Antonio, that's an often asked and discussed question here, and as to be expected, with a wide diversity of answers which shows that in the end it's subjective to one degree or another, to everyone.
For example, just the name of this forum, "Ethnographic weapons".
Being a US citizen, to me, everything except weapons peculiar to the US, which includes almost everything, is ethnographic, while the term, in relation to swords and such, at least to my understanding, includes everything except European bladed weapons.
Again, most collectors seem to be purists, meaning a bladed weapon style coming from and used by the peoples that originated and used them, with value placed upon age, but again, a certain amount of subjectivity enters into it here as well, particularly, for instance, in cases such as areas of New Guinea that had still had relatively little outside contact as recently as the 1950's.
This is where terms such as "contemporary", "reproduction", "imitation" and "tourist" enter into it and discussions become more heated and viewpoints more vehement.
Many to most, I would imagine, would consider your beautiful piece a contemporary reproduction, no matter what the quality, care and skill that went into its construction, with some considering it all but valueless, or a curiosity at best, while others see and appreciate the worth of pieces made by artisans and craftsmen just as much as antiques of bygone times.
Contemporary swords and knives of quality are often as valuable as as some of the antiques as well, particularly where attention is paid to remaining faithful to original specifications, such as using a good high carbon steel vs stainless, because of the inherent brittleness that usually comes as a trade off for being less susceptible to corrosion.
In many cases, the true test, however, is often in how the piece is presented, as in the case of artificially aged reproductions being passed off as aged original antiques, which to me expresses the basic crux of the problem.
If a piece is made so well that even expert scientific scrutiny is unable to differentiate it from an original, where is the harm, other than to an ego?
I know that I'm in the minority here, and with a much broader range of interests and conditions of acceptability than most, but I myself think that you've made a beautiful creation there that would stand extremely well on it's own merits and be a worthy addition to any collection.
Mike
|