Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 1st May 2014, 10:10 AM   #34
M ELEY
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,141
Default

Absolutely agree to generic labeling of pieces these days, Jim. The importance of pinpointing not only adds to our knowledge, but for those that enjoy the fine details, helps us appreciate the history behind it. I have found this fact particularly with naval weapons. Many weapons that went to sea were not documented and must be labeled 'associated'. That being said, some collectors shy away from anything but weapons with absolute exacting proof of such (anchor designs, rack numbers, axe patterns used by naval) while ignoring other pieces that very likely were nautical examples, but need more research to pin them down. Sorry to divert from the sword at hand, but I think the point is this form of sword differs from its cousins for a reason and hopefully, we'll crack its code someday!
M ELEY is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.