Please help on bronze axes

[katana]

Originally Posted by Jeff Pringle

The closely spaced triangles definitely look like vice jaw grip marks, the smearing of the marks on the right side makes it look like the piece shifted a bit, not unusual when trying to grip non-square items and work on them with any pressure.
The only marks I’ve seen in my long history of looking at metal that are similar to the little wave marks are from electric grinders, if the tool has a threaded shaft for attaching the abrasive discs, and the threads protrude from the nut affixing the disc (which they usually do), then if the worker touches the work piece with the shaft of the tool (which they occasionally do) it will skip along the surface and leave impressions of the first couple threads in a regular pattern like that.

Seems a good possible explaination Jeff, especially the 'thread' markings

However, what doesn't make sense is why they are there. If this is a 'high end' fake, why would the evidence be left for all to see. All the marks seem to have occured after the 'hammer shaping' ....which I would assume would have been the last manufacturing process. So can it be assumed these marks happened later...and if so, was there a purpose....testing of the bronze
If these heads were artifically 'patinated' , the sort of chemicals used such as ammonia, urea etc to 'induce' this, would not require tongs or mole grips to place the item in solution. A number of Chinese fakers bury them in urine soaked, highly mineralised soil.


Regards David

[Rick]

Could they have been 'cleaned up' before sale ?

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Rick

Could they have been 'cleaned up' before sale ?

I don't know, Rick
If such "cleaning" took place, it would have to be a thorough job, which would hardly neglect to erase the existing marks we can see now.
Also the object is covered of intense beating, which then had to be done after the said cleaning ... againg failling to smash these bizarre marks, which appear not to have been deformed by both treatments; their edges look intact.

[katana]

I hope this makes sense...

if you look at 'underlined section' 2 the 'symbol' (I'm not saying it is, but is a better description) seems to be repeated above 'section 3'. The 'symbol' in section 1 seems to have a similar shape (albeit, slightly 'deformed') as 'section 2&3' . The 'symbol' above section 4 also has the 'elements' of symbol 2 but a little more spaced.
I may be seeing things that aren't there, ( saw Elvis walking his dog yesterday ) but there seems to be a recurring pattern on that section that does not look 'mechanical'.
I also have to point out I have no idea as to scale i.e. I have no idea of the dimensions of these marks.

I may be drawing BIG conclusions from very little clues


Regards David

[Jeff Pringle]

I didn’t mean to put forth a thesis, just point out that two of the mark types on the axe are consistent with modern metal working tools. How that relates to the creation and history of the object I don’t know, and there may be other ways to create those marks that are just as plausible
On the grinder marks, since the machine is not firmly held in alignment with the work piece, when the spinning shaft hits the metal object the torque immediately kicks it away so you have a hammering effect as hand pressure pushes the tool down and its own oscillation kicks it up every revolution.
Vice jaws are usually padded in one way or another when working soft metals, sometimes ineffectively; and workers will also make wooden shims to assist in holding irregular objects, so not seeing the other jaw of the vice imprinted on the other side of the object does not mean those are not vice marks…but I don’t know that they are, either – they just look like such marks.

[fernando]

I have just met someone who is largely experienced with these things.
I should have no further doubt that these axes are (quote) copies made with the moulds of genuine originals, and a very nice work. I was shown some three different reasons to support such conclusion. However they were certainly not made to pretend to be genuine, but a demonstration of the general casters capabilities, which explains a certain riddle. There is a strong possibility that one was made in the sixties by a certain guy, and the other in the eighties by his nephew.
Whether this last part of the story is accurate, i wouldn't know ...i am "selling it for the price i bought it".
I will now offer these examples in the swap forum as, at this stage, i don't feel attached to these items.
I feel deeply obliged for all the cooperation i had in this subject.
Thank you all Gentlemen
Fernando

[fernando]

Originally Posted by katana

... So can it be assumed these marks happened later...and if so, was there a purpose....testing of the bronze
Regards David

That came to my mind, David; some sort of testing punches ... not clampings.
Fernando