Right, Gentlemen,
I have been off-line for some time - but can now offer some further information:
Here are some images of the sword under discussion. The details which I will explain below are those that I have detected purely from the images of the sword that were available on the Internet. That I was also able to examine the same sword at the MAX allowed me to confirm for certain that my observations were correct - therefore I will explain why I find some features on this to be questionable.
First Image: This is a view of the top of the hilt, the locking nut and acceptance mark being clearly visible. Take a look at the engraving of the �acorn� to the right side - note that the engraving is not quite as precise as it ought to be - well not in my opinion, and after all this is a prestigeous �Honour Prize� Sword, and yet sloppy engraving like this is accepted as normal? I think not! In fact I defy any notable collector/dealer to stand up and state that this is perfectly normal, quality engraving.
Photo Group 2:
There is quite a lot to be seen here. Firstly, images of the inscription 1, and 1a. The inscription is unnaturally letterspaced, and it has been formed freehand, apparently not via a master template. The artist has attempted to make the main line of the inscription fill the entire length of the panel - and therefore has spread the lettering accordingly. This is indicative of someone who is not familiar with penning calligraphic inscriptions and therefore spaces the individual letters too wide.
Image 1a is of the second line - the word Ehrenpreis. The letter spacing is even more accentuated here.
All the other letters of the main line of the inscription (Oberkommando des Heeres) have been separated and grouped according to their order of appearance. The size of the letters in each particular line are exactly to scale with each other.
Grouping 2 relates to the letter �e�, the most common letter in the inscription, and note that each of the �e�s is different. The first example is notably so, being fat and and squat - and base of the stroke is almost flat. There are differences in the individual heights of each of these letters - technically this is known as the �x-height� - as well as in the body construction ofv each letter; and yet each letter has been duplicated at the exact same scale. A professional Lettering Artist would not have allowed so many differences within the same letter group to exist - he was employed to make sure that such inscriptions did not display such varied differencies.
Group 3) The letters �s� - the differences between the two �identical letters� are also obvious.
Groups 4, 5, and 6) This grouping of continuity is interesting :
The group 4 has an interesting feature, all the letters appear to be sloping slightly backwards - to the left as seen by the viewer. The also appear to be slightly higher on the left, with the �Ob� above the base-line, whereas the �er� seems to sit upon the base-line.
Group 5) Appears to show that the letters are now formed in a completely �upright� posture.
Groups 6) All still mostly �upright� - but the letters �r� and �s� seem to show an inclination lean towards the right.
The change of angle of the letters of the inscription is an unprofessional way of forming the inscription.
Group 7) This grouping shows the close proximity of the upper line, with the line beneath it. Technically, both lines of text are too large in their type height - even though the lower line is in a reduced size. The failing is that the top of the lower line almost touches the base of the upper line, and leaves no room for any descender character (gpqy, etc) to fit - especially so if the lower line features an ascender character (bdhifkl, etc).
Based on these observations, I would express my belief that execution of this inscription is not up to the standards of the professional craftsman, and particularly so the pre-war craftsman. The blade and inscription I believe are post-war - and I have reasonable grounds to believe that the entire sword is a post war construction.
Of course, I appreciate that some people may disagree with me, and state that I am being too particular, or finically, And that failings and blemishes in craftsmanship are the norm for German armourer - yet somehow I personally just cannot agree with this line of thought. The craftsmanship may not always be �lazer perfect�, but I can�t believe that it would be so completely and continuously flawed as seen on the example under review
FJS
I have my first image ready to submit, I will follow this with my second image (I hope!).
