Ancient Spear Or Forgery?

Andrew · 18th April 2005, 04:54 PM

From MyArmoury:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan Senefelder

Andrew, this is based on nothing more than the time i've spent collecting original and vintage(Victorian copies) arms and armour, which translates out to what i've ever had in my hands which ain't much on a scale for 1-10. That being said here it is , overall from the pics on the other thread this is A) a partizian B) a cast Victorian version of one. The figural motif which was popular especially for cerimonial use in the 17th and 18th centuries would have been etched at that time (that i'm aware) and it has pretty obviously been cast from the photos. The overall proportions are in the zone for cerimonial work from the 17th and 18th centuries but its to "thick" if you will all the way around(it doesn't have the character of the forged pole arms i've owned but that of the cast Victorian decorator pieces i've had). So I guess in summary IMO its a Victorian era badly kept(cleaned/maintained) cast version of a partizian. This is based soley (sp) on the pictures so definitely take it for what its worth. I'll supply the grain of salt.

tom hyle · 18th April 2005, 05:06 PM

Moving toward a consensus?(I feel sure I spelled that wrong....)? It looks to me like it spent some years underground, or perhaps wrapped or otherwise enclosed in some moisture-wicking material. No one in China listen, but youse might be surprised what a couple weeks wrapped in newspaper gotten wet by a person not me while under her care

will do to "age" your nice antiques

Also, though plenty sturdy for day to day handling, and in all reality probably fine and dandy for haybails or even for spearing an occasional animal, cast iron is a relatively brittle substance, and a wooden target might well do this thing in (or at least its tip) in fairly short order. I agree with Conogre though that it's still a fun piece, probably with some good age (pre wwII), and of some interest as a costume, decorator, or even practice blade.

wolviex · 20th April 2005, 06:00 PM

Hello!

As I wrote it before, we've got something similiar in museum. To be exact - it is almost identical, the same shape, same pattern, but in a bit better condition. I would like to agree with Allan words, quoted by Andrew, but one thing is bothering me: saying Victorian, do we mean English or just European from the 19th century (sometimes called Historical Period) - ANDREW: this would be great if Allan could explain this further

. And this is of course partizan - I would even call it spontoon (sponton) which is a type of partizan BTW.

And the photos of museal piece:

Regards!

Rick · 20th April 2005, 07:29 PM

Sure , let's call it the Historical Period as I'm sure the interest in copies of old arms as decorative pieces was not confined to England .

What I find interesting is that the tips on both examples are broken (I suspect children at play).

I'm still sticking with my trash dump theory for the one in poor condition .
It is simply amazing what people throw out when times or fashion change ; as a former bottle digger I can attest to this phenomenon .

wolviex · 20th April 2005, 08:01 PM

But I would like to calm down our forum friend drzzzz...zzzz - of course there is no doubt that his sponton is in need of restoration, and the pattern isn't well visible - but such objects, 19th century "fakes" from so-called Historical period or Victorian era, are sometimes quite expensive. Even if they are only decorative, theatratical or anything else - today they are antiques. On some internet Auction Houses in Europe you can find such objects - some of them realy ugly, rusty and rude - but with prices over 200 Euros. Some of them (but real nice) are even of 2500 Euros price! So cheer up, anyway

(between us I realy don't know how much it could be worth, and even if I knew, we can't talk about it here.... )

Regards!

Ian · 20th April 2005, 08:23 PM

Those two examples are remarkably similar.

Wolviex -- is your example a cast specimen? Seems I can see the "flash" at the join marks, especially in the center of the curlicues next to the socket.

Ian.

wolviex · 20th April 2005, 08:29 PM

Ian: it seems to be cast. Especially the ornaments, in my opinion, couldn't be made by artist hand personally - it seems to be only a pattern (let's call it this way) from the cast form.

20th April 2005, 06:00 PM	#3
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Museal piece Hello! As I wrote it before, we've got something similiar in museum. To be exact - it is almost identical, the same shape, same pattern, but in a bit better condition. I would like to agree with Allan words, quoted by Andrew, but one thing is bothering me: saying Victorian, do we mean English or just European from the 19th century (sometimes called Historical Period) - ANDREW: this would be great if Allan could explain this further . And this is of course partizan - I would even call it spontoon (sponton) which is a type of partizan BTW. And the photos of museal piece: Regards! Attached Images

20th April 2005, 08:01 PM	#5
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Cheer up ? But I would like to calm down our forum friend drzzzz...zzzz - of course there is no doubt that his sponton is in need of restoration, and the pattern isn't well visible - but such objects, 19th century "fakes" from so-called Historical period or Victorian era, are sometimes quite expensive. Even if they are only decorative, theatratical or anything else - today they are antiques. On some internet Auction Houses in Europe you can find such objects - some of them realy ugly, rusty and rude - but with prices over 200 Euros. Some of them (but real nice) are even of 2500 Euros price! So cheer up, anyway (between us I realy don't know how much it could be worth, and even if I knew, we can't talk about it here.... ) Regards!

18th April 2005, 05:06 PM	#2
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Moving toward a consensus?(I feel sure I spelled that wrong....)? It looks to me like it spent some years underground, or perhaps wrapped or otherwise enclosed in some moisture-wicking material. No one in China listen, but youse might be surprised what a couple weeks wrapped in newspaper gotten wet by a person not me while under her care will do to "age" your nice antiques Also, though plenty sturdy for day to day handling, and in all reality probably fine and dandy for haybails or even for spearing an occasional animal, cast iron is a relatively brittle substance, and a wooden target might well do this thing in (or at least its tip) in fairly short order. I agree with Conogre though that it's still a fun piece, probably with some good age (pre wwII), and of some interest as a costume, decorator, or even practice blade.

20th April 2005, 07:29 PM	#4
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,376	Sure , let's call it the Historical Period as I'm sure the interest in copies of old arms as decorative pieces was not confined to England . What I find interesting is that the tips on both examples are broken (I suspect children at play). I'm still sticking with my trash dump theory for the one in poor condition . It is simply amazing what people throw out when times or fashion change ; as a former bottle digger I can attest to this phenomenon .

20th April 2005, 08:23 PM	#6
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,510	Those two examples are remarkably similar. Wolviex -- is your example a cast specimen? Seems I can see the "flash" at the join marks, especially in the center of the curlicues next to the socket. Ian.

20th April 2005, 08:29 PM	#7
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Ian: it seems to be cast. Especially the ornaments, in my opinion, couldn't be made by artist hand personally - it seems to be only a pattern (let's call it this way) from the cast form.