This sword makes the rounds of the forums and image boards regularly - I very much doubt its authenticity, and I am not the first to say so.
I think the ornamentation gives the game away, and the analysis offered by the auction house is completely off base. Firstly, the ornamentation on the "Hiltepreht" swords mentioned (and several other similar ones) is a Frankish-style floral/vegetal design that does not resemble this sword in any way. All of these are of Petersen's type K and probably of the 9th century. The sword from Hedeby is of the same type; its ornament is different but executed with the same technique: the design is engraved in dark niello (I assume) on a plated silver/bronze/etc surface. This is completely different from the sword in question.
The comparison to the sword from the River Bann is also dubious; its ornament consists of three comparatively simple palmettes, also it has a brazil-nut pommel and is probably of the 11th century. The broken blade from Nijmegen (illustrated by Oakeshott) cannot be precisely dated, but its design shows far greater affinity with the Bann palmettes and certain other inscriptions than the ornamentation of this sword.
The hilt ornamentation we see here is instead a poor imitation of designs that do appear particularly on hilts of Petersen's types O and R, and can be associated with the 10th century Mammen style of Scandinavian artwork. The intricacy and quality of the designs on every genuine weapon decorated in this manner far surpass what can be seen on this sword and others that have appeared at auction in recent years. For comparison, I attach an example excavated in Norway, and the namesake axe from Mammen in Denmark.
|