Awesome. From the picture from the edge it doesn't seem to have any noticable distal taper.

Fascinating article. The sword looks to be in great condition!

Wow, this article is great ! And the sword seems to be insanely preserved. It looks quite heavy too.

Roger Hooper wrote:

Blade thickness of 4.5mm at guard? Not sure I got that right. Too bad there weren't more blade thickness measurements.

Yeah, 4.5mm seems to be thickness at guard. That's curious that the sword doesn't have a distal taper. In fact the tip seems even thicker than at handle... The PoB must be quite far on the blade.

Good spotting there of the khm website! The gallery is also very good.

The blade very much reminds me of the tinker viking sword, with very straight blade profile and overall style... still can't get my head over why the guard and pommel would be so simple though. I guess having a two part pommel would have significantly added to the cost.

https://www.khm.uio.no/english/research/collections/objects/15/gallery/?actimg=http://www.khm.uio.no/english/research/collections/objects/15/gallery/galleri_fig1.jpg&display=gallery

I personally think we wrap ourselves in typologies too often and convince ourselves that there were certain standards set in stone with no outliers or anomalies. While I am certain there are certain patterns that are distinct to regions and time frames, I do not automatically discount something because it does not fit into our view of the past or the norm. After all, our ancestors were human and subject to their own wiles and whims, just as today.

The title of the article is somewhat misleading.
1,640 meters is most definitely not "high altitude" by any yardstick.