![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | ||||||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Thank you for your posting, I whole heartedly agree about things never appearing what they seems to be and that a lot of items are being created to fool the unwarey, we all at one time or another have been bitten by these deceivers, I too have knowingly passed on goods of very questionable backgrounds that I known not to be the real deal to experts who had to have the item, heck I know, I made the damn thing and they even went to to the trouble of telling me the whole history of the type of item in question but, this is not a reflection of who I am or what I do. How does one talk an expert out of what he wants so dearly. I know I have been collecting since a boy and weapons for the last 12 years or so. Although I don't have millions to spend on such toys that I desire but like so many here I know a good deal more than most and I too have handled vast amounts of all styles of edged weapons in some very fine collections and at every arms far for much longer than the 12 years, not that this should be taken in an arogant manner either, these weapons are a passion of mine, not something that I want a pat on the back for as mentioned elsewhere. It is disturbing for me that those who are considered both by myself, others here and themselves as experts, should be able to offer up a little more than links to others webpages and shrug off this piece as a fake, although there have been others with very good points and posting made with reasons stated, which is most important to everyone concerned viewing these threads as it is the only way for everyone, including themselves to learn further. The straight out calling this piece a fake or poor quality is of little concern to me, if it is, it is, that is fine and cannot be changed....but what you say about possibly alienating myself from these people because I heard what I wanted to hear from another, should not put others offside, as humans we all continue to learn and if we think we know it all the learning has stopped. I have offered up images from myself and opinions of others who are very successful in their fields and it is their livelyhood too. By placing these things back on the table so to speak in this forum I would hope others here will continue to offer up images and real facts and reference points to enhance the learning process by all and debunk what more I have offered up... Thanks again for your interest in this thread. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I still ask to see comparrisions in collections of those who have passed comment either good or bad to point and out the where fors and why fors as to why this piece in question is what some think it is from the images, but I think the alienation excuse may be quietly reserved for not doing so. Quote:
Thank you everyone for your interest in this posting, unfortunately I am out of time for now and will address each and every other response tomorrow night. Please in the mean time if so inclined cover off a few of the other questions I have offered up like the UV light and the further images in relation to the comments made, it is the only was to learn and move foward. If after all possible knowldege has been exhausted and it turns out to be a late made piece i will as always be happy to acknowledge the fact, I do hope those who dismiss it with out fulling viewing all that is offered up would in turn acknowledge that they too have learnt something from the postings, if and when it is varified as authentic again further down the track. very best regards Gav Last edited by freebooter; 23rd May 2008 at 10:29 AM. |
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,084
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Now, this may not have been you intention, but it is certainly the way it came off to me and i would guess probably some others. Norman (and yourself) make some good points about knowledgable members sometimes being too hard on certain items that get posted and of course if someone knocks a knife you own you want to hear solid facts as to why, especially if you thought it was something greater than what people are making it out to be. The difference i see here is that while some members have knocked your kindjal (an object), you seem to me knocking the the members (actual people). This is what i found to be possibly alienating, not the mere fact that you have found your own experts who disagree with the members here. Most of our membership is pretty good about admitting they were wrong when presented with facts that show they were. BTW, you seem you want very specific evidence from the forum members as to why they believe your kindjals are not quite kosher. What evidence (other than their say so) did your experts give you that they are indeed authentic antiques? Keep in mind Gavin that i've got no horse in this race. I know nothing about kindjals though i do like to think i know something about quality. I could clearly see the points of forumites who remarked negatively on your first kindjal. I am on the fence about the second. The silverwork and neillo look quite beautiful to my eye. I don't know enough about the blades to know whether or not the style is period. It's a nice knife regardless of it's age or origins. What i suggest is that everyone just take a step back and take a deep breathe. I don't think any member here intended to disrespect you with their comments about your kindjals. Their comments were on the knife itself. I also think that they are trying their best to communicate with you just what it is about these knives that don't sit right with them and if you gave it some time more might come out. And they may well be wrong about this last one. I am just afraid that rubbing your expert's opinions in their faces, especially ones that are equally unsubstantiated, is not likely to get you positive responses. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 936
|
![]()
I also feel the Forum had been swayed to the direction of mixing personal feelings, guesses and comments from others with unsufficient experience in a particular field. Everyone had been professional and courteous, but I believe it'd be better to stick with the basics, i.e. sharing opinions based solely on specific experience and knowledge! At this point many experienced members voiced their solid opinions and reasoning behind them. The best advice was to handle as many pieces as possible, which is the only way to tell the difference. There is no science behind telling an authentic antique kindjal (or painting, sculpture or anything else) from repro. Experience is what counts. Congratulations to those who were able to learn.
