![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]()
Hello people! Few days ago I bought this sword and I would like your opinion on it... Overall it's 163cm long, 118cm blade and 95cm from the end of the ricasso to the tip. Ricasso tapers from 10 to 8mm and the blade is 10mm at the end of the ricasso, 5mm in the middle and 2.5 - 3mm last 10cm of the blade. Ricasso is only 37mm wide at the base and the blade is 6cm wide at the widest at the tip. The sword weighs about 3.7kg. The blade is very flexible and I think well tempered. Mark looks like one of the Stantlers of Munich marks.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Lead Moderator European Armoury
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
...And the pictures, Luka ...
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]()
Oh, the pictures, yes.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,198
|
![]()
I am no expert on this kind of swords but I think this is a piece of pure historism. At least I cannot see any traces of age of the last 450 years.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 397
|
![]()
its not 17th century but 19th or later and the other sword probably to.
This type with the knot at the end of the crossguard is a known reproduction, could you post some pictures of the other sword ? kind regards Ulfberth |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,903
|
![]()
Fairly recent decorative sword.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 397
|
![]()
I can see no traces on the blade that points to the 17th century, however the blade surface is that visible in the pictures.
If you think the blade could be 17th C please post pictures of the blade surface were the steel is visible so not were its totally black. About the balance, the original swords of this type were not battle swords but processional swords and their balance was awful, that in a way that they could not be used in a fight, to clumsy. The fact that these two have a good balance could be mere coincidence. These swords might be a great opportunity to learn from. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 233
|
![]()
Also pictures of the makers mark that you mentioned.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() The other one doesn't have good balance, it's horrible. And looks to have "fake black" patina. I didn't bought this one, it is for a friend... The third picture is a best picture I can get of a surface of my sword... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,198
|
![]()
This is what the catalogue of the Wallace Collection 1962 says to the mark in question
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]()
I also found this about the mark...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 397
|
![]()
Thank you for the extra pictures, however the pictures of the surface of the metal are not clear enough. I will post some pictures of an original Stantler sword so you can see what I mean with surface of the metal visible , also now you can compare an original to the two you have and compare. The one I show also has the diamond shaped pommel as described in the Wallace collection, please notice that here the rust or black spots are in the metal not on top of it as it seems on yours, please compare the stamps although both Stantler stamps the one on your sword is in brand new condition or .... Perhaps if you post pictures like these we can say more of the swords are 16th century as the remarkable fresh stamp implies.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sweden
Posts: 688
|
![]()
I’m no expert on zweihänders but they were novelties even during their time, some more than others. Arms in Eastern Europe sometimes also appear outsized compared to Western Europe. Difficult to judge the swords from pictures but the one on the left looks more convincing to my novice eyes. I would take the swords to a museum or the like for a more expert opinion.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 397
|
![]()
Well I don't want to rule out any possibilities, but I can say with one hundred percent certainty: if these two are original you have hit the jackpot ! Stantler swords are very valuable and the one with knots at the end of the crossguard is extremely rare as an original. Now you can compare and examine them on the spot.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sweden
Posts: 688
|
![]()
Must say Ulfberth’s zweihänder sword looks more slender (less thick) with obvious signs of wear and lack of sharp edges.
There’s a place called Golden Lane in Prague Castle which showcases modern replicas of medieval arms. Czech smiths seem very skilled at producing these for historical renactment etc. The items on display there are for sale. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 397
|
![]()
here are some better close up detail pics, have a look at the leather , reproductions never have leather like this.
Please post some similar pictures including the grips, it seems they are plain wood. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]()
The problem is that for higher quality pictures the forum says they are too big...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 233
|
![]() Quote:
I'll try to resize them in a way that will preserve the quality. Also, outside pictures under natural light will help. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 233
|
![]()
Better pictures of Luka's sword. My take is the blade is old and good. Pommel newer. Undecided on the hilt.
Last edited by CSinTX; 14th June 2020 at 05:37 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 233
|
![]()
more pics
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]()
CSinTX, thank you very much!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 397
|
![]()
Casey is right , the blade is indeed good no doubt , it was good to send better pictures, it dit had recent surface rust that's all.
The pommel I can't say for sure but it could be good , the same for the crossguard that has to much paint on it to be sure but its made in the 17th c manner. the crossguard is made crude, but with this type of sword the originals always are, to refined would be suspicious. At auction the description would be : a 17th C two handed sword in good condition. I would be interesting to see the same detailed pics of the other sword if you would like to share them. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 125
|
![]()
I agree with Casey and Ulfberth. The blade looks right and the mark is correct for Christoph Stantler - being well-struck is not cause for suspicion. The guard is of the correct style for a Munich two-hander of 1580-1600 though it looks a bit more crudely fashioned than some I have seen (and I have examined dozens of this period), so there might be some doubt still attached to it but not enough to condemn it out of hand. In my opinion Luka has got a bargain.
Neil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sweden
Posts: 688
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 15
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|