Yes, the Viking age artisans did decorate their equipment with tendrils and beasts, however on iron hilts (I think we can conclude the hilt is iron from the photo) decoration of this style was done via inlay, not carving. So we don’t even have to get into how the carving might be off, it shouldn’t be there to begin with, I can’t recall a single example from the era.
Unfortunately, referencing another unprovenanced auction sword does not bolster the authenticity of the one in question, though these two are similar enough to make each other look bad. It does not look like the usual chevron pattern created in the Viking period, and it looks a lot like modern attempts to replicate the technique, with what appears to be the chevrons pointing in opposite directions on either side of the blade (indicating much more simple construction than most old blades) …and I’ve never seen an authentic blade with the chevron angle so stretched out. Attached is a photo of a more ‘normal’ chevron angle.
The Bonham sword is even more nonsensical; for fundamental, functional reasons swords were made with the coarse, patterned material in the middle & had edges of very clean metal, going all the way back to Celtic times. And Leutlrit did not make his swords from pattern-welded material, so tis odd that they would reference his swords in the lot description.
