Is it madness or are we all stinking rich?

[Dajak]

Originally Posted by CourseEight

I have to respectfully disagree with this argument as stated, though perhaps not the actual meaning. I personally think the most important point in defining "authenticity" is simply what purpose the creator of a given object had when he created it. If a village craftsman is creating a certain type of object for a member of his people, in the manner it has traditionally been made, to be used as his people have traditionally used it, I would not consider this to be a reproduction.

Obviously with certain types of objects, specifically weapons created strictly for combat, it is not possible to make a truly authentic item. However even today, weapons used for hunting, for parade/festival, for talismanic purposes, or for day-to-day utility can be made to serve the same purpose they did 100 years ago. I doubt very much the people using them consider them to be reproductions, just not as old. This is not to say that these are in any way as valuable as older examples, which for the most part it is assumed have seen more authentic usage. But if a weapon was specifically created for some gentleman during his visit to some village 150 years ago, it would have seen no more usage than one created today specifically for me. What does this say about the autenticity even of objects in old collections? I don't know...

I haven't been collecting that long, so the above is worth what it's worth!

--Radleigh

Hi Radleigh maybe read this

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4987


then you understand maybe what I ment to say about this .

And Andrew I do not now the laws in the USA but if the Forum is not an public thing because you need to be member I was thinking that it could be no problem .
And if we talk after the action bad over the sale and the item it can harm the seller too .
And is this than no problem ???


Ben