It's time to move on. OUT |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | ||||||||||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
When at work I operate with, short clear direct responses without the sit around and have a chat attitude as sometimes seconds are precious and when wasted the day can have a snowball effect. I will touch on the fancier "reproduction and tourist pieces" shortly. False hope, real hope and items standing on their own only do so with consistant facts across the board, I have filed through so many postings here on kindjals and find no consistancy with points of interest raised and the same when taking these notes on board when viewing with great details Kindjals in very reputable dealer's webpages. ![]() Quote:
I just want to see and hear what these reasons for different standards are, not just have it accepted without an explanation. The ducks quacking and I don't see no emus... Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() ![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Thank you everyone who has taken an interest thus far and thank you for all comments good or bad, it is the only way forward. regards Gav |
||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Maybe a little was lost in both our translations. No one at this stage has said anyone is wrong, I am however tenacious in understanding the differing points of comparisons and comments and consistancy of statements and will vigorously follow these up when time does permit as I plainly cannot understand these somewhat obvious points, more to follow in up coming postings with these and other unanswered questions, maybe my questions are beyond the realm of probable questioning without the item in their hands??? With regards to what other dealers and collectors/enthusiasts have said about this piece, I will add too that this piece was shown around a few more dealers on Saturday at the Brisbane arms and Militaria fair with good reception but no further concrete evidence other than what is below. About half a dozen people including the Jeweller and previous enthusiast have passed comment with some interesting points, I also rang the previous owner today an asked if he had any more information in his weapons register. Some of the points that have been mentioned are First and formost the superb quality workmanship has been mentioned and that it is distinctly Georgian and is a very lovely piece without a doubt made by a master craftsman for someone of wealth or importance, it too was offered up that the rubbed inscription panel will most likely hold the key to understanding it's history and who it was for. It was also mentioned that the blade has a good deal of age to it and does show despite what some fool at some stage has done with it and that is run the blade over a belt sander at some stage of it's life, "they should have been drawn and quartered" was the remark of one dealer about what it has suffered. I have had good points bought to my attention on the best way to fix it and out of the cupboard comes my ole faithful Lanskey honing stones or varying degrees and the long task of oiling and rubbing with the stones starts. It has also been advised that the acorn final and the acorn patterns that I hadn't previously noticed in the neillo design and in the chiseling may also real more about the time period if research can be done on these points. Also said that it carries a good deal of honest wear to the reverse side and has beeen well cared for and other than the state of the blade, well respected. It too has been stated in relation to other Kindjals that have been through the hands of these dealers, that an unsightly seam is often seen in the manufacture of the scabbard, someone has gone to great trouble to join this scabbard in an very unobvious spot and short of pulling the old timber from the scabbard it remains undetectable to the naked eye. When probed about hallmarks it was said that it is not uncommon at all to find Silver unhallmarked. The design of the rivet heads was noted too as it gives a very positive feel about where the hilt is in the hand in all range of movements. the shape too may reveal more about it's origins. That's about all I can recall for tonight David, a long day is now at an end for me. Lots more food for thought has been offered up by others, I'll spend a bit of time digesting it all and write again soon. regards Gav |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Thanks Henk, no lady in the house, I did soak it with a sponge and with a little elbow greese and some eucalyptus oil and it came off quite easy. thanks Gav |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |||||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]()
A wonderful few hours were passed away this morning with the French gentleman I spoke of previously, some may question his authority of such items, antique edge weapons is his love and does reflect in the quality and rarity of some weapons I have never had the privilege of handling before.
