![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
Amazing; you could either choose "16 century", "old" or "vintage"
![]() Isn't that a knock off ? Fernando |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,165
|
![]()
Yeah, I'm leaning more toward "knockoff", the more I look at it.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 213
|
![]()
What do you think about this cannon ?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
A very nice piece indeed. Surely a (signal) mortar and not a (hand) cannon , judging by its base and touchhole 'lip', both indicating this is a vertical firing device.
I wouldn't guess its age, due to my little knowledge but, it must be an ancient example, due to its overall look and specially the marks, which are often seen in old swords ... 16-17th century ? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 213
|
![]() Quote:
I've already received the same opinion - it's a 18th century signal device. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
I wouldn't question it being as 'modern' as from the 18th century but then, the marks, the so called 'sickle and the other, were inspired in a much earlier marking system ... or is it my optical ilusion
![]() (picture from the WALLACE COLLECTION catalogue) . Last edited by fernando; 13th November 2013 at 06:16 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|