how do we classify a weapon tourist,origin,time period ?

[Ian]

Fearn:

In the two examples you cite, I would submit that the paradox is only a paradox when the item is altered after the original (descriptive) owner has passed it on to someone else.

If grandfather loses his axe and buys a new one, the second axe is again grandfather's axe because it is owned by grandfather. If grandfather replaces the handle or axe head, the renovated axe is still grandfather's axe (just different from before). The same for Theseus' ship; no matter how many parts may have changed or been replaced, as long as Theseus was still the master of that ship it remained Theseus' ship.

The paradox arises when the axe that once was grandfather's is passed on to someone else. How much change can a new owner make to it before it is no longer grandfather's axe?

Consider the following situations:

Can the handle be shortened and it still remain grandfather's axe? I would say yes, because it can still be used as an axe and it retains almost all of the original item.

Can the handle be removed and it still remain grandfather's axe? I would say yes, because it can be restored with a new handle to function just as grandfather's axe did AND the business end of the axe (its head) is still from grandfather's axe.

Can the head be replaced on the handle of grandfather's axe and it still be grandfather's axe? I would say no, because the functional piece that defines an axe (its head) is no longer from grandfather's original axe.

The paradox resolves to the question of what are the essential elements that define the object in question once its descriptive ownership is terminated. In the case of grandfather's axe, I maintain it is his axe head.

Ian.

Originally Posted by fearn

I'm sure everyone here is familiar with the "grandfather's ax" paradox (aka the Ship of Theseus paradox). If grandfather's ax has had it's handle changed three times and its head twice, is it still the same ax? If you prefer the classical version, Theseus' ship had every plank, mast, and fitting replaced over the course of its voyage. Is it the same ship?

F

[harrywagner]

This is a subject near and dear to me since my day job is library-centric and is heavily involved in various classification schemes. Libraries are way ahead of the curve on this one. They have a large number of established classification schemes that work for just about every subject one can think of. Dewey, LCC and NLM are common examples. These schemes are good at describing books, video and music, but do not lend themselves well to physical objects. As far as I know the scheme.org folks are only group that has attempted this. And it's messy, to say the least! The approach I am using is not standard, but includes enough meta-data about the object to serve for insurance purposes. This includes the following:

- a unique identification number. For example VI-131
- basic object type (dagger, sword, jambiya, etc.)
- origin
- date and place of manufacture
- a detailed description
- the object dimensions
- valuations

I hope this helps. Good luck!

Harry

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

"The pen is mightier than the sword...and a lot easier to write with" !!

[Jens Nordlunde]

Quote.
- a unique identification number. For example VI-131
- basic object type (dagger, sword, jambiya, etc.)
- origin
- date and place of manufacture
- a detailed description
- the object dimensions
- valuations
End of quote.

I doubt that an indification number couls be used here.
Basic object type. Good idea, but some of the weapons are called different names in the different parts of India.
A detailed discription. Good idea, but impossible to many new collectors.
The object demensions. Yes this should be possible.
Valuations. Out of the question if you have read the forum rules.

Thank you for trying, but this is very complex, and I doubt that the different collectors can/will agree to a certain standard - butwe can always hope.

Jens

[harrywagner]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Quote.
- a unique identification number. For example VI-131
- basic object type (dagger, sword, jambiya, etc.)
- origin
- date and place of manufacture
- a detailed description
- the object dimensions
- valuations
End of quote.

I doubt that an indification number couls be used here.
Basic object type. Good idea, but some of the weapons are called different names in the different parts of India.
A detailed discription. Good idea, but impossible to many new collectors.
The object demensions. Yes this should be possible.
Valuations. Out of the question if you have read the forum rules.

Thank you for trying, but this is very complex, and I doubt that the different collectors can/will agree to a certain standard - butwe can always hope.

Jens

Jens,
Absolutely right. You could not do this with a group of collectors, and I wouldn't suggest such a thing. Successful classification schemes have formal bodies that govern them. What I am suggesting is that there is no reason collectors cannot adopt a scheme of their own, for their own collection. Those are really basic metadata elements. I have no doubt it could be improved upon.

Regards, Harry

[fernando]

Originally Posted by harrywagner

... What I am suggesting is that there is no reason collectors cannot adopt a scheme of their own, for their own collection. Those are really basic metadata elements. I have no doubt it could be improved upon ...

Maybe i am missing something Harry but, if i understand you correctly, this is a vital basic for keeping a collection; either for your own guidance or for insurance purposes ... or even for your successors if and when you kick the bucket, so they know what they have and to deal with.
I also think nmany collectors already practice such habit.

I keep a record of all items, split by (1) firearms, (2) white arms and (3) diverse.

Organized by:

- Item number ... although i don't stick a label to the pieces, which is an option.
- Type ... sword, pistol, etc.
- Origin ... Country, area.
- Model ... basket hilt, box lock, etc.
- Serial number ... when existing.
- Marks/inscriptions.
- Seller/trader.
- Age.
- Description details ... full as possible, incl. dimensions, weight, etc
- Price acquired.
- Date acquired.
- Hiperlink to photos ... of my own archives.

When i update my little collection to the Insurance company, i copy all the above, except the Seller/trader column. No need to transmit such info.
Basicaly when you buy a piece, very often some of the particulars to be recorded are not available; then you have to browse the net, consult the forum and all that ... like you would give your kingdom to reach the info to fill all those columns. But that's what makes all the fun.


-