I very much agree Rand. As has often been noted, weapon diffusion has no geographic boundaries and the influences that appear in varying degree can often reflect particular changes in the history of countries or regions. Your example of Chinese and Tibetan art similarity is well placed and we have seen many examples of hybridization in ethnographic weapons, in fact that to me is one of the most exciting aspects of this field of study.
You are the first person I have known to cite that passage in Stone. It often seems that many delight in finding flaws in the work of authors without realizing that few of them have considered theirs to be the final word on the subject. Most authors on arms and armor expect flaws to be revealed as further evidence is found and research continues. Stone was encouraging this as he hoped that others would follow in his path and that his work would serve as the venerable benchmark that it has.
|
5th October 2007, 06:24 AM
Hybrid Mode
