Dangers of Producing replica ethnographic weapons and art

Dajak · 29th July 2007, 06:55 AM

I just thought I would say what is on my mind with regards to making replica or reproduction ethnographic art and or weapons i.e. : of the same size as the originals .Why I think its dangerous is that if the object in question is made by a modern artist then that object, take a sword for instance is made with all the materials as the original picture used say from museum catalogue or an auction catalogue. Though its is signed by the maker and is offered for sale even though the maker had no intention of passing it off as authentic tribal ethnographic weapon.If the sword ends up being traded or sold who is to say 3-4 people down the line one person the current owner might want to remove the signature of the maker or the makers initials so he can then try to pass it off as the real thing for big money thus polluting the authentic ethnographic weapons and tribal art field .Thus this creates a problem in the collecting world of these objects .It diminishes it. The idea of collecting if your like me I want the best examples of real authentic tribal's /ethnographic weapons which means the objects were made by a specific ethnic group to be used in a tribal way by those people, example: Dayak Mandau 19th c sword would been used for head hunting .The whole concept of collecting is to get the real authentic objects that were used long ago not some facsimile or shadow that was made yesterday. Because if a person makes even fantastic examples of a sword and makes it too look old in my book its a fake no matter how you look at it and it should never be considered ethnographic weapon or never be considered as art. What's even more dangerous to authentic ethnographic collecting if a object i.e.:weapon is a put together piece from old parts of another weapon this creates even more of a problem .

I would also say there were only so many authentic examples ever made such as Pakayun, Mandau, Moro sword ect ect the real swords were not made after a certain time depending on the culture .If a person decides to make same size examples of these it disrupts the field of collecting .There are people out there that just want to make money and do not care if they pass off a fake . A rare type sword or dagger if newly made then made to look old, its easy to see how problems can occur.Its difficult enough trying to find the best examples of authentic swords ect why make it more difficult.

I also would like to say making miniatures of swords and art. I have no problem with that since since based on there size they would never be passed off as authentic thus would never be offered for sale in the field of authentic ethnographic weapons or art thus never polluting the field .

Fakes are being made from all cultures all over the world and all types of art and weapons why contribute to that even though a persons original intention was never to do such a thing but as I pointed out its easy for that to happen.

Ben

TVV · 29th July 2007, 07:40 AM

I completely agree that replicas, especially well made ones, are dangerous as they can easily be passed on as fakes. However, here are two points, I feel necessary to bring up.
First of all, I think we, the collectors, are the ones to mainly blame. After all, we are the ones willing to pay high prices for the artefacts, thus creating a market for forgers. If we did not drive the prices up, noone would be forging swords, as making a good sword is actually hard and costly. Fortunately, I do not think that most of the best examples of ethnographic weapons can be mass produced cheaply - they need to be hand made, and sometimes the technology is not easy and only a few people can do it, their products as expensive or even more expensive than the authentic items, such as in the case of wootz. As long as we do not drive prices completely out of sanity, the forgers will be limited to ancient weapons and the more primitive examples.
Secondly, I actually think real sized replicas are necessary. I have friends who are reenactors, many of them reenacting battles from the 19th century. These reenactments help discover important information about battles from the past, as they are our only way of recreating the events, during which the weapons we collect have been used. I personally like weapons because of their historical significance, as witnesses and participants in heroic deeds I will never see. Anyway, some of the equipment my friends use consists of replicas, and some of it consists of authentic items. I know many cases, in which authentic weapons have been damaged - blades nicked and bent, gun butts broken, uniforms torn. Even the thought of somebody running around woods with a precious 19th century Balkan shihsane and clashing an authentic yataghan makes me cringe. Therefore, I do support replicas, as in many cases they help preserve authentic weapons, not to mention that they help us see how the real weapons have been used. After all, I am very much against cutting tests with an old blade, especially if it is a rare and valuable example.
To some it up, there will be fakes in any collecting field with high enough interest and prices, and while I do not think that a limit on the production of replicas will help much, if at all, on fighting fakes and forgers, I believe replicas are necessary and their benefits by far outweigh their eventual downsides.

