![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,280
|
![]() Quote:
Honestly said, if there would be a tag, which explicitly states, the item has been collected 1945, I would believe it in the same degree as I believe in the authenticity of the most other items of this collection. To me this collection simply is not serious enough. We should look on the item and not on the tag. I stated my opinion about this item in the previous post and have nothing more to add to this thread. Thanks! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greenville, NC
Posts: 1,854
|
![]()
VVV,
I believe I see what you are saying about the varying, but similar hilt styles. Would you say that the top example here is more likely Lombok, while the bottom one is more likely Sumatra?? There is a real difference in the angles(with the Lombok example sharper) and detail in the horn carving. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |||||||
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,453
|
![]() Quote:
Than we wouldn't have a deflected discussion. And it is a fact the tag was on the item, so it's not bad discussing the label also. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What does this imply to you then? I wouldn't have bought those "returned" pieces in the first place, so I wouldn't have to return them afterwards. And f.i. the returned rencong is a good original old one, though not fancy!? Maybe it was only one "non seriously buyer" who bid on the all later "returned" items? Who knows? Quote:
![]() My opinion is that these are both good old ones, and the "pedang" nr. 51 is very attractive also in my opinion and worthy in a good collection! But......not relevant to my pedang which I put up for discussion here in the first place. So I leave it with this! Quote:
Quote:
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,235
|
![]()
To blur the discussion maybe even more.
Here is another Pedang from the same auction. Lombok or Sumatra ? and why ? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,453
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,637
|
![]()
Of course these observations are only indications but altogether they seem to point to Lombok.
The squarish hilt is Lombok style. The motifs on the silver resembles those seen on other Lombok weapons. A fuller and no intricate pamor are features often seen on Lombok. Michael PS Charles, mail me if you want to further discuss any of your own pedang/kelewang. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,280
|
![]()
By pure chance looked through this thread (I suppose it's not relevant anymore; as I understand Maurice has sold this Pedang), and have found an interesting detail.
It seems to have a twistcore pamor, which means a couple of things: almost surely A) the blade (if old) is of Lombok origin; B) the fullers are not original or at least not originally intended; C) the inlays are not original. Last edited by Gustav; 30th June 2014 at 02:49 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,015
|
![]()
Always relevant Gustav. Knowledge doesn't really have a time limit.
We see this sort of thing fairly frequently. People do not want to believe that it could be recent, but in my experience it nearly always is, especially so when it is beautiful and perfect, because this sort of ornamentation does not wear well. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|