HISTORY OF STEEL IN EASTERN ASIA EXHIBITION NOW ONLINE
 

Greetings everyone,

The exhibition online shown below is finally ready to be visited.

Your are most welcome to click on the image and discover it.

http://www.arscives.com/historysteel.../hos-enter.jpg

You are as well cordially invited to start different topics in this forum concerning your interests.

I wish to take this opportunity to reiterate my thanks to this wonderful forum, to all moderators and all contributors who made this event possible.
I hope you enjoy the virtual visit. Again, thank you very much.

GREAT EXHIBITION! Thanks for info on the online exhibition! :)

Thank you for making this available. Very nice to see so many recognizable pieces (and names) in this context.

INCORRECT PI HISTORY?
 

There are four significant errors in the historical timeline of the Philippines from the website.
Correct years:
1898 Philippine government declares independence
1899-1902 Philippine-American War (first shot in 1899, declared over in 1902, armed conflict into the 1920s)
1899-1936 Moro-American War (undeclared)/(first shots 1899, full campaigns until 1936 when the military transfers from the US to the Philippine Commonwealth)
1946 US grants Philippines independence

Article states "1898-1901" and "1901-1915" and incorrect independence info?

The term "Filipino" is used too loosely mixing modern adaptation with historical context, the designation was created during the Spanish Era for Spaniards born in the Philippines, so the article doesn't make sense the way its written, citing Filipinos in 10th century China or Spanish era Philippines, etc.

Thank you
 

Hello Ann,

Thank you so very much for the encouraging words.
Always a great pleasure hearing from a great lady :)
Very best regards

Antonio

I was just the assembler, Montoro. All the tremendously generous collectors who have contributed to this exhibition should be the ones to be congratulated.

They have defined themselves as highly responsible and generous citizens of the world, honest, dignified, honorable.

I wish to publicly thank all and everyone of them. I am honored to have worked with them. :)

Antonio

Gentlemen,

Great effort, congratulations. At the same time I do find certain articles hm... highly nationalistic I would say. Well, most of historians, especially those working on weapons are nationalists of some kind.

Best wishes and many thanks to all of you!
I am waiting for the catalogue....

At the posters' requests, I have removed several posts. Let's please keep this on-topic folks.

(Ron, you didn't request your post be removed, but it quoted Antonio's, and made no sense after the other posts were removed.).

?
 

Here's one more missed by the museum curatorial staff -
"1521 Magellan is the first Westerner to land in the Philippines"
I didn't know cowboys existed in the 16th century...lolz

As a matter of fact, Ferdinand Megellan was not the first European to explore the archipelago, but the first to circumnavigate the world, the Portuguese didn't complete his return voyage to Spain because he was killed by the sword on Mactan island in the battle against Lapu Lapu and his warriors.

We're off-topic now, and the current discussion is certainly worthy of its own thread.

I'm going to split the topic.

Ian, I'll be forwarding an email with more written errors found and passed on to me by contributors and non-contributors for the HOS site.
I retired from the eewrs but after first reading the site, I was astounded and thought it was important to point out the obvious errors regarding history, much of it was already documented so don't take my word for it, unfortunate for the rush to finish without thorough proofreading.
The displays cases throughout each section of the museum looked nice, must have been great for people to see it live.
I'd like to read more reviews about the different exhibits, good or bad...
A researcher once told me hearing everyone praise and agree with him is like talking to a wall, he welcomed others to challenge his theories and work to validate or invalidate his points and to stimulate new ideas.

After much thought and consideration, I will respond to this.

As the only person to be involved with both attempts at this exhibit I come to this with perhaps a strange perspective. First, Mabagani, I would have loved to have worked with you on this second attempt. You would have been such an asset and I was dissappointed that you turned down the opportunity. Yes mistakes were made, but I wish you could have been part to help us earlier. These were not intentional nor an attempt to slander any of my fellow Pinoy.

What saddens me is that the anger that this endeavor has generated. I remember a conversation I had with someone who knows Cato and they said that Cato is aware of the mistakes in his work and regrets them. I think as the writers we are open to feedback (yes we were in a hurry that is true) but not to have fingers waved in our faces. If any one feels insulted by what we attempted to do then I am sorry, none was meant.

