2018 ethnographic weapon
 

Hello

Admin feel free to delete if this will be an unwanted thread.

In my first thread I told you, that I‘m also a knifemaker and I wanted to be inspired by antique pieces for my own work. So I like to show you a piece made this year in spring. It is not a typical style , but there are some design elements that I wanted to use. The blade is a little bit inspired by mandau with filework and fullers from a cojang. You can grip it in front of the guard for smaller cutting operations. The guard is inspired by sikkin pieces. The long grip for two hands by kachin-dao. The own made mokume-gane by japanese usages, the open scabbard again by kachin dao. All from pieces in my collection. People who knows me as a knifemaker will find some typical own elements too.

80 cm in total. Din 1.2604 swordsteel, grip from extinct stellers seacow bone, guard from copper/iron mokume and antique wrought iron(by the way, I have some hundreds kilo of iron from 1600 to 1850. if anybody will need a piece for replacements, feel free to contact me ). Scabbard modern bamboo wood and water buffalo-horn with mokume and copper pins ( all pinned without a drop of glue )

Well this was a lot of more than standard work for me. I would like to say, that with every hour, my respect for the master bladesmith of the past has grown higher and higher. Remembering just the work of forging the fullers and grinding them........incredible work that the masters has done in the past. Maximum respect.

Best regards Thomas

Nice work, like the bolster/pommel & blade, kind of an eastern langeseax. I think I'd have squared off the end of the scabbard and left it open, and would carry the blade spine down, like a seax, to keep the edge from rubbing, sidewalls should just be tall enough to let you insert the blade w/o it flopping side to side between the bridges and the scabbard back perpendicular to the blade flat. Taiwan swords use an open scabbard with wire staples and/or zigzags across the open flat, which is also a cool way and could be used in addition to the bridges.

I love this!

I love your use of mokume copper as well and the way you etched it to give that worn feel on the scabbard. Also I like the scalloping of the end of the blade. The hammered and patina'd copper nails/rivets are a nice touch.

Thank you very much.

At the end there is not a nail. Its the tang going thru the grip full lenght. The tang is not hardened at the end to rivet it with a ball-hammer the old way.

Thank you all

Best Thomas

What is the (supposed) intended use of this blade?

The form shall come after the function... Without knowing that is not possible to regard its success.

What is the supposed use a that piece? A good question. Well my experience with a piece of this size is....one. ( making one of the „forged in fire“ test with a half pig would be interesting lol)

You can found a big number of different pieces that we call today ethnographical. Do we have the knowledge of the purpose of every different design ? On a modern knifeshow you will find so many different designs of the theme blade + grip as you will find on ethnographic pieces during the centuries before.

My personal intention was to learn, try out different techniques and answer myself to the question „can I do it ?“ that was all. I‘m fascinated of the old techniques, the imagination of how they made the pieces and just want to do some of this with my own hands. And at the end there was a contest namend „machete“ at the knifeshow in solingen this year. But that was only the occasion to start. I wanted to do a piece like this since years. The next piece of that size will be different. Never thought how much work this was and I have used some modern equipment like a belt grinder.

Thank you

Thomas

Thomas, I also have spent a lengthy part of my life involved in knifemaking, principally in making blades for other makers, but I have also made complete knives, and my work always tended towards an ethno-historical theme.

I have one question:- you have stated your respect for the techniques, and I assume, technology of makers of the past, do you , yourself, use these same techniques and technology in your work?

It‘s often difficult, because you often only see the result without the knowledge how it‘s done. You can read hundreds of hours books from scientist and the (often opposite ) opinions how it was done. Damascus patterns are one of this. It‘s just interesting for me to repeat a pattern. Is this exactly science what I want to do ? No. I will use borax instead quartz sand for the welding and a gasforge instead of charcoal. That doesn#t matter to me. If the result at the end will look like on the old one it will be ok for me. I have a bucket full of magnetit sand in my workshop. I wanted to make some iron out it. I will build an oven and if the result will be „iron“ that will be ok for me. I do not need to reproduce a similar oven with all detail measurements found in a specific region of the country. I will use an electric blower for that. The main issue for me is simple craftmenship , thats all

Best Thomas

Thank you for outlining your point of view Thomas.

