My first Tulwar

[fernando]

Hi Spiral
here are some of the books written by Rainer Daehnhardt:

http://aeterna.no.sapo.pt/lusophia/p...oes_rainer.htm
http://www.livapolo.pt/index.php?act...sao=3174&seq=1

Some time i will scan some beautyfull unique pieces he has exhibited around.
Regards
fernando

[spiral]

Originally Posted by fernando

I wouldn't know if the count is 500 000 items, but you must consider not only basic weaponry specimens but also periphericals, amunitions, accessories, documents and all sorts of devices.
I also ignore if the books he wrote are such sixty,

All the information I citeed came from the same website you then linked to. You might find worth reading?

Originally Posted by fernando

. You know, when a guy is good and famous at something, he has more perrogatives to enhance his knowledge or even "invent" variations, than greyish folks. .

This is true, It doesnt make it neccasarily accurate though.

Originally Posted by fernando

About you having not read any of his works, you know the British phlegm ... Portuguese ? Discoveries? what in heck is that ?
. Even if they are poor stuff, one allways gets to now more than before he reads them.

I recall the portugese owned a fair bit of the world & only gave it up when forced to quite recently? & that the Portugese king bribed the Brit king with a gift of Bombay to get his ugly daughter married off many years ago ? Something like that anyway.

All western Europe did ok at ransacking the thirld world when we had guns & cannons & the natives didnt.

i also agree I to try learn from evry blade or book.

Originally Posted by fernando

Judging by the kukris i have already seen at his shop, i wouln't be surpised if he had a good number of them in his private collection. I remeber seing years ago in his Cascais shop a huge one, with a blade about half meter long ( almost two feet in your language ). I don't know if this was a decoration piece or what but, if memory helps, it had a label warning for its dangerous sharpeness. Probably you also find this hard to beleive but, this time, it is i who stand above that

Sounds good, ones that size are usualy either for tourists or beheading buffalo at festival time. A few old rare warriers ones also reached that size.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by fernando

After all, and if the business is on the basis of presumption, i would advance that your kukris collection, as big as it may be, would fit in one of the drawers at his mannor house ... don't take it bad .

Thats cool, if money was of the that important thing to me I woud have married the American hieress who wanted me to a few years ago.

Actualy I only keep examples of type & of course the best as well of the kukris I come across. Otherwise it seems boring, I dont collect by quantity. But each to there own. I know some collectors who keep evrything they buy.

I suggest you read up here & in litrature about tulwar etc. & then get him to sell you a realy good one.

Originally Posted by fernando

I see that you are at your best dividing 500 000 by time minutes ... without even a break for tea ( or pee ).
And what kind of 500 000 ... weapons or objects ? if it is objects, you can look to an entire row at same time. Therefore that is cheating

I think youll find youve mentioned this more than I did? & if someone is daft enough to think they can look an entire row of hand made items & assume they know them then thats shows a great lack of understanding.

Originally Posted by fernando

I have seen pictures with tulwars, samshirs and the like, stuffed in antique clay pots ... with a glimpse you can look at lots of them ... i can scan you pictures of these.

I want to see photos showing the many thousands, not a few stuffed in pots,etc. I see that in most houses I visit.

Originally Posted by fernando

Exceptionaly one of the best or even unique Portuguese works from the XVIII century, ESPINGARDA PERFEITA = THE PERFECT GUN, was translated by him and a British called W. Keith Neal, and was selling for 10 pounds by Sotheby Parke Bernet, in 1974. Maybe you didn't exist at the time or were not old enough to buy books?! At leasdt i didn't see you around when i stayed in Britain for a couple months back in 1967

Well I see you are aware of my youthfull good looks! its true i only owned 3 or 4 gun books at that time I must admit, but used to shoot clay pigeons evry sunday morning & go rough shooting occasionly, if only you were there I could have learnt so much!

Lets, see, tulwar were stored without handles, India only had 29 kings in that time period, & tulwar handels in Tirris book show no rivets. O yes & you thought I made up the 500 000 figure.

mmmmmmmmmmmm

[spiral]

Originally Posted by fernando

Come on Spiral?!
What has happened to your IQ ?
Where did you pick that 500 000 figure from ?
Some guy without controll of decimals ?

I repeat, {as I obviously have to... }
All the information I posted came from the same website you then linked to. You might it find worth reading? IQ is most of use when allied to a little practicality & common sense after all.

Your favorite auther,dealer etc. obviously has a fantastic collection & would have much available knowledge, & I am sure wouldnt be concerned that I am not convinced by the theorys you have proposed, so far.

But thats ok.

Yours truly,
Spiral

[fernando]

Hi Spiral

Let's keep sporty.

I see no point in getting off topic, like bringing Queens and ransackings to discussion, on a hill-feeling basis.

Is there something you didn't bear in my posting, that i must apologize for?

Shouldn't we stick back to coherency in the area of arms collecting and its immediate supporting argumentation, with more or less humor?

I already said i wouldn't subscribe the 500 000 pieces, as being either an implausible aproach or even a misprint. As i already transmitted in a previous posting to Emanuel, i have passed the link for purposes other than for picking on that number and give it such an importance. Besides, i have read the article a couple years ago and didn't even remember about such figure ... as not even a point worth for questioning. My attention went more for the rare weapons the guy has, that i would like to have myself.

I already posted here links with more than twenty of his books that remain on market on line. It is not so dificult to admit he has writen sixty in his all life.

Enhancing knowledge and "inventing" variations are implicitly inaccurate situations, at least in academic terms. Nobody said the contrary.

It is true that nothing is left from Portuguese colonianism ... which makes me proud. We were forced to leave the colonies ... don't you know other nations that were also forced to do it, sometimes by the might of one only man? But honestly i don't know what this has to do with old weapons collecting , or how it belongs to topic, even as a side efect.

Indeed Catarina de Bragança married Charles II in the XVII century. Some bad tongues say she was so ugly that she had to carry a great dowry for the Brit King to accept her. Some others say that such story was invented by the King's staff, to cover up his ineptitude at picking such an horrendous creature. But if you are one of those traditional tea drinkers, remember that was she who implemented such beverage costum in England. However i hardly see Dona Catarina as a weapons collector ... i don't know about Charles II.

Sometimes natives also had guns and cannons, only that Europeans had them or handled them better. But nobody does o.k. by ransaking anybody else. I don't see your point.

The mentioning of looking to several pieces in a row was naturally another figure of speech. Just a rebating to your keen intention of numbering the necessary years to look at the 500 000 pieces. I see you didn't catch my intent.

I wouldn't know what you mean by India only having 29 Kings in whatever period. What i have learnt and said in my posting was that Industani India had 64 Kings between XVI-XVIII centuries. Are you referring to this?

I told you i was expecting to see naked rivets in Tirris tulwars, like i see in many other swords i have, as also in the tulwar example i personnaly saw, and not surrounded by decoration efects. I have admited my lack of
knowledge? Why are you coming back to this subject?

I didn't say you made up the 500 000 figure, nor did it occur to me who might have told you that. And neither did you mention in the first place where you got it. But i immediately told you that whatever was the source, couldn't controll decimals ( another figure of speech). However and if you think it is worth, you are naturally free to discuss this point with Antonio Cejunior. It is a public link, and maybe he has an explanation for that figure.

I was the first to tell that the book author is not concerned over our poor profile discussions.

He is not my favourite dealer. He is the only actual antique arms seller established in the country. There is another one in Oporto but is only a
small shop, with a reduced number of pieces, together with other non relative curious.

Also Mr. Daehnhardt isn't my favourite author. I actually don't share his horizons, outside the strict weaponry matter. It just happens that he is practically the only guy around that wrote more than just a single or a couple books on old arms. I buy what shows up in the market on the theme. All i seek in his works is the pieces pictures, their detail info and historical data. Same as when i go to his shop/s and i buy ( or don't buy ) some item, and he prompts to freely lecture me on items that i brought along for his apreciation.
I think i have been clear on this subject.

But what theories am i proposing ? I have simply quoted a book, in response to a coment made by David, and you started spitefully hammering me like you had some kind of prejudice?!

You don't agree with the man's statement that in the XVI century, tulwars were stored separated from handles ? No problem, i make a note of that and, next time i visit him, i will find an oportunity to tell him that ... honestly.
Probably he will come up with some kind of justification.

I hope not to have tease you with my wording, by any means. If so, accept my apologies. But please be so gentle and don't look to tease me back. You are in clear advantage, as english is you mother language.

Keep well

fernando

[spiral]

I think you were teasing me & doing it well Fernando!

So yes I was a little "tounge in cheek" as we say.

But no worrys your English is excelent & I guess our teasing doesnt realy take the thread any further forward.

I actualy include England in my statment about western European colonial scenarios.

This thread has certanly brought up some interesting theorys, thankyou.

Sadley at this point not truly much of substance I can add to it.

Take care,
Spiral