His knowledge on this subject matter is incredible when heard first hand. His credentials stand high, curator in France until 1979, is director and founder and curator of well known and respected art galleries and foundations whose artists are represented at the Queensland State art gallery, is an approved valuer of Cultural Heritage to the Commonwealth Government for Australian Artists, both Aboriginal and contempory, also French sculpture, prints, paintings, decorative arts & furniture from 1600-1950. A number of these weapons I have seen today have been and are documented in his family history from the 1860's. Again in length many of my questions were answered in full detail today, the acorns shaped icons I mentioned yesterday are actually a symbol of good luck, they are the "hand of Fatima" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamsa His historical knowledge was expressed in great detail, kind of wished I had a tape recorder. He also touched on coral found on Kinjals and that it is the red coral that was most prized as it too is a symbol of good luck. Many points about Niello and it's very early origins were also covered off today from medieval time up until today, his chemistry major was shining through on many other subjects too. Upon further viewing today, what can be viewed of the script remaining in the central panel to the rear of the scabbard, I have been told that it is most likely a verse from the Koran asking for protection or similar, not a presentation as thought by myself and a couple of others, I am still trying to get it read or rubbed for future posting. Again this piece was put at approx 1870-1900 and from all explanations, it is of the highest gallery quality...This differs from a link below but at this stage I am happy to go with either until further research has been done. Throughout this steep learning curve in Kinjals, I am hoping some off the original forumites who made earlier postings will further comment on some comparisons found in the Oriental Arms website that has been offered up to me a few times. I am not looking to discredit anyone, maybe I have now offered up enough imagery that was not available at the initial postings and initial fears and loathing have been overcome? Maybe it will be continue to be said after all comparisons below that it is still not antique? I am just looking to understand why what's is stated as being right for one is not for another even though it shows all the signs of being correct and of period as seen my many first hand, maybe we can all learn from this??? Quote:
Quote:
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=966 http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2766 http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=1062 http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2885 I haven't looked any further for bad riveting on silver Kindjals..these should do I understand, of course, that photographs are not an ideal way to evaluate antique items, but..... It looks to me as if it hails from the same " workshop" as the first one. Sorry, I am not enjoying bringing bad news....[/QUOTE] Maybe I need a photography course in bringing real essence out of objects?? Here is a link to it's almost twin brother...again from Oriental arms... Actually this link may convince others of it's authenticity??? http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2181 And for argument sake within the forum I'll even run with 1920 ... Quote:
regards Gav Quote:
Hi Alex, with further images, notes, declarations and links provided, is there anything else or other points of interest you can point out? Quote:
The dreaded Kindjal postings continues, still striving for facts... regards Gav Last edited by freebooter; 27th May 2008 at 10:06 AM. |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Gav |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
Gav
I think we have gone as far as we can with this thread and it's time to put it to rest. Gav this will be my last response on this thread. The sloppy lines I referring to are in these two areas below. Unevenly scribed on the acorn shaped tip that extend past the area that is bordered by that scribed oval which are themselves very poorly applied. Also within the panel above the tip the checkered work is unevenly done with some of the lines being crooked. This is not the work of a master engraver. The theory that an apprentice did this work does not make sense do to the fact that the master would not have let this leave his shop looking like this because it would a some what of a negative effect on his reputation. Hey if you like the kindjal and think it's old and original than that's fine but I am entitled to my opinion as are the other forumites and I think we have made up our minds on it already. I am basing this on my experience and observations over the last 25 years that I have collecting edged weapons. Regards Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 31st May 2008 at 11:17 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process. From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused ![]() ![]() All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column??? I can only offer up what I see first hand and describe it best I can with images 100 times larger than the item really is. I too offer up links from the same people that are presented to me and....well like you say, opinions???? Gav Last edited by freebooter; 14th June 2008 at 01:01 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
[QUOTE=freebooter]Interesting Lew,
Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process. From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused ![]() ![]() All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column??? Gav Your logic is flawed to say the least you asked the specialists on this forum to give you there thoughts on your kindjal and they did. Regards Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 14th June 2008 at 08:20 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 | |
Lead Moderator European Armoury
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]() Quote:
![]() . Last edited by fernando; 14th June 2008 at 06:50 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#44 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Hi Lew, flawed logic........ with regards to silver fitted kindjals... Without circling all visual references supplied in this forum over the years, I do wish to know from yourself and these specialists and any others who have knowledge in this forum on these weapons. Take these following comments on board with out taking any visual references of my Kindjal into perspective, just leave it out of any thought process. Why does lets say, unfinished rivets, sloppy lines for starters make one kindjal a true piece and another not?? Does this flaw in accuracy point to the differences between a collector and a researcher. I don't claim to be a professional researcher but I think these valid visual references do point to something that needs to be researched for the betterment of all concerned in learning the truth behind these weapons, after all this is a resource/research site is it not, not just a show and tell??? regards Gav |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
Gav
It's a real kindjal but collectively we do not feel that it's from the 19th century. Just like in my jambiya thread the newer piece is a real jamibiya that an adult male Yemenite would wear it's just not from the 19th century as I have shown in my photos what to look out for when one is looking for an older piece the quality of the older pieces speak for themselves ![]() Regards Lew |
![]() |
![]() |
#46 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 119
|
![]()
this is a little off topic but what exactly are the "spiky protrusions" on the hilt for? i have a kindjal from daghestan that unfortunatly turned out to be a dull wallhanger and those spiky things make the knife harder to handle.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#47 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Gav |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#48 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,653
|
![]()
I have followed this thread with interest and as my knowledge of Kindjals is very limited, I will not comment on the age authenticity of Gav's piece. However, I do feel there has been a number of comments regarding the accessment of the Kindjal that are relavent to a number of threads.