Dajak · 29th July 2007, 10:18 AM

The main danger that I foresee is when the people use old parts from authentic antique ethnographic weapons.Then add these new parts to them and then age these new parts so they will look old as a antique .Thus creates a HYBRID of a object that could then be sold /passed off as a real authentic antique weapon this then directly diminishes the collecting pool of real authentic ethnographic objects wether they be a Sword, dagger ,spear and so fourth.

A Hybrid is not a true antique weapon and never ever should be considered as such but is a put together object and does not have the same value of a 100% authentic antique weapon .These hybrids can further pollute the True Ethnographic collecting pool ....
Another point I would make how many great master paintings in Museums around the world have found to be fakes over the past few years. How many Antiquities fakes have also been found as well, lets not have this happen to the Ethnographic weapons .

Ben

Rick · 29th July 2007, 04:09 PM

http://www.thehenryford.org/exhibits/pic/2000/00apr.asp

Jim McDougall · 29th July 2007, 05:58 PM

Extremely well said Ben!!! and TVV brings up very well placed observations as well

As collectors of authentic antique edged weapons, this is a subject that has always been with us, and one that has become increasingly disturbing as the prices gained by these weapons lure the opportunists. As collecting these weapons has increased in popularity, many with the resources simply will approach acquiring without abandon, leaving many serious students of these weapons behind. This is just one of the many factors that has created todays climate of incredibly priced antiques, fakes, authentically intended reproductions and the Frankenstein lot of conglomerations of components.

The dangers of this disturbing amalgam for the serious student of the history and development of weapons is of course that actual history that is held in the weapons themselves is often either completely destroyed, or misrepresented. Even the best intentions of cleaning up the actual weapons takes away all prospects of analyzing the age and original compliance of the components and reduces the weapon to the uncertainty of the world of fakes and reproductions. I would like to say here that serious reproductions are not 'fakes' but in many cases faithful reproductions, which I agree have merit in thier use for reenactment activities. These examples and activities are indeed viable for our study and understanding of the events in which the actual original weapons were used.I believe that the participants deserve considerable praise for the tenacity and resolve they exhibit in thier pursuit of the history and authenticity of the tactics, strategy and in our case, the appropriate use of the weapons.

One of the most confounding situations that complicates the often found 'hybrid' weapons is that many such weapons were in fact contrived during thier working lives, and are indeed authentic antiques in thier own right. Key examples of such weapons are often found in Spanish colonial forms, where frontier blacksmiths often fashioned ersatz weapons for the auxiliary units, using whatever surplus or resources were at hand. Many examples were refurbished in the field, and in the tribal regions of North Africa it is not unusual to see incongruous components together (as seen in the 'mixed up sword' thread). While these weapons due indeed have historic value, the problem is that the preying charlatans often 'create' such examples using parts from scrapped weapons and try to produce exotic pieces to tempt novice collectors. Take it from one who knows

...its a tough but convincing way to learn the difference.

Knowledge is power, and as always 'caveat emptor'!! Deal only with reputable dealers who will not misrepresent thier work, and will guarantee full refund if examination reveals problems. So called 'hybrids' are best acquired when they can be closely examined to verify telltale patination and various marks that reveal age of the work done.

All best regards,
Jim

ariel · 29th July 2007, 11:29 PM

Ben may be onto something.
Victorian copies of Medieval arms and armor are being misinterpreted as real stuff for quite a while.
And sold accordingly

Dajak · 30th July 2007, 12:30 AM

Onto what Ariel ?

Ben

Jim McDougall · 30th July 2007, 02:03 AM

good observation Ariel.

Bill · 30th July 2007, 03:16 AM

I think that a number of 'hybrid' ivory hilted moro kris are showing up. I'd guess a least 4 have been posted on this site fairly receintly. I have no trouble with some one restoring missing parts but think it's a real shame to destroy a legit antique. If a hilt was in poor condition, I can see making a simular hilt & would keep the original with the sword. I hope that who ever is making these hybrid's have saved the old hilts but it appears they are now permently seperated from the swords. IMO, these hybrid's lessen the value of the original.