In respect of forge work, I have always found that the use of coke and charcoal is far more satisfying than the use of a gas forge. Welding in a gas forge is not difficult, welding in coke or charcoal is a whole other world, and by using coke or charcoal, we position ourselves very close to the smiths of the past, even if we do use electric blowers.

I have used bellows instead of an electric blower, and what I found was that the fire (it was teak charcoal) was much more easily controlled with the bellows than with the electric blower. I've used a farriers hand-blown forge also, WWI vintage, and although for a number of reasons I find it fairly difficult to use, it also gives very good fire control.

I learnt to weld when the only fuel available to the smith I learnt from was coal, this meant that I needed to coke the coal before I could consider welding. Although I have found river sand to be a good flux for iron or mild steel, I have not found it satisfactory for welds involving high carbon steel, in a coke fire anhydrous borax is a satisfactory flux, but often no flux at all is necessary, especially in a teak charcoal fire. Use of a flux is very often the base cause of weld flaw.

I do appreciate your response to my question, Thomas, and I thank you for it, but the main thrust of my curiosity was not so much the forge work, which really is pretty simple and straight forward once the basics are understood, but rather, your approach to the bench work. I am curious to know if you use similar tools and techniques to the blade smiths of olden times for the actual making of the blade, rather than the making of the forging from which the blade will emerge.

Hi Thomas. Firstly let me say that is is a beautiful weapon that you have created. You should be proud of your accomplishment. I think we could call it many things. Well designed. Nicely crafted. Beautiful to look at. In hand we might be able to add more observations on functionality and design. But i am afraid that the one thing, by its very definition, that we cannot call it is an ethnographic weapon.
As fun as this is to see my personal feeling is that it is just not what we do here on these forums. We are not a knife maker's forum. There are in fact many of those out there on the internet as i am sure you know. I also know that we have a fair number of aspiring smiths in our membership. My fear is that a thread like this opens the door for a flood of knife making threads that seems a bit of a distraction from the intended focus of this site. I would suggest that unless Lee is prepared to open up a new sub-group called Newly Made Fantasy Blades Based Upon Ethnographic Designs that we might be better off leaving such discussions for other venues.
But these are just my personal opinions, not a moderation decree. If the mods here on the Ethno Forum wish to continue this discussion so be it. :)

I fully subscribe David's assessment ... with no moderation authority, either.

As an item which will probably never be used as a weapon, but illustrates some of the motifs, materials and techniques used in ethnic weaponry, maybe it could find a home in the Ethnic Miscellania section? :D

Can't call it a preposterous idea, Wayne :cool: .

Well again, i was merely expressing the facts concerning the definition of ethnographic and my opinion that discussions of modern blade craft and methods of forging are somewhat outside the intent and purposes of these forums. I suppose this thread could be moved to another forum, but this isn't actually Ethnographic Miscellania either. Though it may have some future collectors scratching their heads a hundred or so years from now if it loses its line of provenance it is not actually an ethnographic anything. :shrug:

It's German ethnographic. A future antique. :p

A SchwartzenWalderKirschTorteGrossenMesser. :D

A.G.

Yes I agree absolutly to 100 % . This is the way that I realy like to go ( in the future) Life is a compromise. The normal business as a production manager need more than 50 h a week, the neighboors say nothing when I will grind and forge on saturday( but they will not like the smoke of a coal fire ) Here in this area there are a lot of friends making iron in the 100 % traditional way. The Solingen museum is nearby and I have to less time to take part of all these kind of actions. Maybe in a decade when retirement comes by. At the moment I‘m happy with any piece that I finish and that piece above needed some month to finish. There were a lot things going to my mind while taking antique pieces in my hand and trying to do something like this ( unable to make it at the end ) I just want to share my grown respect for the former craftmen.

Best Thomas

Thank you for your response Thomas.

Yes, coal smoke can be something that attracts a lot of attention, however smoke from coke is really only noticeable in the start-up phase, and smoke from charcoal is no more obtrusive than smoke from a BBQ.

Certainly a hammer on an anvil does make some noise, but in a normal residential environment it is really no more than might be expected from the usual weekend activity of home maintenance, certainly not something for anybody to get upset about. Of course, any type of heavy power hammer, even an Oliver, is out of the question in a residential setting.

