To all the members of Vikingsword who responded to my comment:
I apologize for focusing on the elements of a sword that appeared to be reproductions. My assertion and inquiry appear to be beyond the scope of this discussion forum.
I do however feel that recognizing the techniques of reproduction and the stylistic elements and trends is an important part of differentiating historical from reproduction. The hand and eye of a particular maker often offer noteworthy clues. In this instance I felt it was worth pointing out. There is one other sword shared on this forum that has hilt components almost certainly from the same hand. That insight should be valuable to collectors of historic edged weapons.
I want to point out that it was not my intention at all to claim that the workmanship itself was deliberately misleading. Quite the contrary. If I am correct about this maker, he has done a fine job of creating an aesthetic that is historical in nature but versed enough in stylistic detail to create designs that are very much his own identifiable pastiche. That is exactly what appeals to me about his work.
My search for a particular artist brought me here via a Pinterest search. I've exhausted attempts to locate this maker, but I'm pleased to have discovered this forum and a long history of old threads to study.
Best,
Adair
|