Worthy of headline news- "Macao Snubs Philippines"
Macao museum commits an international faux pas. The original blunder was placing the Philippines in an exhibit called "History of Steel in the Eastern Asia" 2006. What was a grand concept where the museum would host a display of antique weaponry from around the world during the 2005 East Asian Games in Macao, instead turns into a grand fiasco when coordinators revamped the show and misfit the Philippines section into an exhibit about Eastern Asia. In the study of cultures, the Philippines is properly categorized with Southeast Asia and nations with ancient ties to the Srivisaya and Majapahit empires. The coordinators were also informed of blatant historical mistakes after the museum went public with an online site. Instead of rushing to correct the errors made online like the haphazard hurry to finish printed text for the opening and hardcopy, the computer edition easily fixed with the clicks of a keyboard were ignored adding insult to injustice.

pm me

I share Battara's feelings but I do not feel one bit apologetic.

I would much rather have seen this project followed through to completion by the original SFI team.

Frankly I'm tired of feeling that I'm being pilloried for having tried to help salvage this exhibition by contributing pieces. I'm also insulted by insinuations that contributions were made in order to get them "published" for personal gain.

Gentlemen,
I do not have a dog in this fight and if any of you asks me to shut up, I shall do it with understanding and humility.

Nevertheless, it pains me to see this Forum turning into a shouting match with mutual accusations and acrimony. We have seen it happening elsewhere and it was not a pretty sight.

In the immortal words of Rodney King " Can we all just get along?" :shrug:

I am a vile man, therefore preferring struggle to conformity... However, reading through articles, I liked all of them, with a few exceptions. I dislike the one by Cao Hangang.
Paleolithic Chinese, Chinese creating the art of bronze smelting, which becomes the envy of the world, and the rest, in the same style.

I guess those poor pharohs, scythians and chalybis, starting their day with grieving over the insurpassable quality of Chinese bronze...

I think this article is really bad. I enjoyed reading the rest of them.

"Tolerance and lest we perpetuate misinformation"
 

"Tolerance and lest we perpetuate misinformation"

Aside from the botched historical article in the Philippine exhibit, I also forwarded information to coordinators about incorrect categories and mislabeled swords. After bringing these matters to attention, nothing has been changed by the Macao Museum's administrator, in turn inaction is against EEWRS forum rules for inciting "INTOLERANCE", "FLAMES, INSULTS, BIGOTRY" and making statements that are now "knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane" towards the race and nation of the Philippines.

For the record, Filipinos members of EEWRS were treated unjustly as a consequence of the Macao HOS project. Filipinos were publicly bashed on the EEWRS, contributors received artifacts damaged and there was an account of money swindled from a participant. Filipino members wanted to be disassociated from the ill-fated unsatisfactory exhibit.

The article and exhibit for the Philippine section does not merit a critique because its an unresearched rough draft containing too many mistakes. The display itself had false catagories with swords placed in the wrong headings. The exhibit, at least the Philippine section, should have been canceled rather than "salvaged and rushed" and unsuitably grouped with Eastern Asia.

Inadvertently, during and after the course of the exhibit, EEWRS was unable to moderate effectively because a majority of moderators were part of the project. Before the start of the second exhibit attempt I caught the Macao Museum assembler's abusive intolerant nature in a posted thread and decide not to join. Had he been banned for breaking the forum rules this whole episode may not have occurred.

Keep in mind, next time someone plans to do an exhibit, world class museums book their events up to two years in advance, details worked out beforehand. Real museums conserve and protect artifacts including their history. Why the Philippines section was expected to come up with an exhibit practically from scratch in a few months and put in a display about Eastern Asia was senseless and the fallout was unnecessary. Unfortunately, people were misled into peril and would like to put the ordeal in the past.

IMHO this thread should be locked and the link to the HOS website removed "lest we perpetuate misinformation". Individual links (excluding the Philippines section) for each of the remaining exhibit sections could be listed for participants who were able to present decent work and research.

the agung plays its final note....


huun, jumanji kami ha mabagani....

