Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
I find this response somewhat disappointing in suggesting that those of who have added entries here have based our comments on speculations and NO REAL KNOWLEDGE. While personally I have only just over fifty years of study and collecting, and Oriental items are admittedly not my central field, I have engaged in research often on these topics many times through the years.
To suggest that Philip and Mahratt are without 'real knowledge' is laughable as both are published authors who have written on these subjects, and frankly Philip is probably one one the most often cited authorities in these fields.
The comments toward auction houses are not based on 'speculation' but on instances we have all experienced, and where these cases were thoroughly investigated and typically resolved and often widely noted within the arms community.
Most speculation, particularly in this discussion for example, is based on experience and knowledge, which of course typically renders it considerably reliable in lieu of irrefutable provenance or proof on topics or items. As always, and as any responsible author will submit, all material is always subject to rebuttal as more evidence is discovered and presented.
I dont believe anyone here was trying to 'refute' your observations and views, but expressing thier own based on personal experience and knowledge. Such input is considered viable material in discourse here and intended as shared opinion for evaluation. Obviously any observation made where sound proof or evidence is not presently or readily available will generally defer accordingly to compelling and well supported material .
I look forward to your addition of same on this topic regarding these dagger based on other than observations based on auction commentary or 'speculations' on age and authenticity based on assumptions thereof.
|
At first: I didnīt meant your answer with my post. You donīt have my opinion, but you argued differentiated.
And to the other points: If sb. is an expert he should argue like an expert. That means that he should underpin his opinion comprehensible. Simple meanings and not verifiable statements are not comprehensible. I made comparisons with other Chinese silver pieces and I can find identical or similar elements in many cases. There are a lot more pieces in the internet. And all this silver pieces are dated to the end of Qing dynasty by more or less famous auction houses. Because of that I think this daggers have the same age. Maybe a bit later than Qing, but not so much. That could be wrong, but persons with another opinion can only convince me with comprehensible statements and facts. I canīt read that until now.
Regards