SPANDAU BALLET

[David]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Thank you David. I am not in the business of trying to stir up trouble or argue the views of the Moderators, but simply trying to point out that IMHO the Miscellaneous section conveys to me that it is just that...Miscellaneous. I am perhaps afraid that as our older Member pass (I am about to turn 81) large amounts of knowledge for those who follow us will be lost. Maybe the Moderators would seriously consider either changing the title of this section, or as an alternative add a further category which would allow discussion of more recently (but still ANTIQUE) items to be openly discussed.
I accept that the title of the Website is "Ethnographic" and not "Ethnic" and there are other sites which deal in what I would call modern weapons, but I would like to think that items produced up to the late 19th century could perhaps be included here. Some are already, in the European Armoury section such as military swords so where does one draw the line?
I respect the Rules as they exist, but wonder if perhaps with the passing of time that they maybe could be revisited to possibly include a wider range of items accepted for discussion.
Stu

Hi Stu. I believe you are operating under a misconception. AFAIK, the word "antique" doesn't appear anywhere in the forum titles or the general rules about posting. Not only are items produced in the late 19th century quite often included on our forums, but on the Keris Forum at least, we frequently discuss 20th and 21st century keris, even ones made just yesterday. So there is no line there at all. Ethnographic has nothing to do with the age of the weapon. They are simply weapons that are specific to a particular culture that reflect the values, craft and design that are a unique part of those cultures. And for the most part they are not factory made items such as modern military weaponry.
Now again, i am not stating this to squash the current discussion here. Please continue as it seems you and others (and even myself in some aspects) are enjoying this threads and it does appear in the Miscellaneous Section after all. However, i see no reason to drop the "Ethnographic" from the name of this particular forum as we are indeed a website dedicated specifically to ethnographic weapons and armour. As i mentioned before, there are tons of sites out there that focus on modern Military weaponry, bith very specifically and generally that are doing a great job preserving the knowledge of WWI and WWII guns and aircraft. That simply is not the focus of this website. And just as you mention the passing of members and your own age, we moderators are just as antique as some of the weapons we post. As i'm sure you know we just lost one of our beloved team and are understaffed as it is. So expanding and adding new categories outside of the scope of Ethnographic Weapons is not really feasible or practical. Asking a forum that is focussed on Ethnographic Weapons to open up a new forum for people to discuss manufactured military machine guns is like asking a forum for Folk Music to add a section to discuss Prog Rock. There is a place for everything.
I would ask at this point that if you wish to continue discussing this further that you make a PM directly to members of the Moderation Team rather than continuing it here. Forum policy is not to be discussed in the open forums. Thanks!

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by David

Hi Stu. I believe you are operating under a misconception. AFAIK, the word "antique" doesn't appear anywhere in the forum titles or the general rules about posting. Not only are items produced in the late 19th century quite often included on our forums, but on the Keris Forum at least, we frequently discuss 20th and 21st century keris, even ones made just yesterday. So there is no line there at all. Ethnographic has nothing to do with the age of the weapon. They are simply weapons that are specific to a particular culture that reflect the values, craft and design that are a unique part of those cultures. And for the most part they are not factory made items such as modern military weaponry.
Now again, i am not stating this to squash the current discussion here. Please continue as it seems you and others (and even myself in some aspects) are enjoying this threads and it does appear in the Miscellaneous Section after all. However, i see no reason to drop the "Ethnographic" from the name of this particular forum as we are indeed a website dedicated specifically to ethnographic weapons and armour. As i mentioned before, there are tons of sites out there that focus on modern Military weaponry, bith very specifically and generally that are doing a great job preserving the knowledge of WWI and WWII guns and aircraft. That simply is not the focus of this website. And just as you mention the passing of members and your own age, we moderators are just as antique as some of the weapons we post. As i'm sure you know we just lost one of our beloved team and are understaffed as it is. So expanding and adding new categories outside of the scope of Ethnographic Weapons is not really feasible or practical. Asking a forum that is focussed on Ethnographic Weapons to open up a new forum for people to discuss manufactured military machine guns is like asking a forum for Folk Music to add a section to discuss Prog Rock. There is a place for everything.
I would ask at this point that if you wish to continue discussing this further that you make a PM directly to members of the Moderation Team rather than continuing it here. Forum policy is not to be discussed in the open forums. Thanks!

