![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kaboejoetan Galoenggoeng Mélben
Posts: 472
|
![]() Quote:
Yes, Amuk is the first name. The seller meant Brookes (plural) as in the dynasty i.e. before any Brooke. 1900 vintage will be fine by me. I'm just concerned that it's a fake i.e. a "more recent" piece (say, post 1945) artificially made to look older. I'm no metallurgist. The rust/pitting seemed to be more concentrated towards the tip, as if it had been hanging in its scabbard for a long time (unfortunately, no original scabbard). I haven't researched it but I have a sneaky feeling that this type of sword may have been around since about the 14thC (just a guess). Around that time, I think the Bataks already had a large Islamic kingdom which traded with India (and maybe traded/copied the tulwar). They had opened up Gajo etc. and were basically the catalyst for the rise of Atjeh in the 14thC. Best, |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|