An extremely unique Indopersian double bladed short sword, ID berde! - Page 2

Ian · 21st July 2020, 01:24 PM

Manish, glad to hear it worked out well for you. There are a lot of knowledgeable people and some excellent material archived on this site. The search function works well.

We've all had experiences similar to yours, and folks here are very helpful to collectors like yourself. Just keep asking questions.

Tim Simmons · 21st July 2020, 07:12 PM

I am so pleased this has worked out well. Anyone selling with such grandiose write up about there stock with such outlandish imagery is deeply suspect. like wow, rare, stunning, museum quality and so on is best to avoid.

manishkulkarni · 27th October 2021, 04:35 PM

Hi All,

I thought I'd post an update on this thread - I've recently heard from the business who sold me this and apparently an indo-persian collector not only recognised this specimen but also shared some snaps from a reputed journal. In fact, as it turns out, this is the very specimen that's been mentioned in the journal.

I'm keen to know what you guys make of this! Lends credibility to the object in question for sure?!

Thanks,
Manish

kronckew · 30th October 2021, 04:02 PM

Still looks like a fantasy wall hanger piece, no details on the not that old book entry as to date, location of origin, etc. 'rare' could also mean they didn't make many because nobody wanted them. Just because someone paid that amount doesn't mean it's worth that to anyone else. If the blades were good & properly heat treated, I'd cut them in half, fix/round off the pommels, polish the casting seams away, and have two nice more useful knives. But that's just me.

mahratt · 30th October 2021, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manishkulkarni

Hi All,

I thought I'd post an update on this thread - I've recently heard from the business who sold me this and apparently an indo-persian collector not only recognised this specimen but also shared some snaps from a reputed journal. In fact, as it turns out, this is the very specimen that's been mentioned in the journal.

I'm keen to know what you guys make of this! Lends credibility to the object in question for sure?!

Thanks,
Manish

Unfortunately, this catalog only proves that this item was made before 1983 ...

David · 30th October 2021, 06:52 PM

I'm afraid i agree with the rest here. This still looks like a fantasy weapon from the late 20th century. If it is in a book from 1983 it does mean it is much older than that date.
The blades do look fairly well made, bit the casting on the handle does not and there is still the problem that this weapon is rather impractical in battle. Also, given the way this weapon is meant to be held wouldn't we expect quite a bit of patina in that area if this was a real 19th century weapon? But there doesn't seem to be any or any wear in that area.

27th October 2021, 04:35 PM	#33
manishkulkarni Member Join Date: Mar 2019 Posts: 20	Update! Hi All, I thought I'd post an update on this thread - I've recently heard from the business who sold me this and apparently an indo-persian collector not only recognised this specimen but also shared some snaps from a reputed journal. In fact, as it turns out, this is the very specimen that's been mentioned in the journal. I'm keen to know what you guys make of this! Lends credibility to the object in question for sure?! Thanks, Manish Attached Images

21st July 2020, 01:24 PM	#31
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,209	Manish, glad to hear it worked out well for you. There are a lot of knowledgeable people and some excellent material archived on this site. The search function works well. We've all had experiences similar to yours, and folks here are very helpful to collectors like yourself. Just keep asking questions.

21st July 2020, 07:12 PM	#32
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,808	I am so pleased this has worked out well. Anyone selling with such grandiose write up about there stock with such outlandish imagery is deeply suspect. like wow, rare, stunning, museum quality and so on is best to avoid.

30th October 2021, 04:02 PM	#34
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,187	Still looks like a fantasy wall hanger piece, no details on the not that old book entry as to date, location of origin, etc. 'rare' could also mean they didn't make many because nobody wanted them. Just because someone paid that amount doesn't mean it's worth that to anyone else. If the blades were good & properly heat treated, I'd cut them in half, fix/round off the pommels, polish the casting seams away, and have two nice more useful knives. But that's just me.

30th October 2021, 06:52 PM	#36
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,131	I'm afraid i agree with the rest here. This still looks like a fantasy weapon from the late 20th century. If it is in a book from 1983 it does mean it is much older than that date. The blades do look fairly well made, bit the casting on the handle does not and there is still the problem that this weapon is rather impractical in battle. Also, given the way this weapon is meant to be held wouldn't we expect quite a bit of patina in that area if this was a real 19th century weapon? But there doesn't seem to be any or any wear in that area.