Grinding can be very noisy, as can any machine process, but use of other techniques can reduce noise considerably, and in my experience are not noticeably slower for finely crafted work. For example, if you use an angle grinder to remove fire scale, the softer heart of the forging is exposed and it is easy to file, particularly so if the forging has been annealed prior to beginning the bench work.

Files, scrapers, cold chisels, and the use of rubbing sticks, rather than machine processes can reduce noise to almost nothing, and the use of these techniques automatically assumes the nature of a form of active meditation.

Try using the old way of doing things Thomas, it is far more satisfying than using electricity.

Yes, I know I have just recommended use of an angle grinder, and angle grinders use electricity, however it takes only a few minutes to remove fire scale from a forging, and the processing following removal of the scale is not something that can be heard outside the workshop. Fire scale can be removed with a file, but it is a lengthy process and wears out the file.


As to time taken to produce historically accurate items, the longest time I ever spent on a blade --- note, "BLADE" not a complete knife --- was 49 man-days, +/- 400 man-hours. Time is totally irrelevant when one is attempting to achieve perfection.

Gentlemen, Thomas may be producing modern interpretations of antique weaponry, but it is not able to be argued that simply because this work by Thomas is both modern, and an interpretation, it disqualifies the work from consideration as an ethnological artifact.

Ethnology is way of learning about the world from the perspective of social relationships. It can be involved in both sociology and anthropology, and can examine the diversity of our own culture and society, as well as the diversity of foreign cultures and societies, both in the present, and in the past.

I do agree that in this Forum most participants hold an interest in weaponry that is either foreign to their own culture, or weaponry that is antique, or both these things, but the elements of antiquity and foreignness are not necessary to define ethnology, quite the opposite in fact.

My personal opinion is that people like Thomas should be encouraged as contributors, not sent into oblivion, as only a maker can understand the intricacies of actually making something, and the knowledge of the maker is invaluable to any person who attempts to understand the things in which he has an interest.

Alan, i don't believe anyone has even remotely suggested banishment to oblivion.
:)
I've been a maker all my life. I'll have to upload some shots of the railroad spike knife and axe i forged. They don't have anywhere near the fine craft of Thomas' beautiful chopper here. But they do serve realtime ritual purpose and cultural significance. ;)

Thank you for putting into words so precisely what I have been trying without success to do all day.

Best,
Robert

Thank you for your reassurances David, and although much appreciated, I am certain they are unnecessary. Just as nobody in this thread has recommended that Thomas be banished, I also did not suggest that banishment was being considered by anybody, however if this current thread were to be moved from the Ethnographic Weapons Forum, into the Ethnographic Miscellanea Forum I do feel that such action could result in Thomas' contribution to our mutual interest being forgotten, and oblivion is the state of having been forgotten.

The fact that you, yourself, have had experience in the craft of metal working is itself evidence of the varied ethnicity of North American culture. When we involve ourselves in ethnographic studies, we are indulging in a very broad based discipline, and where weaponry is an element of that ethnographic study, it becomes extremely difficult to define a boundary.

Thomas' work is certainly not old, it is not replication of weaponry from an identifiable culture, but it is extremely difficult to argue that it does not fit into the parameters of ethnographic study.

Defending the dame !
 

Perhaps this is a case of perspectives, so that the strict acceptation of the Ethnography appears to refer the descriptive study of facts of civilization of the diverse peoples and ethnicities. Everything runs harmoniously on a tacit basis or consensus, until something apparently off scope runs into the club. Scope ... would be precisely the gauge that defines a frontier within which an implement fits into accepted discussion.
It is pertinent to say that Thomas piece doesn't fit in the Miscellania forum, but because its scope comprehending "ethnographic artifacts other than arms and armor" still raises one or another doubt in this case.
Would this be an European item, doubts would not arise, as the scope of such forum makes it clear that replicas or modern items are better dealt in more adequate venues.
So reputing any individual modern creation, providing that it has a blade, as an ethnographic weapon, may be taken by some as a rather subjective interpretation; one that can be validated or rejected by the respective forum moderators, of course. This not meaning that eventual opinions that this is not an ethnographic artifact are not valid, hence risking the whipping post.
And of course this is not about to encourage or discourage those who create whatever they intend; is more about something being or not in the adequate territory.
Mind you, all just impressions of an ignaro :o.

Who can disagree with your thoughtful approach to this matter, Fernando?

