[Andrew Winston]

Hi folks,

A member on the EEWRS started this thread: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?p=7534#post7534

Any help identifying this thing would be appreciated. More photos on the linked thread

Best regards,
Andrew

[Andrew Winston]

No thoughts? Are we heading in the right direction on that other thread?

[Allan Senefelder]

Andrew, this is based on nothing more than the time i've spent collecting original and vintage(Victorian copies) arms and armour, which translates out to what i've ever had in my hands which ain't much on a scale for 1-10. That being said here it is , overall from the pics on the other thread this is A) a partizian B) a cast Victorian version of one. The figural motif which was popular especially for cerimonial use in the 17th and 18th centuries would have been etched at that time (that i'm aware) and it has pretty obviously been cast from the photos. The overall proportions are in the zone for cerimonial work from the 17th and 18th centuries but its to "thick" if you will all the way around(it doesn't have the character of the forged pole arms i've owned but that of the cast Victorian decorator pieces i've had). So I guess in summary IMO its a Victorian era badly kept(cleaned/maintained) cast version of a partizian. This is based soley (sp) on the pictures so definitely take it for what its worth. I'll supply the grain of salt.

[Andrew Winston]

Allan:

Outstanding information, thank you very much!

Best,
Andrew

[Gordon Frye]

I'd have to second Allan on this one. From the pictures it has that "thick" look that seemed to be a hallmark of Victorian reproductions, plus the cast-in relief patterns. It's getting tougher and tougher to be able to tell the difference anymore just from the patina, since the Victorian reproductions now have had a good hundred years of age put on them... plus there are plenty of folks willing to "help" that process along.

Cheers,

Gordon

[Andrew Winston]

Thanks, Gordon.