I can hardly see any bigotry involved in disagreement over the exact dates of Moro-American war or who was the first european to arrive at Fillipines. After all the fuss I have seen no reference presented to the presence of anyone visiting the islands prior to Magellan.

Mabagani,
I can see you are upset .
I hear you.
Can you, please tell me what was factually wrong with the Ph. exhibit?
What caused such grief in the Ph. community? I Obviously, the exhibition touched a raw nerve; I would like to know what is it in order not to commit a similar transgression with my Ph. co-workers.
What is so offensive about including Ph. in the general realm of SE Asia? After all, that is where geographically it belongs, isn't it?
Please understand, I am not attacking you; on the contrary, I would like to learn from what obviously was an unpleasant experience by and for others.

I am not involved with this in any way. I would like a copy of the catalogue. As this is a post on the forum then anyone can reply.

That said, why do we always see this constant squabbling, belligerent postulating, pontificating, and fighting for the final word as if you are all scholarly masters when it comes to any weapons East of the Naga Hills? :shrug:

Or West of Naga Hills, for that matter... :rolleyes:
I think it was Henry Kissinger ( a former Prof. at Harvard) who said that academic turf battles are so vicious because the stakes are very small...
I too want to have the catalogue!

that's just it, tim. perspective is a motherSHOUTYOURMOUTH. everyone has their own reason of collecting swords, but i would dare say that for the majority it's nothing but a pasttime, a hobby. yes, you have members that would try to create a pseudo ritual based on what that person have read on what the natives used to do in regards to venerating their swords. why? is it because it's de regeur? why not believe in all the mysticism that's involved within that culture as well? for what, you ask. that's all bullcrap. magick is not real. but you see, therein lies point. why pick and choose on what and what not to believe? that's why i dare say that majority here collects these weapon as a hobby, and that's that person's prerogative.

in regards to your question, whether it's rhetorical or sarcastic, i sense what you're trying to say is that we can't have any scholarly masters in this here forum? or maybe it's something else? :confused:

Mabagani, i have little doubt that there could be some factual errors in the exhibit which need attending to. Hopefully, if your advised corrections are indeed correct these will be taken care of before the catalog is produced.
Just for the record though, i would like to know just when and where Filipinos have been publicly bashed on this forum, other then the explosive response by Antonio to your original posting which has been removed from this forum for what i feel were very appropriate reasons. And do you seriously believe that that response was racially motivated? Or that there have been other racially motivated argument or attacks on this forum that have not been agressively moderated?
Also for the record i would like to know what other artifacts besides Ron's (Spunjer) barong were damaged in transit. I keep hearing an unnumbered plural in regards to this accusation. I don't mean to lessen the tragedy of Ron's story, but there is a big difference between saying one piece was damaged and, say, ten pieces were damaged. So just for the record, what is the number of damaged pieces?
And just for the record, since an accurate record should be important in this case, just who was "swindled" out of money in regards to this exihibition and how?
It is certainly clear that some folks got their toes stepped on here and it is also clear that they are steppin' back, so to speak. I am in no position to judge just who has been right or wrong here, and i often say that there are at least three sides to every story, but i do believe we can discuss this subject calmly and sensibly without drawing the "race card" into the question.

I rather fancy it is something else. :)

I am a firefighter and have worn a St Florien ( the patron saint of firefighters) metal every day of my life for 30 years. How could I ( or anyone else then ) judge someone negatively for some other beliefs in ritual or talismans. We all choose what we believe in but that does not make my belief any more valid than someone elses or vise versa.

That said I would like to see things not escalate to anger. I think so many people here have so much to share and contribute, and they have certainly done so freely with me.

COULD THE EXHIBIT HAVE BEEN PERFECT "NO"!! COULD IT HAVE PLEASED EVERYONE? "NO"!! ANYTHING PEOPLE DO IS NEVER PERFECT NOR CAN IT PLEASE EVERYONE.

IT COULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER EXHIBIT IF MORE TIME MORE MONEY AND A BIGGER MUSEUM IN MACAU SO A LARGER EXHIBIT COULD HAVE OCCURED. GOOD TEAM WORK BETWEEN ALL GROUPS AND FACTIONS WOULD HAVE ADDED TO THE ACCURACY AND LESSENED THE DISSAPOINTMENTS OF SOME.

