Hi Gonzalo,
Quote:
|
The thin separators on this photos are in weapons who´s age is not established on the book, so we cannot say in which period they began to appear
|
Now you completely perplex me. In the "Catalogo" section, on pg 376 Domenech clearly attributes Cat 1131 to the 19th century and Cat 1152 on pg 380 to late 19th century.
Quote:
|
I don´t think it was cast. Casting over sand in this primitive way could leave some typical imperfections, as pores.
|
Well, for it to be cast, the metal would have to be something non-ferrous, or else cast iron, which is too brittle for a working knife. And Robert tells that it is ferrous. If made in modern times, perhaps SG iron, but that is unlikely. So, I agree with you on this.
Quote:
|
A blacksmith can make very cheaply and easily this type of guard on the anvil,....
|
Having some expertise, in metal work and knife making, I know that I could make a similar guard from either bar-stock or hammer forging a lump of soft iron and then fishing it by filing. But it is quite a complex shape on account of its tapering and curved quillons and would take me a while - Also probably would ruin one or two before ending up with a good one.
Because I do not consider this to be quite as easy a you suggest, I am not at all surprised that I have not seen a single example of a similar complex shaped hand guard on historical Sth American hilted specimens, their being invariably made from a flat strip of metal, either straight or bent to shape.
If it was made by hand, the cutler would have had a lot of practice in getting his sequence and technique right, meaning that he would have had to make quite a number before becoming proficient.
The other possibility is that its rough shape was forged with dies in a factory and afterwards finished by filing, which to me is more likely, though I am not adamant on this point.
It is because of these considerations that I consider the guard so important in identifying this piece.
Cheers
Chris