Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KuKulzA28
I don't really have any expertise to add anything, but thanks for all the information and discussion!
|
Thanks too, Vinny. We are all here to learn, that's for sure
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kai
Hello Lorenz, count me in! AMS is a destructive method though. A bit of metal will have to be sacrificed and since the carbon content of iron/steel is low, maximum accuracy may not be feasible. Still it would be really nice to narrow down the age of this unique piece! BTW, does Dr. Dizon possibly have a list of carbon-dated Philippine pieces? |
Thanks, Kai! I'll let everybody know later what will be the university's response, as to them footing the bill. You're right about AMS - it is a destructive method. Regarding the list of carbon-dated pieces, I'll ask Dr. Dizon when I'll have the chance to talk to him again.
I actually visited him in his office earlier today. He showed me a 1973 publication by Karl Hutterer, entitled
An Archeological Picture of a Pre-Spanish Cebuano Community. Excerpts can be seen below. At least one of the two blades appear to have been the one photographed in the earlier posts above.
Anyway, Dr. Dizon said that these blades in Hutterer's paper were dated to be from the 14th century AD. And what's particularly interesting for me here is that the blade likewise has that profile where we see a 'waist' (i.e., a narrowing down of the blade's width near the hilt, and 'bulging' of the width near the point).