A result of ivory regulations ???

Tim Simmons · 21st January 2024, 08:09 AM

I would gift any ivory items I had rather than have this happen to them. Older collector now have a duty to pass the things on rather than see them vandalised.

Sajen · 21st January 2024, 12:28 PM

The second time that I see high quality weapons destroyed by cultural vandals!

drac2k · 21st January 2024, 06:53 PM

Please inform me how many elephants were brought back to life by this reckless destruction.

corrado26 · 22nd January 2024, 02:15 PM

These laws, which completely miss the intended goal, are the result when incompetents without any necessary training call the shots in an institution like the EU Parliament

Sajen · 22nd January 2024, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corrado26

These laws, which completely miss the intended goal, are the result when incompetents without any necessary training call the shots in an institution like the EU Parliament

Agree with you Udo! But when I go to the States there are similar problems with antique ivory. And the two Burmese dhas had been auctioned in GB and I know that the law there is more bad as in the EU.

Regards,
Detlef

Gavin Nugent · 22nd January 2024, 03:36 PM

I think there is a lot too much speculation as was to what hilts these blades had. Some were silver and ray skin over bamboo, others were silver and Niello.

Personally, I feel the speculation, and where discussions are turning to, will cause far more bluster and fluff than any good to the forum.

Nothing is going to change in this space, and just or unjust from a collectors point of view, or any speculation or discussion on the subject of what is not known for certain holds even less water within the current landscape.
This is just sensationalism for sensationalism sake and a rehash of the subject that has been broached here numerous times.

Live trade still happens. As recent as this week I have seen it on social media and other media. The issue is not going away.

Agree or disagree, we are all entitled to opinions, for me. I see ongoing speculations or even instances of it being removed by governing bodies, that it will do the community here no good at all.

Ian · 23rd January 2024, 05:19 AM

Gav, I'm frankly surprised by your post. Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion, and you have expressed disagreement with statements here condemning some aspects of the attempts to diminish the trade in elephant ivory and other prohibited species. It's not clear to me how such statements do a disservice to collectors.

My concern is more with the opportunistic dealer who crudely removes a hilt to make a few dollars. Look at the second example shown below, where the crafted ferrule has been cut almost completely through with a pair of tin snips or similar tool, and then left hanging there. Crude and crass! Totally without a sense of the aesthetics of the piece and its craftsmanship. I agree that these things happen out of necessity in poorer nations where individuals are struggling to survive and antiques represent an opportunity to make a little money. That's more understandable. But this piece was offered at auction in Britain, a prosperous first world nation.

The title of this forum is Ethnographic Weapons. To me, that means items crafted in a traditional manner from traditional materials by those from the original culture. Sometimes these may contain prohibited materials (such as ivory). In my view, such cultural artifacts created before, say, 1970 and containing prohibited materials should be permitted to remain intact and be traded. Those made after that time should not be traded. However, the rules are very different. Nevertheless, there are exceptions, and we, as collectors, should be able to avail ourselves of those exceptions without undue burden. That is not the case, and I think people have a right (and obligation) to vent frustration at that situation because cultural items are being damaged or destroyed as a result of undue bureaucracy.

I don't think my views are harmful in any way to collectors here or as a whole. (Rant over)

asomotif · 2nd February 2024, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gavin Nugent

I think there is a lot too much speculation as was to what hilts these blades had. Some were silver and ray skin over bamboo, others were silver and Niello.
.

A lot of threads on the forum are largely speculation.
Where do you think this ... is from ?
How old is this ... ?

Hardly ever do I see someone refering to the autum Dha catalogue of 1832

These hilts could have been removed or harvested for other reasons.
Fact is that they are damaged and devalued by it which is a pity.

21st January 2024, 08:09 AM	#1
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,875	I would gift any ivory items I had rather than have this happen to them. Older collector now have a duty to pass the things on rather than see them vandalised.

21st January 2024, 12:28 PM	#2
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,269	The second time that I see high quality weapons destroyed by cultural vandals!

21st January 2024, 06:53 PM	#3
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,268	Please inform me how many elephants were brought back to life by this reckless destruction.

22nd January 2024, 02:15 PM	#4
corrado26 Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Black Forest, Germany Posts: 1,237	These laws, which completely miss the intended goal, are the result when incompetents without any necessary training call the shots in an institution like the EU Parliament

22nd January 2024, 03:36 PM	#6
Gavin Nugent Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,818	I think there is a lot too much speculation as was to what hilts these blades had. Some were silver and ray skin over bamboo, others were silver and Niello. Personally, I feel the speculation, and where discussions are turning to, will cause far more bluster and fluff than any good to the forum. Nothing is going to change in this space, and just or unjust from a collectors point of view, or any speculation or discussion on the subject of what is not known for certain holds even less water within the current landscape. This is just sensationalism for sensationalism sake and a rehash of the subject that has been broached here numerous times. Live trade still happens. As recent as this week I have seen it on social media and other media. The issue is not going away. Agree or disagree, we are all entitled to opinions, for me. I see ongoing speculations or even instances of it being removed by governing bodies, that it will do the community here no good at all.

23rd January 2024, 05:19 AM	#7
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,453	Gav, I'm frankly surprised by your post. Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion, and you have expressed disagreement with statements here condemning some aspects of the attempts to diminish the trade in elephant ivory and other prohibited species. It's not clear to me how such statements do a disservice to collectors. My concern is more with the opportunistic dealer who crudely removes a hilt to make a few dollars. Look at the second example shown below, where the crafted ferrule has been cut almost completely through with a pair of tin snips or similar tool, and then left hanging there. Crude and crass! Totally without a sense of the aesthetics of the piece and its craftsmanship. I agree that these things happen out of necessity in poorer nations where individuals are struggling to survive and antiques represent an opportunity to make a little money. That's more understandable. But this piece was offered at auction in Britain, a prosperous first world nation. The title of this forum is Ethnographic Weapons. To me, that means items crafted in a traditional manner from traditional materials by those from the original culture. Sometimes these may contain prohibited materials (such as ivory). In my view, such cultural artifacts created before, say, 1970 and containing prohibited materials should be permitted to remain intact and be traded. Those made after that time should not be traded. However, the rules are very different. Nevertheless, there are exceptions, and we, as collectors, should be able to avail ourselves of those exceptions without undue burden. That is not the case, and I think people have a right (and obligation) to vent frustration at that situation because cultural items are being damaged or destroyed as a result of undue bureaucracy. I don't think my views are harmful in any way to collectors here or as a whole. (Rant over)