A Viking Sword With Inscribed Blade in a Moscow (?) Museum
 

Please see

http://www.tforum.info/forum/index.p...eq=si&img=2362

on the Russian Forum.

Michael

Thank you for posting this Michael!
Although I have always much admired Viking swords, I honestly have never researched them in any depth....this illustration has certainly inspired me, and one of the best references is "Swords of the Viking Age" ( Ian Pierce, 2002). While the late Mr. Pierce is named as the author, Dr. Lee Jones was also instrumental in the production of this book, along with the late Ewart Oakeshott. These gentlemen together produced a book that is in my opinion key to research on these historic swords.

The excellent example shown here, as near as I can estimate, is closest to the example illustrated in Plate III, which has similar construction as well as the iron inlaid ULFBERHT name. I cannot quite make out the large lettering on this blade, but it does appear to be a variation of the Ulfberht name.

The pommel/ upper guard in triangular configuration and shape of the lower guard seem to correspond to the Petersen (1919) reference as Type H.
The reference in Pierce/Jones/Oakeshott, Plate III, notes as reference
for the type:
"Den Yngre Jernalders Svaerde", A.L.Lorange, Bergen (1889), Plate I.

It seems this type is typically thought to have been found extensively in Norway, but as far south as Switzerland and Yugoslavia (p.17) and that the type H seems to have been in use about latter 8th c. to into the 10th c.

This is at least what I have found in these references, and as always, I look forward to better and more accurate assessments from those who are more specialized in these type swords.......Hello Lee :) !!!

All best regards,
Jim

I had a go at the sign that accompanies this display, (hoping to determine if the sword is an original or a copy) and was able to glean a little more about the sword despite my complete lack of Russian. The sword is signed on the blade, Ulfberht-style, with the name ‘Leutlrit,’ and thus may have been made by the same sword smith who forged the more famous River Withham sword in the British Museum. That one is graced with an excellent Anglo-Saxon hilt, this wears a Petersen Type H. The section on the River Withham sword in “Swords of the Viking Age” mentions another in Russia, and since the spelling of the name and find place of the artifact match, this must be that sword at the State Historic Museum in Moscow. The illustration in Kirpicnikov is labeled “Альметьево, бывш. Чистопольский у. Казанской губ. (тип Н, X в., ГИМ, хр. 12/1) which corresponds well with the signage.
The sword is in a case of what are pretty clearly re-constructed garments, and each description on the info plaque ends in “Late 19th Century,” so I was inclined to think it might be display copy of the original artifact. A Russian friend did not have enough English to confirm this reading for me, and in fact seemed to say that the sword was found or acquired by the museum in the late 1800s, so maybe they just like less precise signage in Russian museums than I am used to seeing.
Via on-line translators, under the headline “Male dress of the Viking Period” the first sub-head says “Sword (Carolingian type).” Then perhaps - “Kazan prov., Chistopolsky. Find place - Almetevo by V. I. Sizova. End of XIX century.”

Меч каролингского типа
Железо, медный сплав, ковка, инкрустация
Казанска губ, Чистопольский у., ст Альметьево
Дар В. И. Сизова. Конец XIX в.

Brilliant research work, Jeff,

Thank you so much! :)

Best,
Michael

Gentlemen!
You were kind enough to admit me to this august body a while back.To my regret,between my computer skills(just now rediscovered my password...),and the life's general busyness,have not had a chance to participate more actively in the forum.Also,possibly my only contribution may be my fluency in Russian,as i'm neither a scholar,or collector,nor am i historian.But,i have glanced at the discussion at times,and,possibly,(look at the bright side!) due to the missing password,was prevented from some foolish and uninformed comment.
However:Jeff!I wish you'd ask for any and all help with the translation from the Russian-i'm tickled when you do...All that you've surmised so far is correct,as far as i can tell from the plaques.Minus the list of materials/techniques used,as are commonly included in the description of objects newly made and antique both.The date is the find date,as is also all the place name data,as is also usual.

Matchlock,what specifically interests you about this particular artifact?I MAY be able to find out some specifics on this,the russian weapons world being as small as the euro-american(regretfully,how little connection betwixt the two,though).Frankly,here's what was always the deal with the Russian style of preservation:The display at the given museum is for the yokel,it simply is not worth it to "cast the pearls..."et c.,before the idly curious.The real collection is the repository,that is where the serious research is conducted.
Some objects,for whatever reason,are actually off-limits,but many are accessible to those with a degree of validity of interest(regardless to nationality).It is entirely possible that a dialog can be established with the "GIM"-The State Historical Museum,among others.As in with the research dept."behind the scenes".I may be naively optimistic here,not sure.
But would be very pleased to be of help,if possible,in an attempt to obtain some particular information,upon the strenght of my own "good name"(ha!).
Sincerely,Jake.

P.S.
The first entry,"The suit",states "Reconstruction",the other objects do not,thereby-are not,as you surmised.

The sword has "copper alloy,forging,inlay",in the description,an the reference to Mr Sizov is in regards to it's being his gift to the museum.

Jake! :cool:
Thanks for logging in on this topic! I was going to email you about this as soon as I had gathered my thoughts a little, there is some Cyrillic mystery here I’m sure you can resolve.
Do you have Kirpicnikov’s work on the old Rus weaponry “Drevnerusskoe oruze?” You would really like vol. 2 on axes and spears!
Кирпичников А.Н. - Древнерусское оружие. Т. 1. Мечи и сабли IX-XIII вв & Т. 2. Копья, сулицы, боевые топоры, булавы, кистени IX-XIII вв.
Свoд aрхеoлoгических истoчникoв, E1-36. Нaукa. Мoсквa-Ленингрaд.

I was able to locate a PDF version (by googling “Кирпичников Древнерусское оружие”), and this sword is pictured therein, Plate XVII # 4 (as well as Plate XIX #s 1+2) with the caption below calling it out as (I presume) GIM Inv. # 12/1. However, in the catalog of swords starting on p.73/74 of the pdf, #16 is a type H (column 6), there is Mr. Sizov again in column 3, so you’d think that is the sword in question; but the inventory # is 117/85. In that table, Inv. # 12/1 shows up in the row for # 43, listed as a type E sword. Which do you think is the correct inventory #?

Jeff,i've recieved your message,but that sourse is still down.Would really appreciate if you could e-mail those directly,jakepogrebinsky@yahoo.com.

Would be very pleased to translate what i can of Kirpichnikov for you,and try to help puzzle out that allocation.It's some of the best of the reputable older studies.
Unfortunately i've not been able to get a hold of a copy yet-our local ILL librarian lady runs when she sees me-all the outdated soviet archeology is so tough to track down...

Have to add that in the above museum labels,Sizov is also listed as the one responsible for the dig,if in some small way that helps.

All the best,Jake

I took another look at the illustrations of this sword and found something pretty amazing on the other side of the blade. Where many of the signed swords of the 10th century have an interlace or similar decoration on the ‘B’ side, this one has the running wolf of Passau! :eek:
Could it be the first example of that trademark?