![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,376
|
I think it would be strictly a guessing match Robert .
Are you going to buy the darn thing or not ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Centerville, Kansas
Posts: 2,196
|
Rick,
Yes I am probibly going to buy it if we come to a price that is fair to both of us. I was just hoping it would turn out to be a 19th century blade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,255
|
Hi Robert,
<1 cent disclaimer on> The possibly relatively old scabbard might be a plus, whereas the hilt seems really recent to me. How long was this kris with your friend? At least, I'd replace the rattan with a more suitable (and nicer) traditional wrapping! Clamp & ferrule would be fine with me, especially if both were to test positive for silver. I have mixed feelings with the blade - if pressed hard I'd therefore tend to a conservative guess, i. e. 20c. I agree with Rick that the file work is quite nice. OTOH, the scroll work seems to be a bit shallow (from the pics). The convex side of the first luk could flow nicer and also the engraved lines don't follow the luks perfectly (cp. pic #4). A light cleaning etch to remove the rust would give us probably more clues on the quality of the forging (laminations/tempering). <1 cent disclaimer off> I'd concentrate on the blade: if you like it, go for it (regardless of exact age which we'll possibly never know). I understand that this may influence the price you might be willing to pay though... Regards, Kai |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 940
|
Quote:
) is much more common in 19thC blades than 20th. There does seem to be a seperate gangya, so if pressed i would guess this was 19thC work. The sheath also looks like older work.Was it made for the blade (i.e. how's the fit?) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | ||||
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,255
|
Hi Nechesh,
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This easily could really be a (late) 19thC blade with later replaced clamp and ferrule (40ies?) while the horn hilt seems to be more recent. As Rick points out, this may be mainly guessing and I wouldn't want to base a buying decision on this scenario. Thus, my conservative guess to be on the safe side. ![]() Since we seem to agree that this is a refitted kris without established provenance my main point is to concentrate on the blade and its quality: IMHO a few decades older or younger won't effect the collectors value as much as the quality of the blade. If an etch were to reveal nice pattern-welding, I would gladly pay a "late 19thC price" even for an 20thC blade. If I really like the blade, I may even obtain it regardless of any "resale value" considerations. Been there, done that... ![]() Regards, Kai |
||||
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|