Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
The 'Benin' sword from Daehnhardt described as 15th-16th c. and with zoomorphic presumed a lion with Sinhalese character and equilateral cross device at blade near tip...
Once you find it sine qua non the uploading of the already viral Benin or, should we say, Daehnhardt's sword, let me try and apply a couple (vital) touch ups.
Firstly, the image has indeed been scanned from Daehnhartd's book and (at the time) his collection; however the translation of the description is mine. With three years of age, and potentially passive of more accurate scholar wording and definitelly not bearing the book author agreement, i would decline its interpretation beyond that of an uncompromised context, as not being a test to what it is currently been through, an evident battle horse, so to say.
I have already reviewed and edited the text translation in my original post, hoping some improvement has been achieved, particularly:The cross is in brass and embedded on the blade, and not a perforation work, contrary to what i, for one, thought.
Then we have a case of gender; influence (influencia) is feminine, as brought (trazida) is equally feminine. Therefore it is not the grip (punho)masculine that would have been brought from Cingalese armoury but only its (construction) influence.
I would also add that any thoughts that the zoomorphic figure in the pommel, when being a lion, has to be of African nature, one may notice that such beast 'Panthera leo sinhaleyus' is a sign of bravery for the Sinhalese and eventually chosen to be the main symbol of their flag.
Concerning the past existence of the (aledgely) christian cross in pharaonic tombs, i would say Daehnhardt is no fool, as there is no smoke without fire.
So far one spot detected with both this and the Ankh cross is in a graphiti in the necropolis of el Bagawat, a funeral site used by early Egiptians and later by Coptas. I am ware these are not Pharaonic tombs but, here between us, this is the side towards which i sleep better