In a learning environment it is far better that negative and positive comments ...are backed up with evidence. This 'enriches' the debate and adds to our 'collective' knowledge. It would be extremely useful in all threads that short comments such as .....this is likely mid 20th century ....is expanded into the reasons why. I have great respect for a number of Formites and 'bow' to their undoubted knowledge, but we/they are only human and mistakes can happen, especially when you have only a description and pictures to 'go on'. Also, as collectors we have to accept that we can be 'fooled' in believing we have something that is totally authentic, to discover that others disagree. Unfortunately, this sometimes can be 'taken personally', afterall not only the piece has become questionable but also the collector's belief and knowledge. As a footnote, AFAIK auction house's descriptions of items are not necessarilly totally correct, the 'small print' always carries a disclaimer protecting them from repocussions. Unless an Auction house will totally guarantee an object's description, to the extent of offering a refund (if found to be incorrect) and some sort of compensation to cover your expenses etc I would take their accessment with a 'pinch of salt'. Very famous Auction house's have sold items, that their experts have deemed 'totally authentic', but later have been discovered to be fake ![]() All the best David |
![]() |
![]() |
#49 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]()
Thanks for popping by David.
True words spoken David, everything in this world has a cost and it is buyer beware, there are however dealers who may not know the whole truth behind an item they have for sale but do stand by their reputation and receive returned goods and offer refunds. I too wouldn't hold any thing said about an item from an auction house as gospel, hence the tenaciousness to draw more information from those who expressed some knowledge in the area. I always trust my own judgement when handling an item and to a degree specialist auctioneers who are honest with their degree of knowledge in certain areas. It is a shame that so many threads do appear with nothing more than a single link and no more than a quick paragraph that really doesn't have any impact on the thought process. A while later these links are no longer available to view and the whole essence and learning process is lost forever, if in fact there is any learning process at all at times. A shame that people who claim to be so knowledgable and advanced collectors can really offer up so little substantial information and shy away when the going gets tough and answers are questioned and more detail requested, very ponderous. I personally want my boundries pushed, I don't want to sit insulated and stale, I crave facts. There are points I have bought up in this thread that I feel would be benificial to all interested in these weapons but those "in the know" don't seem to think so??? Blade profile and shape for one, I did ask about the blades with a recurved double edged tip compared the images shown here, What about the untra violet light to read faint or rubbed inscriptions, the use of coral and the hand of Fatima symbolism on these weapons, I will when given the time add this to Jim's thread on symbolism as I don't think it has been covered off. Also there is the mention of red coral for good luck, the use of material to cover the wooden sheath and hilt inserts, the varying styles of hilt profiles found on these peices, even verses of the Koran that may be found on these pieces. Obviously these points of interest are of no concern to a few here but these points above and others throughout the postings are many points worth discussing and writing about here, after all that is what this site is about. regards Gav PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all. Last edited by freebooter; 16th June 2008 at 12:24 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#50 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 987
|
![]()
Though not always necessary in an informal forum such as this, it is always important to be able to lay out facts/evidence in support of any claim. Sometimes the one-line conclusory answer suffices, other times a more detailed basis is needed or requested. The absense of one, or insistance upon one, should not (IMO) reflect negatively on either the opiner.