IN THE REAL WORLD THERE WAS A VERY SHORT TIMETABLE, LIMITED MONEY, SPACE AND NO TIME TO CONSULT EVERYONE AND MAKE SURE OF ALL THE FACTS AND THAT NO FEATHERS WERE RUFFLED. THE ARTICLES PUBLISHED WERE THE WAY THE PEOPLE FROM THOSE CULTURES VIEWED THEIR HISTORY AND AS SUCH OFTEN AT ODDS WITH OTHER CULTURES OR COUNTRYS. I COULD WRITE AN ARTICLE ON WHAT I THINK THE PHILLIPPINES ARE ABOUT BASED ON WHAT LITTLE I KNOW OR HAVE READ IN ALL INNOCENCE AND NO DOUBT ANGER MANY DUE TO MY POINT OF VIEW AND IGNORENCE. IF ONLY ONE ITEM OF THE MANY SHIPPED OVER AND BACK WAS DAMAGED IT IS UNFORTUNATE BUT REMARKABLE THAT THE DAMMAGE WAS SO SMALL. I PACKED MY ITEMS TO WITHSTAND NUCLEAR WAR, TSUNAMI OR VOLCANIC ERUPTION SO THEY CAME THRU OK, BUT BAGGAGE HANDLERS CAN BE WORSE THEN ANY OF THOSE. :)

IN FACT THE EXHIBIT WAS A REMARKABLE AND WORTHY ACCOMPLISHMENT WITH ALL THE MISTAKES AND UNINTENTIONAL OMMISSIONS AND THINGS CONSIDERED AS INSULTS OR MISLEADING ERRORS. THE FACT THAT A SMALL MUSEUM MADE THIS ATTEMPT AND FOLLOWED THRU TO COMPLETION SUCH AN EXHIBIT AND HOPEFULLY THE CATALOG, IS WORTHY OF PRAISE AND APPRECIATION. HOW MANY EXHIBITS OF ETHINOGRAPHIC WEAPONS HAVE THERE BEEN IN RECENT YEARS?
ANTONIO WAS UNDER MORE PRESSURE FROM THE EXHIBIT AND LACK OF TIME AND HELP THAN ANY ONE MAN SHOULD BE AND ALSO HAD MORE IRONS IN THE FIRE AS WELL AS HIS OWN LIFE TO LEAD. IF I HAD BEEN IN HIS SHOES I WOULD HAVE RAN OFF TO QUILIN CHINA AND LIVED IN A CAVE AS A HERMIT FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO EXHIBIT. :D SO I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE ALL HIS HARD WORK EVEN IF IT IS NOT PERFECTION. ANTONIO HAS ALWAYS CAME ACROSS AS A GENTELMAN TO ME BUT CONSIDERING THE STRESS AND HARD WORK HE HAS BEEN UNDER A HARSH RESPONCE TO THE EXHIBIT WOULD BE LIKE A SLAP IN THE FACE SO WOULD NO DOUBT DRAW A HOT RESPONCE. WHICH WOULD THEN BE REGRETTED LATER. I HAVE CERTIANLY DONE IT A FEW TIMES MYSELF WHEN I THOUGHT I HAD DONE MY BEST AND SOMEONE TRASHED MY WORK AND SAID IT WAS WORTHLESS I WAS SUPRIZED AND THEN FURIOUS. :mad: I DON'T MIND SOMEONE TELLING ME WHERE I GO WRONG AND HELPING ME TO CORRECT IT BUT AM NOT TOLERANT OF ATTACKS ON MY INTELLEGENCE WITH NO RECOMENDATIONS ON HOW TO CORRECT IT. :p

IT WOULD BE GOOD IF THE INCORRECT INFORMATION IN THE CATALOG COULD BE CORRECTED AND THE MUSEUM SHOULD RESPOND TO ANYONE WHO TAKES THE TIME TO POINT OUT MISTAKES EVEN IF IT IS TOO LATE TO CORRECT THEM AS A PROFESSIONAL COURTSY. BUT SOMETIMES THAT DOSEN'T HAPPEN FAST DUE TO LACK OF TIME INTERPRETERS OR FUNDS.

