Bonhams

[Tibor]

I came across this:

http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20007/l ... ult%3Dlist" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kinda interesting...

[Marhala]

Mmmmmm...

I'm not expert on screen used whips, but that one has a rather thick and short handle than the ones Morgan used to make back in the day. It seems to me a more recent Morgan. And, either the fall was replaced, or again, the whip is more recent. A whitehide fall tends to become yellowish with time if it doesn't get dirty.

Just my two cents,

Aldo.

[Tibor]

I thought the same thing about the handle. Good point about the fall. Very curious

[BullWhipBorton]

“See you can tell by the cross sections!”

This particular whip has been up for sale several times over the past few years via a couple different auction companies including Bonhams and Profiles in History. It may be an authentic Morgan; but there are numerous specifics not right about it when compared to authenticated screen used whips and other David Morgan whips form the 80s. Personally, I don’t believe for a second it’s a film whip and certainly not one from Raiders.

[riku1914]

I don't think it's a raiders whip either. Immediately when I saw it I thought " well either that's not a raiders whip, or it just rewrote Morgan's history...". It's more of a 90's-now morgan. You can tell in the handle, much like the cross section

[Zuiun]

Is it just me, or is there an error in the plaiting? Photo with the white background, coming off the transition knot, the 13th strand along the bottom looks wrong to me. I'm I just crazy? If that's an error, would an authentic whip have a mistake like that? Does it matter? Also, if you enlarge the photo, there are many areas where the plaiting just looks really loose. You can see the white background through the whip. Would that be an age thing (leather stretched over the years)?

[BullWhipBorton]

Yeah, I noticed that too; it’s probably a plaiting error in the overlay. Though not common, it happens and having seen similar errors on other Morgan’s, its certainly not out of the question. Something like that doesn’t really affect the way the whip performs though, so it wouldn’t have been considered anything more then a cosmetic imperfection at the time and depending how much further the whip was plaited before it was noticed, apparently it was not something worth going back and correcting. I suppose for the sake of argument, it could be a dropped strand. If it is though, it’s in a really strange place and is being dropped much sooner then where David would usually start.

If I had to venture a guess I’d say this whip was most likely made between 2001- 2004, probably more towards 04. The last few years David was still making them, he wasn’t able to pull the strands in place as tightly as he used too. So its not uncommon for the whips made around that time to be plaited more loosely then older whips or after when Megan and Alex started doing more of the heavy plaiting.

Like Aldo pointed out, the short handle on this one is probably the biggest and most notable give away. The bullwhips David made up to around 2000 still featured that longer more familiars thinner handle grips, the knot placement varied a little from whip to whip but they were basically still what you’d see on the whips made for the Last Crusade. It wasn’t until 2000-01, that he started shortening the grip. But even if that was a fluke the type of white hide fall used on this whip is much more consistent with what they were using around that time and is shaped a little differently then what David was putting on in the 80s. That along with a number of other more subtle differences in how it's put together, I’m pretty much convinced that this whip was made well after the fact of the Indy films. That’s not even taking into consideration questions that have been raised with other “authentic” Raiders props that Kit West has brought to the market over the years.

[Oildale Jones]

Perhaps Mr. West is augmenting his retirement.

Did it not sell last year? I noticed that last year's estimate is considerably higher than this year's.

http://www.antiquetrader.com/antiques/a ... ip_auction" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

EDIT: Sorry, looks like two different whips. That other one looks even less authentic. And then another one pops up again this year?

[kwad]

Exactly how many whips does ol' Kit have lying around from Raiders?
I can almost buy that the "stunt whip" he tried to auction off a while back was made for the production, almost...but, this new one? Don't think so.

[Indiana County Jr.]

This is the kind of thing I have missed about this place. Clearly not a Raiders whip, but I am still curious where it came from though...

Good find!

Allen

[parttime]

I had a customer send me this picture a few months ago in an email as a reference to a "Raiders" whip he was looking to have made.
He pointed out to me the loose strands.



When I saw this thread I checked the picture. It maybe too small to see in this forum but when I blew it up on my computer it has the same plaiting error in the transition. It has to be the same whip and if so this may give a time line for the auction.

-Dusty

[Oildale Jones]

http://artdaily.org/index.asp?date=12/11/2011#images" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Click the thumbnail for a large image)

LONDON.- One of the trademark Bullwhips used by Indiana Jones in the 1981 film Raiders of the Lost Ark is displayed at Bonhams auction rooms in London. The whip is estimated to realize 30,000-50,000 pounds ($47,000-$78,500/35,000-58,300 euro) and will be auctioned on Dec. 15 in the Entertainment Memorabilia auction. AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth.

This is the listing for the auction: http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/19037/lot/92/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you click on the picture, you can zoom in quite closely.

Interesting. It looks like it didn't sell in London in December, so they're trying again in Los Angeles with a lower estimate. http://www.bonhams.com/search/?q=bullwhip&indexes=lot" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Different angle here: http://g1.globo.com/pop-arte/fotos/2011 ... ml#F318659" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[whiskyman]

That is seriously sloppy braiding from Mr. Morgan! Extremely loose - gaps, errors and spiralling seams. Definitely not made during his peak!

[Zuiun]

Also, the more pics I see of this thing, the more that whip just looks like a limp noodle.

[Sakis]

Anyone knows how I can save the hq pictures from the Bonhams site?

[riku1914]

Mod Edit: http://indygear.com/cow/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=45336" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Sakis]

How come I don't believe it's th real mccoy?

[knibs7]

As others have said, the first thing I noticed was the handle. There's NO WAY that was ANY part of Raiders. Some whips I give the benefit of the doubt and I'll agree that they could have at least been on the set, but this whip clearly isn't from 1980-81.

Kyle

[Oildale Jones]

Mod Edit: http://indygear.com/cow/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=45336" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, rules are rules, but I don't think that posting a link is going to cause a run on a $47,000 whip auction.

[riku1914]

Plus it's a buy it now...

[louiefoxx]

That whip's handle looks very different from what most of us think of when we think of "The Raider's Bullwhip", they should have no trouble spotting it in the movie and having a still to back it up.

Louie
#savingmy47.5K