Bronze Dagger

erlikhan · 8th July 2005, 09:09 AM

I dont think bronze was still a material used 1000 years ago by bladesmiths. it had been many decades since the development of much cheaper and stronger iron technology (1000s B.C. perhaps lets say 500 years later in China). So it must be at least 2500 yrs old if original. And it seems too new for that age to me. Not patinated at all, and details fresh . they should have become a bit or more erroded depending on the composition of the soil it has rested in till it was found. Too many Chinese bronze fakes are sold on internet and I am afraid this one seems very much like one of them.

45Auto · 8th July 2005, 03:30 PM

The owner says it came home from WWII in a G.I. footlocker, which may indicate that it's at least a 60 year old copy of..... what ? . Good point about the extent of oxidation, etc.

Anyway, is the writing on this item an early form of Chinese?

Thanks,
Greg

Rivkin · 9th July 2005, 03:32 AM

My guess would be more african ? May be an imitation of ancient egyptian daggers ? The "language" seems like a collection of pictogramms, but they look obviously non-egyptian, so it can be an imitation ?

not2sharp · 9th July 2005, 05:24 AM

The owner says it came home from WWII in a G.I. footlocker, which may indicate that it's at least a 60 year old copy of..... what ?

It implies that, but he didn't actually say that. If I have a footlooker and throw something in it, does that make it 60 years old?

Chinese antiques are notoriously faked. If you found an intact 2500-3500 year old object; would you toss it in a locker and forget about it? The real ones are usually found in official dig and very well documented. This is not the kind of thing that survives unless it is preserved in a very secure location (like a tomb). From the pictures I would be bothered by the abondance of sharp straight lines; nature hates a straight line and will always do its best to wear it away.

n2s

Ian · 9th July 2005, 01:08 PM

Greg:

I'm unclear whether you believe this is a solid bronze dagger or just the hilt is bronze. It is dificult to tell from the pictures, but the blade is definitely a different color, with staining and mild corrosion, and I believe I can see evidence of lamination. That would make the blade steel rather than bronze, would it not?

A steel blade with a bronze hilt suggests something different from what we have been discussing.

Ian.

Lew · 9th July 2005, 01:31 PM

Hi Gregg

Your dagger is a nice copy cast in bronze. These daggers if original would be 2000 yrs old and there are no signs of wear and the patina seems to be applied. Hopefully you did not spend too much on this dagger.

Lew

8th July 2005, 09:09 AM	#1
erlikhan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Istanbul Posts: 452	I dont think bronze was still a material used 1000 years ago by bladesmiths. it had been many decades since the development of much cheaper and stronger iron technology (1000s B.C. perhaps lets say 500 years later in China). So it must be at least 2500 yrs old if original. And it seems too new for that age to me. Not patinated at all, and details fresh . they should have become a bit or more erroded depending on the composition of the soil it has rested in till it was found. Too many Chinese bronze fakes are sold on internet and I am afraid this one seems very much like one of them.

8th July 2005, 03:30 PM	#2
45Auto Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 16	The owner says it came home from WWII in a G.I. footlocker, which may indicate that it's at least a 60 year old copy of..... what ? . Good point about the extent of oxidation, etc. Anyway, is the writing on this item an early form of Chinese? Thanks, Greg

9th July 2005, 03:32 AM	#3
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	My guess would be more african ? May be an imitation of ancient egyptian daggers ? The "language" seems like a collection of pictogramms, but they look obviously non-egyptian, so it can be an imitation ?

9th July 2005, 05:24 AM	#4
not2sharp Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 210	The owner says it came home from WWII in a G.I. footlocker, which may indicate that it's at least a 60 year old copy of..... what ? It implies that, but he didn't actually say that. If I have a footlooker and throw something in it, does that make it 60 years old? Chinese antiques are notoriously faked. If you found an intact 2500-3500 year old object; would you toss it in a locker and forget about it? The real ones are usually found in official dig and very well documented. This is not the kind of thing that survives unless it is preserved in a very secure location (like a tomb). From the pictures I would be bothered by the abondance of sharp straight lines; nature hates a straight line and will always do its best to wear it away. n2s

9th July 2005, 01:08 PM	#5
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,361	Greg: I'm unclear whether you believe this is a solid bronze dagger or just the hilt is bronze. It is dificult to tell from the pictures, but the blade is definitely a different color, with staining and mild corrosion, and I believe I can see evidence of lamination. That would make the blade steel rather than bronze, would it not? A steel blade with a bronze hilt suggests something different from what we have been discussing. Ian.

9th July 2005, 01:31 PM	#6
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Hi Gregg Your dagger is a nice copy cast in bronze. These daggers if original would be 2000 yrs old and there are no signs of wear and the patina seems to be applied. Hopefully you did not spend too much on this dagger. Lew