PERHAPS SOME OF OUR AMERICAN PHILIPPINO MEMBERS COULD WORK WITH A MUSEUM IN THE PHILIPPINES AND ORGANIZE AN EXHIBIT THERE. WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO MORE ACCURATE INFORMATION AND WE COULD GET TO SEE SOME OF THEIR COLLECTIONS. WE AS COLLECTORS ARE INTERESTED IN ALL THE CULTURES OUR WEAPONS COME FROM, BUT TO HAVE PRIDE IN THE CULTURE IT MUST BE YOUR OWN. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT BLOOD OR PRIDE IT IS EASY TO MISUNDERSTAND AND CONSIDER THINGS UNIMPORTANT AND CAUSE HARD FEELINGS WITH THOSE WHO CONSIDER THEM AS VERY IMPORTANT. PLEASE TRY TO FORGIVE OUR IGNORENCE AND LACK OF SENSITIVITY AS WE NEVER MEAN TO INSULT AND WE WILL ALSO TRY TO STAY COOL IF YOU UNKNOWINGLY TROD ON OUR TOES.

SO I FOR ONE AM WILLING TO FORGIVE ANY MISTAKES OR OMISSIONS AS I FEEL IT IS BETTER TO HAVE HAD AND PARTICIPATED IN THE EXHIBIT THAN TO HAVE HAD NONE AT ALL.

I'm traveling and responding on my PDA. I need some time and a laptop to digest some of this. Until then, I'm locking this thread.

Everyone please cool down.

After careful consideration, I'm reopening this thread.

This discussion must stay civil.

It sounds like you have a problem with the moderation of this site, in addition to the exhibit. Please address your moderation concerns to the Staff via email or PM.

This comment is uneccessary.

Please post in English.