There have been a number of factual observations made about this piece which have been indicated as showing it to be either recent or antique, but what I think is lacking a bit is the significance of these observations in the context. There are inprecise, you might say sloppy, aspects to the engraving. What does this mean for a kindjal? As someone pointed out, sloppy does not universally equate either with "recent" or "fake." But does it for kindjal? The niello has certain wear patterns - what does this tell us, other than that it is worn? What do the particulars of the blade geometry tell us? Should a 19th C kindjal have well-made, or unfinished rivits? Is there some sine qua non for an 18th C, or 18th C, or 20th C kindjal? For example, in my own experience, a poorly made blade, even in fancy fittings, says nothing about the age or genuineness of a dha, as it is not uncommon for a genuinely "old" dha to have a rather poorly made blade. The same goes for the craftsmanship of the fittings. They can be a clue, but you have to look beyond to the whole package & context to see whether a poorly made blade of this particular style, with this particular type of fitting, from this region is consistent with the purported age, or not. |
![]() |
![]() |
#51 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all.[/QUOTE]
Gav I do not understand why you are asking this question ![]() Lew |
![]() |
![]() |
#52 | |||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Gav I do not understand why you are asking this question ![]() Lew[/QUOTE] I would have explained here Lew but you rude PM, it covered off enough about "we" and your use of the word. It was an inocent question that could have been answered simply specifically or other ways. Quote:
Quote:
regards Gav Moderators, for the betterment of all, some are taking things far too personally, maybe some comments should be struck from the postings, maybe the post should be closed and the pursuit for knowledge be shut down ![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#53 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
Gav
What part of "We" do you not understand? We being the other formites who posted their comments and did not think your kindjal was circa 1860. Btw I do not claim ownership of any group on this forum as you insinuated below ![]() PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all. Your question is presumptive to begin with and is antagonist at the least. Maybe you need to be more careful when you post your questions as to not to step on other formites toes. Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 17th June 2008 at 04:25 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#54 | |||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
When the word "we" is used the way you describe Lew, it does in fact take ownership of others, it should in fact read "I". It is much like so many who say "how are we today", in this case it should be how are "you" or "how are you all today", when asked that question in such context I couldn't reply for another, especially one who indicates that I should comment on how they are. Would my reply be "WE are well today", I think not, my reply would be "I am well thank you, how are you". I was only confused as to who "we" was, now that you mention who "we" are, I now know you are the spokesman of others who choose not to enter further into an educational fact finding mission about Kindjals with silver fittings. Quote:
As you indicated in the abrasive, abusive and threatening PM, you did indicate that you exchange mail with others internally which is what the study is all about, as this is a discussion forum wouldn't that knowledge and comments, study and research be better bought to light objectively in the pages of the forums, for the most here it is blah blah blah and nothing to verify comments. I'd believe it is a Chinese Jian if one can indicate why and because and with a good many unrefuted points of reference. I think you are missing the whole point, subjectively I would place this piece at 1880-1920 and of a very high standard, All I have heard thus far is that it is rubbish, a fake, poor quality and many other misleading comments from those who claim to be in the know and when I disprove these comments subjectively and with further imagery, still nothing further to enhance the learning process is made any clearer why the new evidence should or shouldn't be taken on board, how is anyone going to learn further if it is all hush hush behind the scenes if it is there at all??? I think Mark's comments below do indicate further as to what I offered across and as to what can be learnt here. Quote:
regards Gav Last edited by freebooter; 17th June 2008 at 09:44 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#55 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
Gav
I do not need a lesson in the english language ![]() I think you are missing the whole point, subjectively I would place this piece at 1880-1920 and of a very high standard, All I have heard thus far is that it is rubbish, a fake, poor quality and many other misleading comments from those who claim to be in the know and when I disprove these comments subjectively and with further imagery Gav Your imagery proves nothing anyone with a moderate level of skill and the right tools can produce the same work on your kindjal. Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 17th June 2008 at 12:40 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#56 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,167
|
![]()
We are not amused.
![]() (the royal 'we'). we suggest this thread has gone as far as it needs to. we are nicer people than where this is heading. |
![]() |
![]() |
#57 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,725
|
![]()
Please take it off-board if you want to continue this, gentlemen.
I might also suggest you explore the "ignore" function of the forum's software. Thread closed. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|