![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 301
|
![]()
That's incredible!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 190
|
![]()
Nice dagger, dates early 18th century. Scabbard would have been silver-covered and probably lavishly decorated. Hard to tell from these images if the gems are original.
Ham |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 951
|
![]()
Wouw very nice one
Ben |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,280
|
![]()
Very impressive and beautiful. We I grow up I will have one just like it.
![]() I am in the "scabbard is later" camp. (if you need a silver scabbard..... ![]() One other point Charles, the gems at the top of the hilt appear to be later additions, say no earlier than the late 19thc and they are in Eurpean, possibly British or American work. The silver mounts are not those used by the Ottomans or Indians. Last edited by Battara; 6th July 2007 at 06:46 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greenville, NC
Posts: 1,854
|
![]()
Yes, the faux jewels are definitely later add-ons, maybe even done by the guy that had this scabbard made.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|