This exhibition may have its faults (its not India and so thats not for me to judge) but I am surprised at the aggression fired against it. Surely we should applaud it for bringing the attention of arms to an increasingly ignorant general public.
We all want scholarly, and well researched additions to our libraries, but I think the bigger picture is being ignored. We also desperately need exhibitions and books to be pushed onto those that would not normally look to this subject. And these can happily remain on the ‘basic’ level. If we dont, and continue to sit here like a judge and jury, then I strongly feel we will slowly watch your hobby die.
This exhibition has been hounded on various platforms, and I think this is absolutely disgusting! A lot of effort was put into this, and it opened up many eyes by the efforts of Antonio and his staff.
I realise that the inaccuracies rubbed up some people the wrong way, but as in any academic book, this should not be so aggressively addressed. All books have their problems, for those that look hard enough. But, surely this is a starting point to discuss these issues, and further our knowledge. Can we not appreciate the exhibition for the efforts involved, and discuss any points we disagree with?
I made the same point about the book 'Arms and Armour from Iran'. Yes, it had many faults but the author somehow talked a publisher that had previously turned down weaponry books into accepting it, and has pushed his work through hard advertising and lecturing onto a much wider base than many previous books have managed. Is this a bad thing?
Of course it isnt. It means that were have a new book to discuss and it opens the doors for others to publish.
The same goes for this exhibition. Maybe Macau would never have even considered hosting an exhibition had Antonio not done all the work.
One book (or catalogue) could never be definitive, and so any inaccuracies should be noted and discussed by those than know better, and those that don’t will have an overall view, with a hopeful thirst to know more and discover these errors for themselves. If any book is taken as ultimate and faultless, then it is the problem of the reader in that he should question more.
Of course, this isn’t meant to excuse mistakes, but surely the exhibitions merits out weigh these inaccuracies! How many museums do we know of that are 100% accurate in their descriptions. Yes they should be pointed out, but surely not like this.
I cant speak for other countries (nor the US for that matter) but America ought to be wary of complacency when it comes to this hobby of ours. They, as a country, have a passion for guns, which luckily overlaps onto ‘white arms’, and the have the funds and museum space to continuously host permanent exhibitions. But, you should be aware of what is happening over here (UK).
I have watched museums gradually distance themselves from arms in general, due to their unpopularity as exhibits. This unfortunate view has been reflected in London arms fairs, which seem to attract fewer people each year. The auctions are the same. Most ‘top-end’ dealers will readily admit a decline in sales and hearken on to previous stories of a time when things were available and business was good.
Ebay is no judge of the current market, and forums do not show this decline. Everyone here is passionate, but will this go onto the next generation?
Baltimore is run by enthusiasts, who have done a fantastic job in organising events to instil this passion in lectures and dinners. But, without these few guys, the show would not be the same.
The Met still hold some great exhibitions centred around arms, but these too are run and organised by a select few. Without them, I wonder if the Met would not concentrate more on other popular exhibitions.
The V&A is a great example of this decline. When Tony North heralded the department, things were vastly different. However, when he retired, and was not replaced, the arms on show were soon taken down and put into storage (maybe permanently). The space was used for other exhibitions known to draw more of a general crowd. To keep a museum open and running, the general crowd must come first. We know that, even as passionate collectors. We must come second and it’s a fact we have to accept. There are still some very passionate people at the V&A, but these all have their own speciality and push for that primarily. I wonder what would happen if Donald Larocca retired? Yes, I am sure he would be replaced, and things would hopefully continue. As I said, the Met has the funds and the space, but I think people ought to be aware of the V&A as an example, before being so harsh with exhibitions that could potentially attract a ‘new’ crowd.
If Antonio’s work attracted just one new person into the fold, then it was all worth it. The layout looked fantastic, and the design alone would attract different people to view the exhibition. So, new eyes would see these weapons at their best, and potential collectors (all desperately needed) could be born.
It is a real shame that there were such obvious inaccuracies (apparently, from what I have read from others) but this still shouldn’t cause such a bad feeling towards this exhibition. I think it would be awful if Antonio decided not to host another, due to the harassment from this one. I know I would be reluctant to bother again if it were me. We surely learn from our own mistakes. I have heard this exhibition be called damaging to the academic field. How can this possibly be so?
The internet seems to have bred a new breed of academic. Very intelligent and educated. But hardly well read in what they criticise. You can give any individual essay to any college graduate, and he can tear it apart, word for word. But, all books, thesis and exhibitions should be looked at as a whole. The mistakes should be pointed out, but the efforts involved should always be applauded. Anyone can sit back, wait for someone to do all the work and then shoot it down. This doesn’t make them academic, not a good critic, as they are completely missing the point.
My point is that if any one good thing comes from anything, then it was all worthwhile. I really hope Antonio continues his efforts, and that people lighten up over this, and other, events.
This exhibition has not damaged anything (except maybe Ron’s pieces :( ), but I feel that the ‘village mob’ may prevent anything like this from happening again.
Well I, for one, sincerely hope not!

Points taken.
But hold the applause and consider what's at stake.
We've heard "Publish or Perish" but I doubt it meant giving less than full effort, which is what happened in this case and at a sacrifice by incorrectly writing a country's history and abusing its people in the process.
There is also a big difference between collectors who want to write but plagiarize and regurgitate incorrect information to tout themselves as experts vs. collectors who have taken the time and effort to research producing insights and new theories. The better museum works I've seen have gone through or were connected to academic institutions to complete articles and essays or had their own research department to verify and approve written material to safeguard against or minimize errors. This is another reason why projects are scheduled two years out, painstakingly to produce a worthwhile endeavor.
Given the short notice, the outcome and fallout in this case I would have again opted to hold off publishing and left the Philippines out. Most importantly, no one or country deserves to be trampled on for the good of an exhibit or "catalog".