David · 30th July 2007, 04:03 AM

Bill has a point here. Not just ivory pommels, but silver and other fancy hilts are showing up on weapons that were middle-class in their working days and would never have been graced with such valuable hilts. Obviously the sole purpose in this is to make them more maketable and c ommand higher prices. Most of these seem obvious to me, but i am sure that many a nice hilt has been married to a blade which then passes muster are an original ensemble. I certainly see no prblem with restoring a kris to it's former glory, and sometimes this requires a new hilt or pommel. But it should be one that is suited to and equals the blade, not surpasses it.

Dajak · 30th July 2007, 04:10 AM

Hi Bill this is happening with a lot of weapons also with some mandau in Kuching Borneo they have an old blade put an Handle on it and carved a new scabbard and try to sell it for real old .

The danger from this if people see this stuf and buys them this somethimes bad stuf can become standard .

Ben

Jim McDougall · 30th July 2007, 05:33 AM

right Ben.

kai · 30th July 2007, 09:48 AM

Hello Bill and other forumites,

Quote:

I think that a number of 'hybrid' ivory hilted moro kris are showing up. I'd guess a least 4 have been posted on this site fairly receintly. I have no trouble with some one restoring missing parts but think it's a real shame to destroy a legit antique.

Creating antique-looking composites (solely forged for market reasons) has been going on for a long time both in collector communities as well as in the respective countries of origin. Utilizing genuine, old spare parts or patination of newly crafted pieces are obvious strategies - both of which destroy a piece of historic evidence as has been noted already. (Of course, the same is true for removing parts from an existing ensemble be it a hilt from a kozuka blade, a relief from a temple, or a relic from an archeological site...

)

Quote:

If a hilt was in poor condition, I can see making a simular hilt & would keep the original with the sword. I hope that who ever is making these hybrid's have saved the old hilts but it appears they are now permently seperated from the swords.

Sure, not only will the connection be lost (the main goal of forgery) but also most damaged parts will get discarded. OTOH, fittings have often been exchanged at the whims of the owner already in the original cultures which makes it hard to draw a clear line. Short of scientific analyses, one will often only be able to guess from the age of patina, bindings and other materials used wether the change was still done in the "good, ol' times" rather than more recently.

Quote:

IMO, these hybrid's lessen the value of the original.

We should also keep in mind that in most cases new materials are being artificially aged and that, for example, newly sourced ivory has most certainly been obtained in an unsustainable as well as generally unethical way.

Regards,
Kai

Dajak · 31st July 2007, 01:01 PM

Hi don t forget they use old wood let it outside for a few years and no one can tell that it is not 100 years old if they use traditional tools .
I did see this a lot in Indonesie .

Ben

29th July 2007, 06:55 AM	#1
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Dangers of Producing replica ethnographic weapons and art I just thought I would say what is on my mind with regards to making replica or reproduction ethnographic art and or weapons i.e. : of the same size as the originals .Why I think its dangerous is that if the object in question is made by a modern artist then that object, take a sword for instance is made with all the materials as the original picture used say from museum catalogue or an auction catalogue. Though its is signed by the maker and is offered for sale even though the maker had no intention of passing it off as authentic tribal ethnographic weapon.If the sword ends up being traded or sold who is to say 3-4 people down the line one person the current owner might want to remove the signature of the maker or the makers initials so he can then try to pass it off as the real thing for big money thus polluting the authentic ethnographic weapons and tribal art field .Thus this creates a problem in the collecting world of these objects .It diminishes it. The idea of collecting if your like me I want the best examples of real authentic tribal's /ethnographic weapons which means the objects were made by a specific ethnic group to be used in a tribal way by those people, example: Dayak Mandau 19th c sword would been used for head hunting .The whole concept of collecting is to get the real authentic objects that were used long ago not some facsimile or shadow that was made yesterday. Because if a person makes even fantastic examples of a sword and makes it too look old in my book its a fake no matter how you look at it and it should never be considered ethnographic weapon or never be considered as art. What's even more dangerous to authentic ethnographic collecting if a object i.e.:weapon is a put together piece from old parts of another weapon this creates even more of a problem . I would also say there were only so many authentic examples ever made such as Pakayun, Mandau, Moro sword ect ect the real swords were not made after a certain time depending on the culture .If a person decides to make same size examples of these it disrupts the field of collecting .There are people out there that just want to make money and do not care if they pass off a fake . A rare type sword or dagger if newly made then made to look old, its easy to see how problems can occur.Its difficult enough trying to find the best examples of authentic swords ect why make it more difficult. I also would like to say making miniatures of swords and art. I have no problem with that since since based on there size they would never be passed off as authentic thus would never be offered for sale in the field of authentic ethnographic weapons or art thus never polluting the field . Fakes are being made from all cultures all over the world and all types of art and weapons why contribute to that even though a persons original intention was never to do such a thing but as I pointed out its easy for that to happen. Ben