Not I, that is certain.

However, that said , I do have a couple comments.

This Forum is designated as a "General forum for discussion of all ethnographic edged weapons and related topics".

The ethnographic method of cultural investigation can be thought of as an empirical hands-on approach, as distinct from the purely theoretical method that under-pins both sociology and anthropology, in fact in the purest form of ethnographic examination of a culture the researcher enters the culture and becomes a part of it. I adopted this approach to the investigation of my own special field of study more than 30 years ago, after I found that the existing literature provided neither adequate, nor accurate information in respect of my needs.

In the matter under discussion we seem to considering at least three elements. Firstly we have a craftsman working in Europe, we then have the craftsman working in a form that takes inspiration from Asia, and finally we have that craftsman using current era technology in a craft that has existed in both Europe and Asia for in excess of 2000 years.

Considered objectively we can now understand that in the work of Thomas Hauschild we are seeing the interaction of one or more Asian cultures/societies on the thought processes of a European craftsman working in the current era, and providing an interpretation of Asian material culture by use of technology and techniques that are embedded in a sub-culture that is common to both Europe and Asia.

The ethnographic method of enquiry investigates cultural norms and variations in a culture, ideally, in a living culture, but the historical approach can also be adopted where this is necessary.

In my opinion, Thomas Hauschild and his work do provide a superb example of the interaction of cultural influence across time.

Ethnographic enquiry is about understanding cultures and societies in order to better understand the anthropology and sociology of those cultures and societies. It is an inclusive method, not an exclusive method.

In consideration of Thomas' we work have material that permits not only the obvious possibility of analysis of the physical object that Thomas produced, but a moment's thought will surely illuminate the multiple probabilities in the past where ideas from one society/culture penetrated an alien society/culture and sometimes gave rise to variation within that receiving society/culture. Much of this variation has concerned weaponry.

To my mind, this is ethnology at its core, and my understanding is that this Forum exists for the purpose of discussion of weaponry and related topics from an ethnographic perspective.

The lessons to be learned from Thomas' work go far beyond the object he has presented.

I agree with A.G. Ethnographic edged arms is not just a dead art over 100 yrs. old. they are alive and well and in use and in production by small smiths all over the world, using a variety of traditional and modern techniques.

Mass produced replica knockoffs may not fit our forum, but there should be room for experimental archaeology that explains or perpetuates the technical construction and processes that produced our items of the past, for us and for the future, and this includes the current production of future antique artworks.

Knowing how things are made, assembled and used increases rather than decreases our knowledge of the past, as well as the present.

noun: ethnography
the scientific description of the customs of individual peoples and cultures.

Well then, my questions would be, what ethnicity does Thomas' chopper reflect? How does this particular blade fit into the customs and practices of Thomas' specific people? How will this blade be used and cared for by the Thomasonian people? Were there special rites and rituals that went into it's construction? Do the Thomasonians ascribe any spiritual qualities to their blades or are they simply for practical purpose? If only for practical purpose how exactly is this blade used within the context of Thomasonian society? How and when are such blades carried and wielded? Is this a weapon or an agricultural tool?
No one was suggesting that ethnographic items need be antique. There is still a very active keris culture operating throughout parts of Indonesia where keris are made as a part of cultural expression. Though perhaps lessened, keris still serve a cultural function within those societies. As well made and beautiful as Thomas' blade is, and despite the obvious cultural influences that he drew from in its creation, it still seems more an artifact of personal expression than a cultural one to me.
So, do we now open the Ethno Forum to every maker amongst our membership who wants to show their latest forged creation? There are certainly many other forums out there that specifically discuss the works of modern blade smiths. Should we open a separate sub-group on our site for such discussion?

I suspect this question must, in the end, be decided by the big man upstairs. No, not that one, I meant Lee. He who draws the purse strings calls the tune.

It would draw in fresh blood, and liven things up a bit. Maybe a 'Modern' section with a fee-paying sales subsection to increase revenue? Would give those so inclined a pen to play in.

edited:
I do however have been clutching at straws trying to give the OP a lifeline acceptable to the majority, and our fearless leader. My personal opinion , that it falls into the "and related topics" escape clause which does not restrict the relationship to historic weaponry. He's posted an unargueable Naga weapon he has which inspired this one in another thread, so I think we should not drive him away by denigrating his contribution and explainations...

