Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 18th January 2016, 03:25 PM   #1
harrywagner
Member
 
harrywagner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 373
Default Islamic Arms and Armor in The Metropolitan Museum of Art

I received notice from Amazon this morning that "Islamic Arms and Armor in The Metropolitan Museum of Art" will be released later this month. A little ahed of schedule.

Harry
harrywagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2016, 04:29 PM   #2
Jens Nordlunde
Member
 
Jens Nordlunde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,713
Default

I just ordered it from Amazon.
Jens Nordlunde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2016, 05:07 PM   #3
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Me too.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2016, 05:31 PM   #4
Kubur
Member
 
Kubur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
Default

OMG
Should I kill someone to get it or can i just buy it?
Kubur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2016, 06:00 PM   #5
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Yes, first you should kill somebody, and only then you might be allowed to use your VISA.

That's the rule.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2016, 02:05 PM   #6
Kubur
Member
 
Kubur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
Default

I got it, one of the best book ever!
It's sad that most of the weapons presented are pre-19th c.
Nevertheless some members will have to change their minds about Arabian jambiya...

Kubur
Kubur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2016, 11:32 PM   #7
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

I hope the descriptions used in the book have been checked by someone who knows armor and weapons, there are many mistakes in the Mets online collection descriptions. Here is one example, this char-aina is listed as being Indian, to me it has all the characteristics of a Persian char-aina, another obviously Persian char-aina that was listed as being Indian for many years just recently had its description corrected to Persian. The dagger below is described as being a khanjar (Dagger (Khanjar) Date: 18th–19th century) but it looks like a type of jambiya to me.

Many weapons do not mention wootz steel being used. Several mail shirts are listed as being "Ottoman" but their construction looks nothing like any Ottoman mail examples that I have seen, I think the Met may be relying on some very old descriptions which need to be updated, since I have not seen the book yet I do not know if they have in fact done this already.



Cuirass (Char-aina)
Date: late 18th–19th century
Culture: Indian
Medium: Steel, gold, textile.
Attached Images
  

Last edited by estcrh; 27th January 2016 at 02:30 AM.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2016, 03:55 PM   #8
Jens Nordlunde
Member
 
Jens Nordlunde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,713
Default

I just got my copy, having skimmed it, read here and there, and I can recommend it as a very interesting book, showing, if I remember correctly, 176 different weapons with texts explaining about the different weapon types.
Jens Nordlunde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2016, 09:46 PM   #9
CharlesS
Member
 
CharlesS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greenville, NC
Posts: 1,855
Default

Just got mine too...impressive at first glance, but haven't had a chance to really peruse it yet.
CharlesS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2016, 01:00 PM   #10
mariusgmioc
Member
 
mariusgmioc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,860
Default first critic

I just got my copy today and I can say it is a monumental work illustrating some magnificent and unique weapons. However, it definitely is quite far from a reference book as it avoids using specific technical terms and sometimes even uses them erroneously. For example, all curved blade swords are called "saber" whether it is a Persian Shamshir (page 182), an Ottoman Kilij (page 161) or an Indian Tuwar (page 184). It goes as far as calling "dagger" an archetipal single edged Persian Kard (page 222). It also uses the generic and rather inaccurate term "crucible steel" for describing Wootz.
Overall, the book certainly looks beautiful but it sounds like being written by the museum's photographer, and not by a reputed authority in the field.

Last edited by mariusgmioc; 2nd February 2016 at 02:24 PM.
mariusgmioc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2016, 02:35 PM   #11
Kubur
Member
 
Kubur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mariusgmioc
I just got my copy today and I can say it is a monumental work illustrating some magnificent and unique weapons. However, it definitely is quite far from a reference book as it avoids using specific technical terms and sometimes even uses them erroneously. For example, all curved blade swords are called "saber" whether it is a Persian Shamshir (page 182), an Ottoman Kilij (page 161) or an Indian Tuwar (page 184). It goes as far as calling "dagger" an archetipal single edged Persian Kard (page 222). It also uses the generic and rather inaccurate term "crucible steel" for describing Wootz.
Overall, the book certainly looks beautiful but it sounds like being written by the museum's photographer, and not by a reputed authority in the field.
Dear Marius,

It's exactly the opposite!!!
Specialists and scientific will use neutral vocabulary or standard lexicon.
Collectors or connoisseurs - like most of US on this forum, will use specific terms related to one region, tribe or dynasty... Specialists are smart enough to cover their ass using generic terms.
As we say "more we learn less we know..."

Best,
Kubur
Kubur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2016, 02:49 PM   #12
mariusgmioc
Member
 
mariusgmioc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,860
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubur
Dear Marius,

It's exactly the opposite!!!
Specialists and scientific will use neutral vocabulary or standard lexicon.
Collectors or connoisseurs - like most of US on this forum, will use specific terms related to one region, tribe or dynasty... Specialists are smart enough to cover their ass using generic terms.
As we say "more we learn less we know..."

Best,
Kubur
Thank you for this very interesting oppinion!
Unfortunately, I did not research the book long enough, neither do I posess enough knowledge to agree with your oppinion.
In my oppinion, a specialist in the field should be confident enough to be able to be both accurate and specific when dealing with a subject within his area of expertise. I don't really appreciate a "specialist" that is so cautious with terms that prefers to use very broad and generic terms instead of the specific ones just to be "on the safe side."
Then, I wonder what kind of "specialist" would use the term "dagger" for a classic single edge knife.
It would be interesting to hear other people's oppinions though.
mariusgmioc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2016, 05:03 PM   #13
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mariusgmioc
I just got my copy today and I can say it is a monumental work illustrating some magnificent and unique weapons. However, it definitely is quite far from a reference book as it avoids using specific technical terms and sometimes even uses them erroneously. For example, all curved blade swords are called "saber" whether it is a Persian Shamshir (page 182), an Ottoman Kilij (page 161) or an Indian Tuwar (page 184). It goes as far as calling "dagger" an archetipal single edged Persian Kard (page 222). It also uses the generic and rather inaccurate term "crucible steel" for describing Wootz.
Overall, the book certainly looks beautiful but it sounds like being written by the museum's photographer, and not by a reputed authority in the field.
It would not be unusual for an author to use terms which he feels will not change or be outdated after a period of time. Being to timid when describing items could mean that the author is not exacty sure what term to use so the most basic/safe description ends up being used. It is to bad that the author took this approach but it is understandable, he had the ability to photograph the items but delving into the various terms/descriptions that WE may be familiar with and use could cause anyone a big headache.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 10:49 AM   #14
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mariusgmioc
I just got my copy today and I can say it is a monumental work illustrating some magnificent and unique weapons. However, it definitely is quite far from a reference book as it avoids using specific technical terms and sometimes even uses them erroneously. For example, all curved blade swords are called "saber" whether it is a Persian Shamshir (page 182), an Ottoman Kilij (page 161) or an Indian Tuwar (page 184). It goes as far as calling "dagger" an archetipal single edged Persian Kard (page 222). It also uses the generic and rather inaccurate term "crucible steel" for describing Wootz.
Overall, the book certainly looks beautiful but it sounds like being written by the museum's photographer, and not by a reputed authority in the field.
Well, I guess David Alexander and Stuart Pyhrr know a thing or two about wootz, shamshirs, kilijes and khanjars:-)))

Generally, a short-bladed weapon is generically called a "dagger" when it is clearly a fighting item and is primarily designed for stabbing. It does not matter whether it is single, - or double edged. Khanjars are double edged, pesh kabzes are single edged. Knives can be fighting or utility. I do not think this point is worth much discussion.

My guess , the authors wrote this book with an educated and advanced reader in mind, well past the "name game" stage.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 10:55 AM   #15
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Well, I guess David Alexander and Stuart Pyhrr know a thing or two about wootz, shamshirs, kilijes and khanjars:-)))
Is the term "crucible steel" used in place of "wootz" as mentioned?
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 12:18 PM   #16
mahratt
Member
 
mahratt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
Default

I just got my copy book. Beautiful illustration. The texts are not ideally perfect. But disadvantages can be at any book.
mahratt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 02:12 PM   #17
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estcrh
Is the term "crucible steel" used in place of "wootz" as mentioned?
In a couple of places I had time to look at, - yes. I have no problem with it. Wootz is a Europeanized variant of the indian ukku ( or whatever the correct phonetization might have been). Technologically, it is crucible steel, which is undoubtedly correct.

I guess there is a valid reason to use a local name for a thing when we need either to specify a unique pattern or to pinpoint its origin: Turkish saber is kilij , not saif, and Uzbeki knife is P'chak, not Kard.

And, BTW, shouldn't we use Wootz only with reference to Indian blades, while referring to Persian ones as Fulad or to the Arabian as Jouhar?:-)))
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 02:15 PM   #18
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahratt
I just got my copy book. Beautiful illustration. The texts are not ideally perfect. But disadvantages can be at any book.
I would be very interested in your enumeration of imperfections of the texts ( plural). Always good to learn from a specialist. Thanks.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 02:43 PM   #19
mahratt
Member
 
mahratt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
I would be very interested in your enumeration of imperfections of the texts ( plural). Always good to learn from a specialist. Thanks.
Experts at the forum, who know better than I, already named some imperfections. I noticed:

1) strange doubts in the regional localization of items - pp. 56, 66

2) the fact that some things are called simply: saber, sword. Although they have a name - pp. 178, 180, 184

3) the fact that the knife for some reason called "dagger" - p. 194

I hope I have helped you to understand that you did not know?

While I only quickly scanned book. So, of course, I do not enumerate all the pages.
mahratt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 03:20 PM   #20
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel

And, BTW, shouldn't we use Wootz only with reference to Indian blades, while referring to Persian ones as Fulad or to the Arabian as Jouhar?:-)))
According to Ann Feuerbach there were two main production areas, Indian and Central Asia, with wootz being used to describe the steel originating in India and bulat for steel originating in Central Asia....I suppose if you do not know the origin "damascus or watered" steel would suffice. While the term "crucible steel" is used instead of "wootz, bulat, damascus steel, watered steel' it probably should not be as it really describes the method and not the specific end product.

Ann Feuerbach
Quote:
It must therefore be concluded that the materials and techniques associated with the crucible steel process in Central Asia (pulad) and those used in India and Sri Lanka (wootz) are significantly different.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 05:08 PM   #21
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Estcrh:
Have you noted a whole bunch of "smileys" in my message?:-)))))
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 05:19 PM   #22
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahratt
Experts at the forum, who know better than I, already named some imperfections. I noticed:

1) strange doubts in the regional localization of items - pp. 56, 66

2) the fact that some things are called simply: saber, sword. Although they have a name - pp. 178, 180, 184

3) the fact that the knife for some reason called "dagger" - p. 194

I hope I have helped you to understand that you did not know?

While I only quickly scanned book. So, of course, I do not enumerate all the pages.
Mahratt:
Drs. Alexander and Pyhrr are not amateurs. Please read CAREFULLY the text to the items on pages 56 and 66. Then, perhaps, you would understand the complexity of attribution and the depth of research that went into it.



The rest of your "comments" are just a repetition of previously-mentioned personal opinions of other people, and I have already said what I thought. See last sentence of post #14.

Last edited by ariel; 6th February 2016 at 06:33 PM.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2016, 08:43 PM   #23
mahratt
Member
 
mahratt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Mahratt:
Drs. Alexander and Pyhrr are not amateurs. Please read CAREFULLY the text to the items on pages 56 and 66. Then, perhaps, you would understand the complexity of attribution and the depth of research that went into it.
Be sure to read it carefully when I have time. As I wrote before, I quickly scan the book. I got a few books. And I can not study them all at once))))

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
The rest of your "comments" are just a repetition of previously-mentioned personal opinions of other people ...
I am glad that my opinion coincides with that of the other participants.
mahratt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 01:51 AM   #24
Battara
EAAF Staff
 
Battara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,135
Default

Remember to keep this civil folks................
Battara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 03:08 AM   #25
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahratt
Be sure to read it carefully when I have time. As I wrote before, I quickly scan the book. I got a few books. And I can not study them all at once))))
Good!

You will find answers to your questions.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 03:52 AM   #26
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Estcrh:
Have you noted a whole bunch of "smileys" in my message?:-)))))
Ariel, I know you are aware of Anns work, I really wrote that for anyone who was reading this that might not be aware of the different terms.

Can anyone scan one image and its accompanying text so that we can discuss whether the item is in fact properly identified and described, now that would be helpful.

I do not have the book (I already have a huge stack of unread books!!) but I am well acquanted with the all of the Mets Indo-Persian arms and armour items and their current descriptions. It would be interesting to see if the authors added anything to the Mets descriptions or if they in fact just went with what was already written without changing anything (this would be quite weak).
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 03:57 AM   #27
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahratt
Experts at the forum, who know better than I, already named some imperfections. I noticed:

1) strange doubts in the regional localization of items - pp. 56, 66

2) the fact that some things are called simply: saber, sword. Although they have a name - pp. 178, 180, 184

3) the fact that the knife for some reason called "dagger" - p. 194

I hope I have helped you to understand that you did not know?

While I only quickly scanned book. So, of course, I do not enumerate all the pages.
If you have time, can you post some scanned examples from the book for discussion, I am interested in knowing if this is a coffee table book or if there was actually some research behind the descriptions of the items.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 08:19 AM   #28
Kubur
Member
 
Kubur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estcrh
If you have time, can you post some scanned examples from the book for discussion, I am interested in knowing if this is a coffee table book or if there was actually some research behind the descriptions of the items.
Oh! You can buy this book. The book is written by one of the best specialist in the field. I join Ariel on all his comments. Alexander is a world specialist, the MET is one of the best museum in the world. This book has nothing to do with coffee table book or dealers catalogs with basic descriptions such as Wagner/Pinchot. I read to learn something not to see what I know already...
I'm just disapointed of their choices, I expected to see different objects. I guess this choice is linked to their own tastes and experience.
Kubur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 09:22 AM   #29
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubur
Alexander is a world specialist, the MET is one of the best museum in the world. This book has nothing to do with coffee table book or dealers catalogs with basic descriptions such as Wagner/Pinchot. I read to learn something not to see what I know already...
I'm just disapointed of their choices, I expected to see different objects. I guess this choice is linked to their own tastes and experience.
Kuber, I know that Alexander has a great amount of knowledge, but people with a great amount of knowledge can publish a not so great book. It depends on the audience that is being targeted and the demands of the publisher. While a book can have nice pictures and be entertining for the masses it may not be as well received by collectors/researchers/dealers etc. I think this is the crux of the questions about this book, will people from this forum learn something from the items descriptions or will we be looking at some pretty pictures and descriptions that are no better than the Mets less than amazing descriptions.

If anyone has an interest in Ottoman armor this essay by Alexander is available online.

http://www.metmuseum.org/research/me...rnal_v_18_1983

Another good armor essay by Alexander
"The Guarded Tablet": Metropolitan Museum Journal, v. 24 (1989)
http://www.metmuseum.org/research/me...rnal_v_18_1983

"Two Aspects of Islamic Arms and Armor": Metropolitan Museum Journal, v. 18 (1983) David G. Alexander.
Attached Images
 
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2016, 04:19 PM   #30
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,719
Default

It is exciting to see this new book by the MET, and of course I will be ordering it as well!
It is always interesting to see opinions, observations and critique evolve as these publications filter into the community, though much as with literature, music and movies, individual judgements will vary according to personal taste and requirements.

While many of the comments exchanged are 'entertaining', there are many very reasonable and actually helpful observations entered in the discussion.
One I most agree with is that in these kinds of books, often intended to reach a much broader consumption than specialized collectors, more attention is directed to an accordingly broader scope in descriptive terms.
I agree this is probably more deliberate than any oversight or deficiency in knowledgeable terminology ......the phenomenon we know well as the 'name game', the specious pursuit of a kind of weapons term 'Scrabble'.

The term 'coffee table' book is of course typically used to describe large volumes of which are profusely illustrated and usually very light on description, detail and explanatory text. Ironically, many of these can be most useful, such as the well known work by Anthony Tirri, which while offering little in reference, is a wonderful collectors guide showing many identified weapons of the level most often seen in collecting circuits.

The mention of dealers catalogs along with these 'coffee table' books of course can be accurately included in many cases, but I would most emphatically note and disagree with the Wagner/Pinchot inclusion.
While Oliver Pinchot of course did deliberately tone down the descriptions and text in this outstanding catalog of Kip Wagners amazing collection,
anyone familiar with his writing on arms will know his knowledge on these arms is unsurpassed.
I would not classify anything written by him categorically with dealers catalogs nor anything to do with coffee tables! however I do know that the Wagner book was admittedly basic in descriptions. I just wanted to clarify.

Most authors know to expect nit picking, and as many have told me, it sort of comes with the territory. Actually in most cases, such derisive notes usually reveal deficiencies in the critics themselves, however in some cases where comments are constructive they can truly offer valuable corrections. These are not only encouraged but very much welcomed by responsible authors.

Good notes guys! Thank you!
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.