29th July 2007, 04:09 PM	#4
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,284	A Prime Example http://www.thehenryford.org/exhibits/pic/2000/00apr.asp

29th July 2007, 05:58 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,879	Extremely well said Ben!!! and TVV brings up very well placed observations as well As collectors of authentic antique edged weapons, this is a subject that has always been with us, and one that has become increasingly disturbing as the prices gained by these weapons lure the opportunists. As collecting these weapons has increased in popularity, many with the resources simply will approach acquiring without abandon, leaving many serious students of these weapons behind. This is just one of the many factors that has created todays climate of incredibly priced antiques, fakes, authentically intended reproductions and the Frankenstein lot of conglomerations of components. The dangers of this disturbing amalgam for the serious student of the history and development of weapons is of course that actual history that is held in the weapons themselves is often either completely destroyed, or misrepresented. Even the best intentions of cleaning up the actual weapons takes away all prospects of analyzing the age and original compliance of the components and reduces the weapon to the uncertainty of the world of fakes and reproductions. I would like to say here that serious reproductions are not 'fakes' but in many cases faithful reproductions, which I agree have merit in thier use for reenactment activities. These examples and activities are indeed viable for our study and understanding of the events in which the actual original weapons were used.I believe that the participants deserve considerable praise for the tenacity and resolve they exhibit in thier pursuit of the history and authenticity of the tactics, strategy and in our case, the appropriate use of the weapons. One of the most confounding situations that complicates the often found 'hybrid' weapons is that many such weapons were in fact contrived during thier working lives, and are indeed authentic antiques in thier own right. Key examples of such weapons are often found in Spanish colonial forms, where frontier blacksmiths often fashioned ersatz weapons for the auxiliary units, using whatever surplus or resources were at hand. Many examples were refurbished in the field, and in the tribal regions of North Africa it is not unusual to see incongruous components together (as seen in the 'mixed up sword' thread). While these weapons due indeed have historic value, the problem is that the preying charlatans often 'create' such examples using parts from scrapped weapons and try to produce exotic pieces to tempt novice collectors. Take it from one who knows...its a tough but convincing way to learn the difference. Knowledge is power, and as always 'caveat emptor'!! Deal only with reputable dealers who will not misrepresent thier work, and will guarantee full refund if examination reveals problems. So called 'hybrids' are best acquired when they can be closely examined to verify telltale patination and various marks that reveal age of the work done. All best regards, Jim

