Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde
Ariel, that you have an old tulwar with faint spurs of reinforcement does not proof anything, when it comes to this sword – tulwars did not, normally as far as I know have reinforcements.
Tim, the scabbards is so far of ‘no’ interest, and your postulation 'that there is no reason why this is not a weapon put together in the late 19th century for display purposes, as the use of such weapons became more anachronistic', is only a postulate.
|
Jens,
I know tulwars do not have reinforcements. But a tulwar's blade with a hole and an imprint must have been a part of a sword with reinforcements at some time in its career. That's all.
Proves only one thing: not every remount is a proof of recent "forgery". But we have known it before....