Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Mark · 20th June 2007, 06:28 PM

The provenance is well-documented. Presidential gifts usually are. It was not recognized by the museum as what it was until 1969, but once identified for what it was, the documentation/provenance was good.

The blade really is exquisite, however the fittings are in my opinion sub-standard in their execution. Perhaps King Mongkut did not think much of Pres. Pierce, either. The workmanship on the metal fittings is rather rough, and do not have a good "fit and finish" with the blade and the scabbard. The scabbard in a couple of places has rough cut marks, for example around the notch cut for the kurikata, and where the chape joins the wood of the scabbard.

Now I want to see what I can do in order to see the one in the National Archives.

20th June 2007, 06:28 PM	#7
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 987	The provenance is well-documented. Presidential gifts usually are. It was not recognized by the museum as what it was until 1969, but once identified for what it was, the documentation/provenance was good. The blade really is exquisite, however the fittings are in my opinion sub-standard in their execution. Perhaps King Mongkut did not think much of Pres. Pierce, either. The workmanship on the metal fittings is rather rough, and do not have a good "fit and finish" with the blade and the scabbard. The scabbard in a couple of places has rough cut marks, for example around the notch cut for the kurikata, and where the chape joins the wood of the scabbard. Now I want to see what I can do in order to see the one in the National Archives. Last edited by Mark; 20th June 2007 at 11:18 PM.