Chinese Bronze Age dagger

[laEspadaAncha]

Adrian,

I would advise your friend not to bother attempting to fix, reverse, or restore anything, as IMHO there is nothing worth restoring.

At present, I have in my possession about a dozen bronze artifacts, half of which are Bronze Age pieces. Two of the bronze artifacts are early ritual vessels from China (one Shang Dynasty, onr T'ang Dynasty) and four more are edged weapons.

Furthermore, while I cannot attest to having held a period-original Chinese Bronze Age sword, I have had the chance to see several exmaples in curatorial collections, and to see the corrosion process is parallel to ritual vessels of the same period.

Unfortunately, with regards to your friend's sword, I see several severe 'red flags' that would have resulted in a 'pass' should I have encountered it myself at auction.

Nevermind the fact that I have never once seen a bronze artifact that 'bent' like that over time. I am not a metalurgist and would be interested to hear from one about this rather bizarre claimed result of oxidation, on bronze or otherwise, though as I understand the corrosion process as it occurs on both bronze and steel, an 'expansion' shouldn't happen (aside from possible delamination).

I found three severe concerns, each enumerated in the below photo.

First, no. 1 (shown up close in the insert) shows a clear 'ladder' artifact in one of the cut grooves that is a clear indication of a drill having been used to create this particular channel. Not only is the technique incorrect for the period, but the regularly-spaced intervals indicates the use of an electric drill, and thus modern manufacture. That would be enough for me to walk right there.

Second, no. 2 shows the fitment of stone to metal is crude compared to what one would expect from period work. Nevermind distortion from the 'bend' of the blade; there is simply too much variance in the tolerance between the two materials in any given section for it to be period-original work.

Lastly, the presentation of crackling of the epidermal layer of the encrustation (no. 3) is bizarre to say the least, and if - and that's a big "if" - it is a natural by-product of the corrosion process, it is a statistical outlier, something that in and of itself would raise concern IMO, and in conjunction with all the other red flags that present on this piece, makes me inclined to say with near certitude this is a knock-off of recent manufacture.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but this field of collecting is nothing if not a learning experience for all of us...

Regards,

Chris


.