Moro Twist Core Reborn

[hideyoshi]

[QUOTE=Bill]Sorry didn't mean to break the rules. Didn't mean the original posting but the later example. I don't have a good knowledge of metals but trying to attach/adhere two different metals is tough.
A flimsy piece of metal won't stick to the steel blade.
My first thought was later functionality.
Appears there's something more.
Perhaps it is just decoration, but I 'm somewhat leery of that.
Talismanic?


Good point Bill, due to the traces of scrolled ingravings on some of this plates.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by Rick

I have a problem with this piece .
The resto is very nice .
But
I don't believe that the hilt is original to the piece, rather a later replacement of the original .

The hilt is not the same caliber of quality as the kris .
It may have lost its stirrups so long ago that there is no trace of their existence left .

The hilt can well be a later replacement and probably is but by later I would say a period replacement circa 1900ish, I say this as the image on page 53 of Cato's Moro Swords shows one that is almost in identical profile so very possible when redone it was a true reflection of the original....

Gav

[ThePepperSkull]

Originally Posted by Bill

Sorry didn't mean to break the rules. Didn't mean the original posting but the later example. I don't have a good knowledge of metals but trying to attach/adhere two different metals is tough.
A flimsy piece of metal won't stick to the steel blade.
My first thought was later functionality.
Appears there's something more.
Perhaps it is just decoration, but I 'm somewhat leery of that.
Talismanic?

This is a great posting, in the sense of, restoration vs. preserving.
I don't think the hilt represents the original sword & on the other hand, changing the wear, removes history/use.

It is easy to see that many of these swords are being "updated". I'm guilty of repairing/replacing. Difference between nickel & silver is only $10/less in most cases of repairs. The original sword, in this posting deserves better dress & on the other hand, it should be preserved. Don't know right answer.

If for purely aesthetic reasons, I disagree. The dress that charles and phillip have chosen for the blade are beautiful and simple, which let the beauty of the blade take the spotlight so to speak while at the same time not detracting from the piece as a whole. I myself quite enjoy the work they've done.

By the way, this also prompts me to ask another question: Which part of this work was Phillip's and which was the work of Charles? It is all very lovely!

[mross]

Originally Posted by ThePepperSkull

If for purely aesthetic reasons, I disagree. The dress that charles and phillip have chosen for the blade are beautiful and simple, which let the beauty of the blade take the spotlight so to speak while at the same time not detracting from the piece as a whole. I myself quite enjoy the work they've done.

By the way, this also prompts me to ask another question: Which part of this work was Phillip's and which was the work of Charles? It is all very lovely!

Phillip did the polish and all work supporting it, taking a bend out of the blade redoing some of the groves etc. and the scabbard. Charles did the handle wrap.

I have it from a very reliable source that the "real" original handle would have been a small ivory kakatu and it would have had baca-baca. However, I think the original handle was replaced for what ever reason so long ago that it spent most of it's existance in the restored current state.