Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 30th October 2017, 12:05 PM   #6
motan
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Jerusalem
Posts: 274
Default

Hi Battara,
I agree with you. Most chances that both are copies, but the first one is a much better copy. Could also be real, who knows?
Copper and broze casting is relatively easy technique that can be performed in basic workshop conditions - I have seen artisans from Mali doing it.
It is also easy to make these artifacts look old, so forgeries of Luristan bronze are quite easy to make.
Luristan bornze is intriguing because their cultural background is unclear. As weapons, it is logical to assume they were more ritual than functional, as iron working was already established in the region at the time of their making. It is true that relatively great numbers of artifacts were found in Luristan, but the sheer number of artifacts on the market makes it very improbable that they are all real. Because of this and the fact that only a very professional analysis can tell a real from fake suggests that it is better to stay away from Luristam bronze
motan is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.