Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

ariel · 6th June 2006, 11:51 PM

I agree with Brian 100%: Southern.
And the blade is a replacement: it seems to me that Indians tried to use spare parts. Blades, by definition, were more breakable than hilts and there was no sense to get rid of a perfectly good hilt.I still think there is a good possibility that the blade is European. The flanges were never attached to the blade: the distance between them is too wide and there are no rivet holes in them.
Very, very, very nice sword, and likely with a lot of history behind it!
Congratulations!

6th June 2006, 11:51 PM	#9
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I agree with Brian 100%: Southern. And the blade is a replacement: it seems to me that Indians tried to use spare parts. Blades, by definition, were more breakable than hilts and there was no sense to get rid of a perfectly good hilt.I still think there is a good possibility that the blade is European. The flanges were never attached to the blade: the distance between them is too wide and there are no rivet holes in them. Very, very, very nice sword, and likely with a lot of history behind it! Congratulations!