29th July 2007, 07:40 AM	#2
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,614	I completely agree that replicas, especially well made ones, are dangerous as they can easily be passed on as fakes. However, here are two points, I feel necessary to bring up. First of all, I think we, the collectors, are the ones to mainly blame. After all, we are the ones willing to pay high prices for the artefacts, thus creating a market for forgers. If we did not drive the prices up, noone would be forging swords, as making a good sword is actually hard and costly. Fortunately, I do not think that most of the best examples of ethnographic weapons can be mass produced cheaply - they need to be hand made, and sometimes the technology is not easy and only a few people can do it, their products as expensive or even more expensive than the authentic items, such as in the case of wootz. As long as we do not drive prices completely out of sanity, the forgers will be limited to ancient weapons and the more primitive examples. Secondly, I actually think real sized replicas are necessary. I have friends who are reenactors, many of them reenacting battles from the 19th century. These reenactments help discover important information about battles from the past, as they are our only way of recreating the events, during which the weapons we collect have been used. I personally like weapons because of their historical significance, as witnesses and participants in heroic deeds I will never see. Anyway, some of the equipment my friends use consists of replicas, and some of it consists of authentic items. I know many cases, in which authentic weapons have been damaged - blades nicked and bent, gun butts broken, uniforms torn. Even the thought of somebody running around woods with a precious 19th century Balkan shihsane and clashing an authentic yataghan makes me cringe. Therefore, I do support replicas, as in many cases they help preserve authentic weapons, not to mention that they help us see how the real weapons have been used. After all, I am very much against cutting tests with an old blade, especially if it is a rare and valuable example. To some it up, there will be fakes in any collecting field with high enough interest and prices, and while I do not think that a limit on the production of replicas will help much, if at all, on fighting fakes and forgers, I believe replicas are necessary and their benefits by far outweigh their eventual downsides.

29th July 2007, 10:18 AM	#3
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	The main danger that I foresee is when the people use old parts from authentic antique ethnographic weapons.Then add these new parts to them and then age these new parts so they will look old as a antique .Thus creates a HYBRID of a object that could then be sold /passed off as a real authentic antique weapon this then directly diminishes the collecting pool of real authentic ethnographic objects wether they be a Sword, dagger ,spear and so fourth. A Hybrid is not a true antique weapon and never ever should be considered as such but is a put together object and does not have the same value of a 100% authentic antique weapon .These hybrids can further pollute the True Ethnographic collecting pool .... Another point I would make how many great master paintings in Museums around the world have found to be fakes over the past few years. How many Antiquities fakes have also been found as well, lets not have this happen to the Ethnographic weapons . Ben

29th July 2007, 11:29 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Ben may be onto something. Victorian copies of Medieval arms and armor are being misinterpreted as real stuff for quite a while. And sold accordingly

30th July 2007, 12:30 AM	#7
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Onto what Ariel ? Ben

30th July 2007, 02:03 AM	#8
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,879	good observation Ariel.

30th July 2007, 03:16 AM	#9
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	I think that a number of 'hybrid' ivory hilted moro kris are showing up. I'd guess a least 4 have been posted on this site fairly receintly. I have no trouble with some one restoring missing parts but think it's a real shame to destroy a legit antique. If a hilt was in poor condition, I can see making a simular hilt & would keep the original with the sword. I hope that who ever is making these hybrid's have saved the old hilts but it appears they are now permently seperated from the swords. IMO, these hybrid's lessen the value of the original.

30th July 2007, 04:03 AM	#10
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,085	Bill has a point here. Not just ivory pommels, but silver and other fancy hilts are showing up on weapons that were middle-class in their working days and would never have been graced with such valuable hilts. Obviously the sole purpose in this is to make them more maketable and c ommand higher prices. Most of these seem obvious to me, but i am sure that many a nice hilt has been married to a blade which then passes muster are an original ensemble. I certainly see no prblem with restoring a kris to it's former glory, and sometimes this requires a new hilt or pommel. But it should be one that is suited to and equals the blade, not surpasses it.

30th July 2007, 04:10 AM	#11
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Hi Bill this is happening with a lot of weapons also with some mandau in Kuching Borneo they have an old blade put an Handle on it and carved a new scabbard and try to sell it for real old . The danger from this if people see this stuf and buys them this somethimes bad stuf can become standard . Ben

30th July 2007, 05:33 AM	#12
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,879	right Ben.

31st July 2007, 01:01 PM	#14
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Hi don t forget they use old wood let it outside for a few years and no one can tell that it is not 100 years old if they use traditional tools . I did see this a lot in Indonesie . Ben