Unique and Impressive Two Handed Sword

[cornelistromp]

Originally Posted by Lee

Perhaps I'd roll this observation back about an order of magnitude, to 99%. On a couple of occasions I have had experienced museum curators confide to me that more than a few of the most iconic (and beloved) medieval swords in some very well regarded museum collections are, at the very best, 19th century enhancements and composites. (Technical examination has also raised concerns about some examples in my own collection with earlier reliable provenance.)

Lee you are 99,9% right
on the other hand, a university study costs money.
The mistakes that every collector and researcher makes in his career also cost money. I have a separate exhibition bucket for this and classify it under the heading of learning money, and of course use it as explanation material for fellow collectors

Concerning the %, 99.9% might be a bit high.
but by this % I mean mainly the excavated swords and daggers. its value was relatively low in the 20th century that counterfeiting was of little use here. Now after +- 2000 that is unfortunately no longer the case.
There are now so many counterfeits in excavated swords on offer that the majority of collectors no longer know what a real excavated sword should look like. A verifiable provenance for 2000 gives a little more support.

best

[Lee]

Originally Posted by cornelistromp

There are now so many counterfeits in excavated swords on offer that the majority of collectors no longer know what a real excavated sword should look like.

As to overall agreement about the current state of affairs, I would say that we are 100% in agreement.

I did a detailed XRF study of my collection and discovered many interesting things. I still am far from really understanding the data (COVID came along and killed interpretative progress!) but some items that had received a thumbs down from the "great denunciator" appear to have been vindicated, while questions were raised about other well regarded swords that had passed so many other hurdles. The technical examination conclusively 'killed' one Viking style sword that had come before 2000 from a most reliable dealer and embarrassingly I only recognized the anachronistic stylistic features after they were pointed out to me and this led to my review of the technical data and a horrible sinking feeling. I never had suspected that sword as it had come from a most reliable dealer before the preset scourge of forgeries became apparent. At least it was not a personal favorite.

I suspect that some of the recent fabrications from before around 2000 may have been what I will call exercises in "academic craftsmanship" and were not at the outset ever intended to deceive. Then the items fell into the wrong hands.

[cornelistromp]

It has become a strange reality, often the dealer does not know exactly whether the piece is right or not, but a reliable dealer will always have to find a solution instead of caveat emptor.
Some counterfeits are so well made that unfortunately they can fool authorities and sometimes are even published in a renowned highly regarded PL arms-armour catalogue. I unfortunately have a recent example of this.
This has also created great suspicion in the assessment of weapons and anything that looks just a little too good or looks different from the familiar is often dismissed as forgery.
I catch myself doing this too, nevertheless I try to remain as objective as possible at all times. Likewise with the sword under discussion, as strange as it may look, personally I keep open the small possibility of beeing a 16th century sword.

best,
Jasper