Fair enough, A.G.; and thank you for caring to respond to my simplistic approach to the subject. Still my argumentative abilities are manifestly inferior to those of the author of such excellent piece of rhetoric.
Yet is time i retire from this conversation, as having already expressed my point of view ... one that prevails, by the way.

Yours humbly !

How About?
 

A Smith's sub-forum wherein the artisan(s) only can show ethnographically inspired contemporary work for comments?

Or is this a...
Lead balloon? :shrug:

I agree with you David, that it is nearly always a very good idea to try to fix the precise meaning of any word before relying on that word to carry a message that is intended to be clearly understood. In fact, it has been my long-standing habit to check any word that I do not use in daily colloquial communication. Additionally, it pleases me greatly that you accessed an Oxford source.

However, the dictionary meaning of any word is only the beginning of an understanding.

For instance, we all know and use without hesitation the word "occupy". It is a word that was avoided in the 17th & 18th centuries, because in Shakespeare's time it could get you time in the stocks if you were heard using it in public, as it had some particularly vulgar connotations --- well, connotations deemed to be vulgar at that time, perhaps not quite so vulgar now.

The way in which words are used changes constantly, just as society itself changes constantly. The only time a language does not change is when it is dead, as is the case with Latin, which in a sense can be a useful quality in a language, as it certainly prevents misunderstanding, possibly one of the reasons why a medical practitioner in past times would use Latin to convey instructions for treatment.

So, the message is clear:- language that is unchanging is dead, and language being an indicator of health for a society, any society that fails to change can also be considered dead, and dead things simply disappear and sink into oblivion.

Another quality of language is that meanings can and do change, dependent upon context.

Although we can produce a dictionary definition of a word, indeed, in the case of "ethnography" we can produce a very large number of dictionary definitions, all of which are similar, but all of which could be debated upon the variations in their similarity. Thus, for an understanding of current usage of a word, we need to go a little beyond the limitations of a two line dictionary entry. Because of the changing nature of language, lexicographers are in a sense, historians:- they record the meaning of words in the past, not necessarily in the present. The dictionary is the place that we start when investigating correct and current understanding of a word, but it is not the place where we finish, in fact, in real life the true meaning of a two letter word could well find itself argued in front of the highest court in the land.

I would like to make this post as short as I reasonably can, so rather than write a multi-page presentation on the way in which the word "ethnography" can be understood, I will provide this link:-

http://www.americanethnography.com/ethnography.php

In David's dictionary definition of "ethnography" we can see that this word is defined as a "scientific description". I most humbly suggest that if we were to use this definition as the basis for a decision upon whether or not a particular subject presented for discussion in the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum was acceptable or not, we would very probably need to disallow the vast bulk of all threads and posts to every sub-forum.

Since this has not happened, and since it is clear that the dictionary meaning is known and understood, then it is very obvious that the strict dictionary meaning of "ethnology" is not at all relevant to the matters that have been, and that continue to be, discussed in this Forum.

Rather, what does seem to be relevant to an understanding of the word "ethnographic" is the way in which various academics who practice and teach ethnography understand the word. Those who care to investigate university course descriptions, and text books that deal with the subject will find that my comment in Post #23 is very close to a generalised understanding of the concept of "ethnographic", across the academic world.

In short, the ethnographic approach to understanding humanity, its cultures and societies is a hands-on method that amongst other things permits the examination of inter-societal exchange enabling a better focussed understanding of a society, its culture, and the people within it.

The work of Thomas Hauschild as presented in this thread exemplifies this academic context, and as such should be considered as a serious contribution to an understanding of cross-cultural exchange.

What we can see in Thomas' work is ethnographic examination in action.

Earlier in this post I commented on the way in which societies and languages that do not change eventually die. I feel it is reasonable to think of this Forum as a sort of sub-culture within a segment of society. Kronckew has suggested that perhaps the time is ripe for some changes to take place in the sub-culture that we inhabit. I do tend to agree with him. I am certain that the last thing that any of us wish to see is the death and disappearance of this Forum.

A review of Forum activity during past times, in comparison with Forum activity at present should convince anybody that we do need an increase in interest.

Well, i think there might be a limited number participating members who forge such things, but i could be wrong.
:shrug: