Quote:
|
Originally Posted by spiral
Sorry Jim, lost this thread for a while...
To me the deduction that badly done stamping implies genuine, seems rather upside down, I agree on rare some fakes are carefully done & some genuine pieces are crudely marked, But far more often in my experience, crude badly stamped pieces are more predominantly the sign "quick cash pile them high, sell them cheap" importers... {Who of course do not always sell them cheap.]
To me it seems an oxymoron to assume that because a stamp is badly done implies more likelihood of originality or even" later armoury" work than if its well done.
At least Amongst the fake kukris, & supposedly Sheffield made, 19th century knives, daggers bowies, fake markings are often no match to the originals.
spiral
|
No problem, and thank you so much for the response. Interesting perspective and points well taken. I think that my often admittedly optimistic thinking sometimes presents some readily disputable views, and quite honestly I had considered that the well established industry of 'antique' production had become more skilled. You guys out there are far more involved in such interaction as you are more exposed as you buy and sell, and as I do not collect personally I am not as aware of the character of the 'products' on the market.
It would seem to me though that my comment on poorly applied stamps or marks in a bureaucratic piece work context does make reasonable sense, particularly in India during the Raj. While there were certain protocols in place with the shipment of arms to India and being received into the arsenals for military and paramilitary units, there were so many instances of deviation, inconsistency in marks and acceptance stamps etc. I do understand what you mean on the rather oblique reasoning
Over time, heavy use of stamps which degenerated their image, and others lost or broken etc. and not replaced due to the usual red tape would lead to often erratic or absence of marks.
Obviously in such circumstances there must have been many exceptions and variations, so setting exacting guidelines for classification of these kinds of marks must be considered somewhat speculatively, but I think my suggestion is a viable perspective . Naturally the marks placed by high quality producers such as Sheffield and certain other well established British makers are not going to fall into the category of loosely controlled imports and subcontracted suppliers into India I had noted, and of course the 'fakes' are not going to compare to originals.
Spiral, thanks very much for your notes and while it seems we might have some polarity in our perspectives here I think we both have valid points.
As always, your observations reflect your well established experience and expertise in these arms.
All best regards,
Jim