OK Tim, first off , I suggest you reread what I actualy wrote, & not imagine the assumptions you say I have made!
I didnt make them.
They are your assumptions not mine.
But of course the interpritations of written word can be tricky as we all know.
I am sorry that the clarity I though I used, was obviously missing.
I said steel bolsters took longer to make. {"a sign that more time was taken making the kukri than brass ones."} That is pure fact.
Brass is softer & easiyer to work. Thats why most modern kukri have brass bolsters.
If you go to Dharan & watch them making them & ask the kami thier opinion, It is a straight forward open & shut case.
I didnt say they took more care, steel or brass bolsters come in all quality. From tourist scrap to top quality pieces.
I gave sources of verifiable information including 2 museams. Go to Winchester & veiw there collection & speak to the curator.
I wont suggest you fly to Nepal, to thier National museam , even though thats what I did to satisfy my curiosity about this questian & others.
A gurkhas opinion of the age of a kukri is generaly worthless unfortuantly.
They are mainly boys from the hills with very littkle knowledge of thie own history even. There are of course occasional exceptions.
They make good soldiers though.
Whether you wish to accept what I say is up to you.
But I spoke of facts, & also stated my opinions, which are derived from those facts.
I cant realy give photos to illustrate that steel bolsters are better than brass, because I never said that.
I have some very high quality brass bolstered pieces.
Pictures of your kukri would be interesting & I will tell you as much as I can about dating it if I can.
I am glad you like your kukri.
I like mine as well.
Spiral