Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 3rd May 2007, 02:46 AM   #27
josh stout
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 407
Default

Thank you for the detailed reply. I was not saying that Zhou made a restoration, I am wondering if one had been done sometime in the 19th c. and whether the Ming attribution was for the blade, which could be Ming, or for the whole piece, whose fittings look more 19th century. It is not just the round pommel that is usually but not necessarily 19th century; it is also the way the patterns are cut into the fittings. I freely admit I am a beginner at this, and my experience is only with the more commonly seen things. That is why I am so curious about what appears to me as Qing being labeled Ming. I would like to know what makes it Ming so I can see those characteristics in the future on other pieces. Dating by style is a very uncertain technique but the only one available for many pieces. I need every clue I can get.
Thanks,
Josh
josh stout is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.