While I agree with Julien and other contributors that this blade certainly ticks at least some boxes regarding assignment as an archaic blade, I believe this might be a really well-crafted example from the revival period, possibly originating from the 19th century. Just a feeling that I'd currently have a tough time to support!
I'd posit that we need to research these blades in much more detail before we can establish defendable stylistic and technological trends (and/or possibly cultural differences), deduce key features to allow constructing a reliable evolutionary tree/network, and possibly identify individual pieces & even assign age estimates. Given the dearth of documented early pieces which could be used for dating, age estimates are likely to stay relative (younger/older) rather than real periods.
Regards,
Kai
|