"Love God with all your heart, always bear in mind that love of God is also love of Country, and thus, too, is love of ones fellowmen" -Andres Bonifacio, Katipunan Revolution founder

AS I DON'T KNOW ALL THE FACTS I AM NOT AWARE OF WHY THERE IS INFIGHTING OR WHAT HAPPENED TO CAUSE THE INITIAL ANGER BUT SENSE IT IS PERSONEL AND HAS BEEN BREWING SINCE BEFORE THE EXHIBIT AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM NO MATTER HOW ACCURATE THE EXHIBIT HAD BEEN.
THE EXHIBIT IS OVER AND THE MUSEUM DID CONSIDER THE PHILIPPINES IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO BE INCLUDED IN IT. IF THEY HAD NOT CONSIDRED THE PHILIPPINES TO BE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO EVEN BE IN THE EXHIBIT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SNUB. THEY DID HAVE TO RUSH THE EXHIBIT WHICH HAS LED TO MORE MISTAKES THAN WOULD USUALLY OCCUR. THERE WERE ALSO PROBLEMS AT THE START AS SOME PEOPLE WHO INITIALLY WERE GOING TO HELP PROVIDE INFORMATION AND ITEMS DROPPED OUT FOR SOME REASON. THAT ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE MISTAKES MADE AND MAY BE PART OF THE REASON FOR THE ANGER WHICH MAKES THEM FEEL THE PHILIPPINES SHOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT ENTIRELY. BUT THEY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN MAD IF THEY HAD BEEN LEFT OUT ENTIRELY AS THEY ARE IN THE REGION AND DID PLAY A PART IN ITS HISTORY. I FEEL ITS UNFORTUNATE THERE ARE NEGATIVE FEELINGS AND ANGER OVER THIS EXHIBIT AND HOPE IT DOES NOT EFFECT THE CHANCE OF FUTURE EXHIBITS IN MACAU OR OTHER PLACES. I CAN'T JUDGE AS I DON'T KNOW HOW THE PHILIPPINES WERE INTENTIONALY TRAMPLED AND INSULTED :confused: . PERHAPS THE ONE WHO WROTE THE HISTORY SHOULD GET A POOR GRADE ON HIS DATES ON THE HISTORY TEST BUT THEY WOULD SURELY HAVE SCORED A LOT HIGHER ON THE TEST THAN I WOULD HAVE. :)

THIS IS NOT A CHALLENGE OR PUT DOWN ITS JUST HOW I SEE IT NO OFFENSE IS MENT.

Gentlemen,

I apologize for saying something very controversial, but:
100 years ago a collector was typically a nobleman with a profound education, who upon feeling the approach of his demise would write most likely a single work that would encompass his lifelong activities.
Today a typical weapons collector is a nationalistic young fellow who after a few sessions of karate decides to bless the world with the description of his own country's martial culture. From this point on he can spent a few years doing a Ph.D. on the subject, where he will learn that he can not really learn much in academic environment since arms and armour is not a significant part of academic classes, and 99% of historian and art historians have their knowledge of the subject formed by movies and the BS published by Osprey. Another option is that he will write a book, which is typically a bizarre mixture of quotes from old classical texts, photographs of his friends' swords and his own research, the latter is typically beyound BS.

From this point I see no reason to popularize the knowledge or studies of arms and armour, but rather deepen it. As of today we lack the people who publish at least 1 article on the subject every 4 months or so, we lack any kind of educational opportunities extended to students at universities, which makes our community pretty much off-mainstream. As of now there are only very few people whom I would experts in some part of our field, the rest I would put together with me in the category of enthusiasts.

I obviously have not read the catalogue and I have not seen here anything that would be really negate the information given by the exhibition (it is kind of hard to give precise years of any undeclared war). If the catalogue is ridden with errors, it is indeed a grief thing. However we just recently had some other publication coming out which is ridden with errors, as obviously we had many times before... It is bad, but that is what enthusiasts do - they try and hopefully they learn on their mistakes. Should we stop the presses - no, I think we do not. We just should spend more time collaborating, proof reading, emailing the materials prior to the publication. And this is what I think to be even more important than promoting the knowledge of swords in the general public (in which I do not really believe) - deepen and professionalize our knowledge.

