![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
![]()
Rick
I must disagree with you on the age of the blade. It seems like an older one to me but It's hard to be sure from the photos. Lew |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2
|
![]()
Thanks for the replies. As for the age of the blade, would it help if I posted some additional photos of the blade itself in greater detail? How would one go about determining a blade that was naturally aged rather than artificially aged?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,209
|
![]()
Please do post some better pictures of the blade. It surely will help.
I think, just like Lew, the blade is an older balinese blade, missing his original gondjo. The gondjo on this keris is a replacement and much recent than the blade. For the dress I go with Rick. The dress is new. Such a dress is used for tourists. But this dress is carved better than most cheap tourist examples. It is as far I can judge the pictures, properly done. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,336
|
![]()
Gentlemen, I always leave myself a way out; notice I used the word 'may'.
![]() ![]() I'd agree that the gonjo looks like a replacement. I think the quality of carving of the scabbard is superior to that of the hilt. Can we get any measurements; possibly the length of the blade? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 132
|
![]()
Hmm... it's like I've seen this piece before on Ebay...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,211
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
![]() Quote:
![]() David, those are way... past auctions. ![]() Last edited by Alam Shah; 24th May 2007 at 02:05 AM. Reason: spelling |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|