The $755/$18,000 ratio was humorous.
No doubt in my mind that the blades are real and very good, especially the one with gold inlay and a signature. I doubt very much it is a real AssadUllah's signature purely on statistical grounds: he must have made ,- what?- 100? 200?- swords in his lifetime, but thousands of swordmakers put his name on their swords. If his signature is real, and it requires careful evaluation that cannot be done by us, screen gazers, then this sword should be valued way above $18,000. If not, it should be viewed as yet another very good Persian blade and bring what the market will bear.
However, my point is that both swords were grossly misrepresented. We all would agree that the fittings are modern. Well, even that is not a sin. But to claim that " all is original" is blatantly not true. This is a "restored" sword and should have been presented as such.
The circumstances of the repeated "sale" of the sword with the plainer blade
are intriguing. What "men with no names" bid on it? Who "wins" it ? Why is it appearing again and again at no reserve, reaching high prices and then being re-listed?
All together makes me wonder about the whole operation and the authenticity of other items as well. Buying from that seller is out of the question for me (even if I could spend $18,755
)