yes, i picture a white mustachioed man wearing a red velvet robe smoking a pipe writing about his exploits in the savage lands of india and southeast asia, were dastardly natives are noted for their peculiar habit of stretching their lips, and yet produces the most interesting and unusual types of weapons yet unseen in the 'civilized' world. of how he crossed (i'm sure riding in the back of an elephant while the natives walked and carry all his belongings) and explored the vast jungles of dark africa.
yet a hundred years later with all the braggadocios of these exploits that has little to do with our shared enthusiasm, we are still bickering whether those palias (really trying to conform with english only post, but i'm sorry, doesn't know the english translation for this word) on the spine of the muslim pilipino's head chopper axes signifies talsimanic symbols or numbers of heads lopped off by that certain weapon. we have pictures of their great collections, and yet it doesn't help us explain certain properties of why the sword was this way and not that way, or what's the significance of those inlays. books, such as stone's, are profoundly flawed, though i consider him as a profoundly educated man. the bottom line is, our knowledge regarding our collection has markedly improved since the early days of those educated noblemen, and i believe this is due to being able to communicate in a level field with the same people who's ancestors were the one responsible in making the same type of weapons. but then again, maybe i'm being too nationalistic. i do know this: traveling to the philippines and being able to talk to the older folks certainly gave me a better perspective and whole new outlook on the weapons that i have in my collection.



i have no idea that we share the same sentiment on cato's book. the ironic thing about it though is that to this day, the book is still regarded as the 'bible' to most muslim pilipino sword enthusiasts.



my take on this is, one's enthusiam can go a long way. if you're really interested to find out more about your collection, why wait for everybody else's contribution to be posted in this here forum (or any other forums) when you can do your own research? this forum can only take you so far. this is not a cheap hobby for sure, and you can't be on a government sustenence if you're planning on starting on collecting. my point is, for a few sacrifice, meaning not buying two or three swords for awhile, maybe one can use that fund to make that trek to your weapon's origin. to the muslim pilipino weapon collectors, a trip to mindanao and/or sulu is just a hopsctoch from manila, a mere $50.00. when you come back, maybe write an article about what you've learn.

• On August 14, 1898, 11,000 American ground troops were sent to occupy the Philippines

• Hostilities started on February 4, 1899 when an American soldier shot a Filipino soldier who was crossing a bridge into Filipino-occupied territory in San Juan del Monte, an incident historians now consider to be the start of the war.

-Wikipedia

Unfortunately I have no knowledge of Moro or SEA weaponry whatsoever, therefore my comments are purely general observations of the field. Yes, 100 years a lot of mistakes where made, but I am quite impressed by the contribution of the old school, made often in the absence of any acrheological or historical data.
I find speaking to the "carriers of the culture" to be a complete waste of time, unless this culture indeed used swords at most 50 years ago. 100 years typically separating the actual use of swords from modern "culture carriers" have lead to the replacement of knowledge by marketplace rumors. Archives, records of early travelers, old training manuals, archeology - these are the sources I respect. "Isa and Musa said" for me is basically nothing.

Concerning the dates of undeclared wars - typically there are always a few hundred of guerillas that continue to fight even after the time when large battles are over. Which brings in the question whether we qualify their actions as organized crime, terrorism or a continuation of the war ? In the latter case how large a number "guerillas" merits the extenstion of the war's timeline ?

I had this problem when researching the Dutch Atjeh war. While the dutch sources almost universally use the same date the Atjeh ( Aceh ) sources do not always agree with the Dutch sources

Here's a well researched book by an American if anyone is interested in learning more about US history in the Philippines, "Muddy Glory, America's 'Indian Wars' in the Philippines 1899-1935" by Russel Roth 1981.

But back on topic, rather than taking wild guesses at what went wrong with the Philippine section of the exhibit, gather information from everyone involved. Why make excuses? All the authors agreed the work was rushed and had many mistakes, one quit the EEWRS over the fiasco. Contributors caught many errors in the descriptions and want them changed. Difficult to call this infighting rather than honestly wanting to correct errors that were already made. Including the Philippines with Eastern Asia might be okay for something like sporting events, but if we are writing about weaponry the nation fits better with Southeast Asia, "Malay" keris/kris culture. Keep in mind, the original exhibit was supposed to include all regions of the world but was reorganized when the Macao Museum could not meet its deadline for the East Asian Games 2005 event. Ironically, within the East Asian Games participating regions are the People's Republic of China, Guam, Hong Kong, China, Japan, Kazakhstan, DPR Korea (North Korea), Korea (South Korea), Macau, Mongolia and Chinese Taipei.