Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > My new Schlachtschwert Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,307

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 4:51 am    Post subject: My new Schlachtschwert         Reply with quote

Hello people! Few days ago I bought this sword, possibly late XVIth century... 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.


 Attachment: 51.04 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 58.93 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 44.97 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 52.98 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 57.66 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 55.09 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 39.37 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 44.96 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 44.91 KB
[ Download ]
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Beeching





Joined: 22 Jan 2014
Reading list: 2 books

Posts: 262

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 1:52 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Wow! That's quite the monster.

I have some questions, if you'd not mind answering:

1. Approximately what does one pay for an antique like that?

2. What does the typical collector do with an antique like that?

...I ask these questions as I don't quite understand making an investment in something I either can't use or rather, shouldn't. I do not mean offense when I ask this question, I just want a better understanding from someone who has made the investment in such an antique. As per Point #2 specifically, the only really clear serious usage I see someone getting out of such a sword would be the swordmaker, who can then attempt to accurately reproduce its qualities, etc.

Alternately, I should not overlook the obvious - that's a really fantastic sword, and not the usual rusty heap one often thinks of when buying a such a sword. Going back to Point #2, I'm going to guess that the weapon going to live in the display cabinet somewhere?
View user's profile Send private message
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,307

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 2:24 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Beeching wrote:
Wow! That's quite the monster.

I have some questions, if you'd not mind answering:

1. Approximately what does one pay for an antique like that?

2. What does the typical collector do with an antique like that?

...I ask these questions as I don't quite understand making an investment in something I either can't use or rather, shouldn't. I do not mean offense when I ask this question, I just want a better understanding from someone who has made the investment in such an antique. As per Point #2 specifically, the only really clear serious usage I see someone getting out of such a sword would be the swordmaker, who can then attempt to accurately reproduce its qualities, etc.

Alternately, I should not overlook the obvious - that's a really fantastic sword, and not the usual rusty heap one often thinks of when buying a such a sword. Going back to Point #2, I'm going to guess that the weapon going to live in the display cabinet somewhere?


Good questions! Definitely no offence taken. Happy
The slight problem with this sword is that I'm not sure that it is really end of 16th/early 17th century. Some experts I have consulted think that it is, some that it isn't. None can be sure without seeing it in person. Most agree at least crossguard is newer/19th century, if not the blade. The guy who sold it to me thought that it is 19th century so I got it for only 600 euros. My personal opinion is that the blade is really late 16th or early 17th century because it has a very drastic distal taper, fine edge geometry and nice balance, and I don't think a 19th century guy who would make this to be hung above a fireplace would bother with that. In late 16th century, although already mostly used for ceremonies, these blades were still made well enough to be fighting blades. They were carried by bodyguards, after all. The crossguard probably is newer, it is not a very precise masterwork and it does look like it was made only to look impressive from a several meters distance.
About point 2... I generally don't like to possess something I can't use, whatever the price was. I'm going to carry this sword with me to various reenactment events to educate people about such swords and I want people to be able to see it in person and handle it. I don't believe any sword that is structurally sound and not absolutely priceless one of a kind national treasure should spend it's remaining time behind the glass. I will also probably somehow tighten the hilt since it is slightly loose to be able to try some montante exercises with it.
View user's profile Send private message
Arne G.





Joined: 31 Jul 2014

Posts: 103

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 2:59 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Was it common for 19th century "reproductions" to fake the maker's marks? I'm not too familiar with the Victorian era stuff.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,307

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 3:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Arne G. wrote:
Was it common for 19th century "reproductions" to fake the maker's marks? I'm not too familiar with the Victorian era stuff.


I don't know, but I don't see why would they do that. They weren't faking originals for profit, as far as I know...
View user's profile Send private message
Arne G.





Joined: 31 Jul 2014

Posts: 103

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 3:48 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luka Borscak wrote:
Arne G. wrote:
Was it common for 19th century "reproductions" to fake the maker's marks? I'm not too familiar with the Victorian era stuff.


I don't know, but I don't see why would they do that. They weren't faking originals for profit, as far as I know...


That was rather my thought, which, coupled with your observations about the blade design and handling characteristics, is why I agree with your assessment that the blade is likely original. I know that, under the same circumstances, I would have plunked down the same amount you did for it, and perhaps even a bit more, and felt that I made a great purchase.

Have you thought about dismounting the hilt and perhaps having a more period correct crossguard made for it?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Thu 11 Jun, 2020 5:34 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Many 18th/19th/early 20th century historismus examples have makers marks that mimic marks from earlier eras. The most obvious is the passau wolf mark. These "running wolf" marks are found on all kinds of 19th century reproductions even though that maker was long, long gone by that point.

Victorian-era swords were made for profit, of course. They were sold as goods to decorators and collectors alike. The question is, were they sold as forgeries or as originals? The answer is both. Newly-created, highly authentic reproductions were sold and appropriately identified. Likewise, as has always been true and still is, forgeries were made and sold as originals when they were not.

.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,307

PostPosted: Sun 14 Jun, 2020 3:46 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Arne G. wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
Arne G. wrote:
Was it common for 19th century "reproductions" to fake the maker's marks? I'm not too familiar with the Victorian era stuff.


I don't know, but I don't see why would they do that. They weren't faking originals for profit, as far as I know...


That was rather my thought, which, coupled with your observations about the blade design and handling characteristics, is why I agree with your assessment that the blade is likely original. I know that, under the same circumstances, I would have plunked down the same amount you did for it, and perhaps even a bit more, and felt that I made a great purchase.

Have you thought about dismounting the hilt and perhaps having a more period correct crossguard made for it?
I thought about several options, but I'm not touching it until I get a consensus if it is real or not and which parts are which. Happy
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Beeching





Joined: 22 Jan 2014
Reading list: 2 books

Posts: 262

PostPosted: Mon 15 Jun, 2020 10:59 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for the feedback, Luka.

...Given the price, I don't think anyone with the means could pass that piece up - great buy!
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > My new Schlachtschwert
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2020 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum