![]() |
|
|
#15 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 485
|
jens,
your honesty is very apparant in what you write i say this because you assume the placement of glass instead on precious stone was done to save the buyer some cost. i think that the original buyer probably paid the full amount from someone who replaced the originals with costume jewellery. the hilt is a good thing, and the channels cut into the pommel area and the base of the hilt suggest original gold inlay. inlay on a jade hilt suggest the hilt once may have held expensive stones and not ' born' with glass. a nice piece. |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|