Thank you David for your patience regarding the above discussions.
I would just like to clarify, and seek clarification on the following two points before I close my ramblings.
I use, and have always used the term ANTIQUE, purely to describe items either over 100 years old or made before 1900. There was no intention on my part to suggest that this Forum dealt in Antiques as such, or changed anything in the Rules to include the word Antique.
In one of the replies above it was stated that a Spandau was not an Ethnographic item as it was factory produced, so how can a German/Austrian/English/French sword or other items which are also factory produced, and discussed in the European Armoury, be described as Ethnographic?
I leave you with these thoughts and thank you for your tolerance.
Stu

[Lee]

Back before there was a forum component on this site - just over a quarter of a century ago - I wrote this:

Ethnographic arms and armour describes weapons and combat protective devices other than the standardized military models of the past few centuries and is likely a product of an individual artisan working according to traditional patterns as opposed to a product of modern mass industrial production. Militaria is thereby excluded by our definition. While modern custom work would qualify as an artifact of our own culture under this definition, such items are not considered here, as they are better represented elsewhere.

My attitude has not changed. I did and do acknowledge that the interests of the forum community that developed would not be constrained by my arbitrary definitions and would be as irregularly broad as are my own interests. The Miscellanea section was later added to accommodate discussions of other artifacts specifically of the cultures that created the edged weapons primarily considered here, acknowledging these broader interests. I have tolerated occasional diversions into militaria as I understand that the interests of many of us do extend into that realm, but such materials and discussions lie outside of the intended focus of this project.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Lee

Back before there was a forum component on this site - just over a quarter of a century ago - I wrote this: My attitude has not changed. I did and do acknowledge that the interests of the forum community that developed would not be constrained by my arbitrary definitions and would be as irregularly broad as are my own interests. The Miscellanea section was later added to accommodate discussions of other artifacts specifically of the cultures that created the edged weapons primarily considered here, acknowledging these broader interests. I have tolerated occasional diversions into militaria as I understand that the interests of many of us do extend into that realm, but such materials and discussions lie outside of the intended focus of this project.

Thank you for this Lee. Perhaps with your clarification above as to what is acceptable for discussion, you could please address the question I raised above regarding Factory produced swords of fairly recent vintage being included and discussed in the European Armoury Section. Under the definition you give, these surely can not be classed as Ethnographic?
Stu

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

...
In one of the replies above it was stated that a Spandau was not an Ethnographic item as it was factory produced, ...
Stu

The 'Spandau' machine guns were produced in Germany based on the designs of the Maxim machine guns of Hiram KMaxim from 1884, and licensed accordingly. They were produced for a 'German' 7.62 mm cartridge rather than .30-06. That's about the only 'ethnic' difference.


It kinda reminds me of the Indonesian Dutch 'klewang', designed by Europeans for use by indigenous troops in the 19c, produced in Hembrug, and in Solingen, and MILSCO in the USA, used by all the major combatants in WW1/2, as well as 'ancient' sharp pointy things STILL in use by civilians and military,like kris/khukuri/ginunting/barongs/machetes/daab, and a host of others still used as tools AND when needed, weapons.


Ethnographic kinda means 'Eastern' and 'European' kinda means 'Western', with fuzzy overlaps.We rightly, don't discuss modern/vintage 'replicas', tho they are sometimes useful as illustrations or caveats. I would limit those to fairly accurate 'museum' grade replicas. As in Experimental 'archeology'.



All-in-all, I do not envy the Mods/Admins, the arbiters of who does what to whom, and where. I occasionally disagree with them, but they run things here.


'Ethnographic' in the banner at the page top is a bit fuzzy, but I can't think of a replacement at present...


I suggest we just use a bit of common sense (not very common any more), discretion and tolerance. I also think we don't need any 'new' sub-forums. I look to us being a store-room of knowledge, and of instruction for the new collectors, as well as tthe old ones.

