Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Ian · 12th May 2006, 05:24 PM

Thanks Ron. The close ups help a lot. The top kris certainly seems to be an older form, possibly 18th C. if we believe Cato's classification. At one time this had a larger pommel, perhaps junggayan, that has been lost. This sword would take some time to restore but it is probably fairly valuable as an older example. The other appears to have a small ivory kakatua and also would need some restoration IMO. Again, quite a valuable example.

Even with the costs of restoration work, the purchaser could probably recoup most of his/her investment by restoring and selling these two swords.

Ian.

12th May 2006, 05:24 PM	#14
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,336	Thanks Ron. The close ups help a lot. The top kris certainly seems to be an older form, possibly 18th C. if we believe Cato's classification. At one time this had a larger pommel, perhaps junggayan, that has been lost. This sword would take some time to restore but it is probably fairly valuable as an older example. The other appears to have a small ivory kakatua and also would need some restoration IMO. Again, quite a valuable example. Even with the costs of restoration work, the purchaser could probably recoup most of his/her investment by restoring and selling these two swords. Ian.