Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Lee · Today, 04:57 PM

I collected these sort of things for about three decades. When I started in the 1980s, I only encountered examples in the market occasionally and although I was truly a noob, wet behind bat ears, I did well because the items in the market were almost always authentic antiques and because lesser examples in excavated condition were simply not in great demand.

I have been inactive in this market now for over a decade, though with very little trouble on the web I can find at least a dozen examples of objects on offer appearing to be European medieval swords - all in better condition and with finer decoration than what I have collected.

I occasionally get inquiries from aspiring collectors as to whether an example they are considering purchasing is "older than I am." For analogy, consider a stool with three legs: 1) connoisseurship - overall form and decoration, nature and quality of workmanship and patina; 2) objective technical data - XRF for surface and shallow elemental composition, X-ray and metallography; and 3) provenance - and here if there are no verifiable details be cynical. With only a set of images you are maintaining a very precarious balance.

I am a fairly unhelpful and useless consultant as I have only two unqualified responses as I gather in all the information presented. I am either "enthusiastic" meaning I'd strongly consider finding the cash to buy the item or I am "afraid" and would decline. If I could generate a score number for my overall impression it would rarely be 100% confident or a 0% condemnation. But probably my calibration would place a score less than 80% under 'afraid' and decline. This calibration should occasionally cause me to reject an important and authentic example. Such a failure in that direction has yet to be proven and a 95% threshold would likely have saved me money without significant lost opportunities.

So now, donning my moderator's hat, may I remind members that when they present an item to the membership for opinions, that is exactly what they are going to get - opinions from varying degrees of expertise based on incomplete and remote data. I have had items condemned here for which I remain confident. Search my history and you shall find that I have practiced what I preach - thank members for their opinions, as almost always these have been offered in good faith, even on those occasions when they may not be correct.

Today, 04:57 PM	#22
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 979	I collected these sort of things for about three decades. When I started in the 1980s, I only encountered examples in the market occasionally and although I was truly a noob, wet behind bat ears, I did well because the items in the market were almost always authentic antiques and because lesser examples in excavated condition were simply not in great demand. I have been inactive in this market now for over a decade, though with very little trouble on the web I can find at least a dozen examples of objects on offer appearing to be European medieval swords - all in better condition and with finer decoration than what I have collected. I occasionally get inquiries from aspiring collectors as to whether an example they are considering purchasing is "older than I am." For analogy, consider a stool with three legs: 1) connoisseurship - overall form and decoration, nature and quality of workmanship and patina; 2) objective technical data - XRF for surface and shallow elemental composition, X-ray and metallography; and 3) provenance - and here if there are no verifiable details be cynical. With only a set of images you are maintaining a very precarious balance. I am a fairly unhelpful and useless consultant as I have only two unqualified responses as I gather in all the information presented. I am either "enthusiastic" meaning I'd strongly consider finding the cash to buy the item or I am "afraid" and would decline. If I could generate a score number for my overall impression it would rarely be 100% confident or a 0% condemnation. But probably my calibration would place a score less than 80% under 'afraid' and decline. This calibration should occasionally cause me to reject an important and authentic example. Such a failure in that direction has yet to be proven and a 95% threshold would likely have saved me money without significant lost opportunities. So now, donning my moderator's hat, may I remind members that when they present an item to the membership for opinions, that is exactly what they are going to get - opinions from varying degrees of expertise based on incomplete and remote data. I have had items condemned here for which I remain confident. Search my history and you shall find that I have practiced what I preach - thank members for their opinions, as almost always these have been offered in good faith, even on those occasions when they may not be correct.