[David]

Gentlemen, i don't want to sound like a broken record, but again, discussions or explanations regarding forum policies have no place in the open forums. If anyone wishes to continue to question why one thing has been permitted fair for discussion in the forums while another thing has not or you would like further clarification question the meaning of "Ethnographic" or the origin or current intent of this website's forum i suggest to PM the moderation team. This forum is and always has been Lee's baby, but even though over the years the moderation team has helped work out the specifics of how we operate, we are all, regardless of our advancing years, just teenagers living in our parent's house.
From the Rules page for all forums.
I want to complain about a forum policy: These fora are managed by a volunteer Moderator Team and each moderator has a vote on fora policies. Concerns may be directed to any of the moderators (or to webmaster@vikingsword.com) for presentation to and consideration by the Moderator Team. Do not create a thread in the forums for your grievance or suggestion, unless you wish to risk being banned.

[Jim McDougall]

Actually I agree that administrative matters should entirely be discussed privately as on threads these kinds of diversions not only derail discussion but can often obstruct it. As I am the one who began this thread and it seems inadvertently entered a topic which is by definition outside forum parameters, I bear responsibility for this situation.

However I am grateful for the forbearance of the staff in permitting the discussion and entries which seem to indeed reveal the common interest many of us share in the elements of WWI aviation and the weaponry used. In the future I will check with staff before posting a thread which may fall into potentially controversial category. As seen, sometimes these topics do have merit, and can bring useful discussion and sharing of knowledge without compromising the general content here.
The primary objective of certain regulation is understood to avoid having our pages fall into the quagmire of content including militaria and modern reproductions of weapons which have profoundly diffused some other forums.

As already well explained, it does not seem necessary to re-title things nor to create yet another sub-forum, as we all work together in sharing discussion and material, and the moderators have the thankless job of trying to maintain some semblance of order.

In arms and armor, much as in history itself, it is often difficult to strictly categorize, much as we find in trying to rigidly classify weapons by distinct form.
As has been noted, essentially the ethnic/ethnographic or Eastern vs. Western denominators in general application are not consequential.

As Kipling said in 1889, in his "Ballad of East and West":
"...oh East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.
till earth and sky stand presently at Gods great judgement seat.
But there is neither East nor West, border nor breed nor birth,
when two strong men stand face to face, though they come from
the ends of the earth".

While a tenuously applied analogy, it seemed to apply, not only in the sense of the ethnographic to western issues, but to all of us here, whom I view as all strong men, whose ideas may often differ, but we find common ground.

It would seem the discussion has run its course on the Spandau topic, but I hope the thread might stay open for any future input. In any case, Id like to thank everyone for their entries, and to thank the clearly notable number of readers for their interest.

All best regards,
Jim

[Lee]

I believe that the post 1900 / 100 year old "cutoff" may have been Fernando's personal "rule of thumb" in moderating the European Arsenal section of the forum. Life is better for all when members of the moderation team are allowed reasonable latitude. Personally, I'd classify a British Brown Bess, a British model 1796 cavalary saber and a model 1860 U.S. cavalry saber all as militaria. A reworking of any of these within another culture might surely create an ethnographic weapon character and discussion in the forum may also be relevant to considerations in the "evolution" of ethnographic types and the martial environment they existed in.

I started out as a militaria collector. In suburban middle America of the 1960s and 70s this is where one's opportunities were going to lie. I avoided contributing to the current "Arms Collecting and Nostalgia" thread because how my interest in European medieval arms initially arose is a bit embarrassing. Even as I focused on European medieval swords, I would occasionally find interesting and analogous metalworking techniques in edged weapons from many cultures and times and I began collecting these. Decent examples were relatively inexpensive in the 1980s and 90s.

