapons which have profoundly diffused some other forums.

As already well explained, it does not seem necessary to re-title things nor to create yet another sub-forum, as we all work together in sharing discussion and material, and the moderators have the thankless job of trying to maintain some semblance of order.

In arms and armor, much as in history itself, it is often difficult to strictly categorize, much as we find in trying to rigidly classify weapons by distinct form.
As has been noted, essentially the ethnic/ethnographic or Eastern vs. Western denominators in general application are not consequential.

As Kipling said in 1889, in his "Ballad of East and West":
"...oh East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.
till earth and sky stand presently at Gods great judgement seat.
But there is neither East nor West, border nor breed nor birth,
when two strong men stand face to face, though they come from
the ends of the earth".

While a tenuously applied analogy, it seemed to apply, not only in the sense of the ethnographic to western issues, but to all of us here, whom I view as all strong men, whose ideas may often differ, but we find common ground.

It would seem the discussion has run its course on the Spandau topic, but I hope the thread might stay open for any future input. In any case, Id like to thank everyone for their entries, and to thank the clearly notable number of readers for their interest.

All best regards,
Jim