kurd/IndoPersian ?

B.I · 14th September 2005, 11:00 PM

tim, the advantage will always be yours as you have the piece in your hands. i can only go by the images you post, and give my opinion accordingly.
i try not to brush things aside and the core of my opinion is based on the fact that the two pieces (hilt and blade) do not seem to sit well together. i can only go by gut feeling and personal experience. if i held the dagger, my overall opinion could be completely different.
the tang on elgoods dagger is assumed to have been as thin due to the missing hilt being originally of stone (whether jade or possibly rock chrystal). this wasnt a common feature in these daggers.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

14th September 2005, 11:00 PM	#16
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	tim, the advantage will always be yours as you have the piece in your hands. i can only go by the images you post, and give my opinion accordingly. i try not to brush things aside and the core of my opinion is based on the fact that the two pieces (hilt and blade) do not seem to sit well together. i can only go by gut feeling and personal experience. if i held the dagger, my overall opinion could be completely different. the tang on elgoods dagger is assumed to have been as thin due to the missing hilt being originally of stone (whether jade or possibly rock chrystal). this wasnt a common feature in these daggers.