I discovered the internet during this phase and this project began being about European medieval swords. Much of the interest in discussion groups then was very much of the "collect all of the Oakeshott types in modern mass-produced replica form." Bored during a clinical chemistry conference irrelevant to my work, my mind began to drift and that is when I wrote the paragraph quoted above in my previous post and conceived the ethnographic part of this web project. With more than a little bit of arrogance and presumptiveness I took it upon myself to suggest that aspiring collectors should focus on something that I considered worthwhile and meriting their attentions and that if they did not have the luck and resources to pursue authentic medieval European swords, then there still were ingenuously and proficiently handmade antique arms and armour from other times and places languishing at gun shows and antique shops that could be had for very reasonable prices.

From when I started going to the Baltimore show decades ago, I remembered an intriguing and detailed educational display of Philippine edged weapons. The next year I earnestly looked for it, but it was gone. On a snack break I saw someone with some Philippine items and offhandedly lamented to him that I had missed the amazing display from the previous year. He replied that it had been his, but that influential members of the gun collecting and dealing fraternity had declared it a waste of scarce display space. I heard the same sentiment from some gun and militaria dealers I knew as well. Well, if they can be narrow minded jerks, so can I.

Relatedly, a word on the absolute hostility towards commerce in our discussion forums and the tight restrictions even in the swap forums. This is probably best explained with an analogy: consider a garden where you are attempting to grow some fastidious plants, here representing the sharing of knowledge and appreciation of ethnographic arms and armour. Commerce represents weeds in that sharing of knowledge may be seen as giving up commercial advantage in the market. Against the alternative of "wheeling and dealing" and acquiring, the pursuit of knowledge will be pushed aside. Consider the annual Ethnographic Arms and Armour dinner and lectures seminar that we held each year to coincide with the Baltimore show over a decade ago. This thrived until an antique arms and armour auction came to be held in the same hotel also on Saturday evening - when the auction started, the seminar room thinned out quickly and to such an extent that the the seminar series was abandoned just a few years later. Most "antique arms collector" groups in the US are in fact, in my opinion, essentially dealer organizations. This is surely not to say that I have not known and appreciated dealers who have nurtured my connoisseurship and knowledge, but they are the best and the exceptions. My hope here has been that by rigorously combating such weeds, the forum will be and remain a place where we can all share our knowledge, insights and enthusiasm for the subject.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you so much Lee! Wonderfully explained, and great analogies! and importantly noting that lines of demarcation such as the 1900 or 100 year marks are not necessarily written in stone. The moderation team indeed must evaluate topics and subject matter using a degree of latitude and determine how these might effect the overall contexts of discussions on our pages.

With the matter of military items, I understand exactly what you mean in noting that the Brown Bess musket, M1796 light cavalry sword etc. which of course are in that category and discussed openly in the European forum. However, as these weapons became present in colonial situations, they in fact often technically transcended into the ethnographic category as they were adopted into native use. Therefore they might be classified as BOTH European or ethnographic depending on point of view. Naturally as military weapons in the European category these have been discussed openly in that forum since inception in 2008, and remain so.

In many cases ethnographic forms copied European and vice versa, and of course we are well aware of the ubiquitous use of European blades in native edged weapons, whether via trade or other means.

One favorite notation I recall from some time ago pertains to the British cavalry in India during the Sikh wars, and the British noted the superior and deadly skills of these warriors with their tulwar sabers. What horrified them even more was when they discovered that these tulwars were equipped with old British M1796 saber blades, finely honed.

One of the most intriguing anomalies in collecting and studying native edged weapons are the many examples of for example, ethnographic swords with European blades and conversely European hilted forms with Middle Eastern blades etc.

I agree that discretion and latitude must be factored in the content of items and subjects in discussions, and these must be weighed on merit and influence on the overall character of our discussions and our forums in general.
As noted, the often insidious issue of commercialism and dealings are likely one of the most damaging effects that threaten the character and content of our pages . As I have always believed, we all learn here together, and that is the most important thing.

Again, I had not imagined this thread becoming a platform for these matters, but hope that the subject might be satisfied. The topic of the thread remains the Spandau machine gun, an evolution of the Maxim gun of late 19th c. and famously represented by the German fighter planes of WWI.

One thing I gained in the look into these guns here: I had not realized that the purpose of the much perforated shield on these was to air cool the barrel. Apparently, the guns of this type used in the field were water cooled, in what I found.