When I was a beginning collector the topic of ‘Lion-heads’ vs Panther-heads’ caused me a lot of “head scratching”. Especially with older more experienced collectors telling me that the Panther-heads referred to the feline creature at the ends of the knucklebows. But as I have discovered with some different topics: time in the hobby, somebody’s status as high level dealer etc. etc. might not translate to actual expertise if they were just guessing. Relating what somebody else had told them, or just making things up as they went along like some guys seem to do.
My current understanding of the period usage is as follows: The attached image of a Prussian Ordonnanz model Artillery Officer’s sword, if it was a private purchase type, it's considered a ‘Offizier-Säbel mit Löwenkopf’ (Lionhead). As can be seen it has no glass eyes, which is one of the things that distinguishes it from the many ‘Offizier-Säbel mit Parderkopf Augen’. 'Parder' in this context I believe* meaning the biological family of the big cats - Felidae, Subfamily: Pantherinae, Genus: Panthera - ie: the big cats like Lions, Leopards, Panthers etc. In other words it is referring to those sabers that have the (glass) eyes. To illustrate my point in the attached image the modestly decorated saber to the left is technically an ‘Offizier-Säbel mit Löwenkopf'. That in the image is being compared to a same vintage high grade 'Grösse.- Offizier-Säbel mit Parderkopf Augen' that has the very well developed/detailed head of a male adult Lion with glass eyes.
With all that said - ’Lionhead’ usually seems to work well enough for most discussions. (* Noting that I'm not a biologist or a native German speaker.) Best Regards, Fred
It looks period to me also, but I think that the blade has been shortened and perhaps the scabbard as well? That said, the crossguard eagle is one of the better designs IMO. Best Regards, Fred
What strikes is the wide of the blade as this one looks more like an Imperial type of blade.
I would expect a smaller one in the TR period, that sad the fit from the ferrule and the guard is not great, there's a bit of a gap shown on the right when you look at the second picture, it could be an imperial or Reichwehr saber converted into a TR one.
The guard and hilt are very well made, at great labour costs: hand enhancements are very well done on these fittings.
What strikes is the wide of the blade as this one looks more like an Imperial type of blade.
I would expect a smaller one in the TR period, that sad the fit from the ferrule and the guard is not great, there's a bit of a gap shown on the right when you look at the second picture, it could be an imperial or Reichwehr saber converted into a TR one.
The guard and hilt are very well made, at great labour costs: hand enhancements are very well done on these fittings.
Ger
Ger, You’ve made some good interesting points. From the information at hand my own immediate sense is that the blade is probably post Imperial, and a measurement could help with that aspect. Of the same opinion that a gap with a quality sword hilt like this one is not what I would normally expect either. Also being in complete agreement that it’s a very well done example of hand finishing.
Also agreeing Neil:
by Neil Hever
My apologies. Panther or Lion head? The ear and mane was throwing me off in the original posting. Here are some comparison photos. One photo shows Lion and Panther together and the other an example of the Panther alone....................
Even though they were not as pronounced as the ones with larger manes, that is what really confused me in those long past discussions with the advocates of the “Panther-heads”. Panthers have fairly sleek heads with no manes. Which to me seemed to be a common sense indicator that they were Lions - albeit created in a stylized manner. Period German documentation I think confirming my original “gut” (intuitive) reaction. Best Regards, Fred
I have also been a little puzzled by the categorization of "Lion versus Panther" and wondered with it was the overworked imagination of dealers and some collectors. To my eye these differences in the mane (fully body versus trimmed short) were just style variations from different manufacturers and of no particular significance.
Fred mentioned the glass eyes and whether not having glass eyes indicated a "panther". By understanding from what I've read is that the glass eyes were in fact an optional extra (for extra cost), but one almost everyone who bought a sword decided to have. So it became to appear to be a standard fitting, when it was in fact an option. So you could have a "big hair" Lionhead with glass eyes, or if budget was tight, without the glass eyes.
Especially with older more experienced collectors telling me that the Panther-heads referred to the feline creature at the ends of the knucklebows. But as I have discovered with some different topics: time in the hobby, somebody’s status as high level dealer etc. etc. might not translate to actual expertise if they were just guessing. Relating what somebody else had told them, or just making things up as they went along like some guys seem to do.
.
by Frogprince
From the information at hand my own immediate sense is that the blade is probably post Imperial, and a measurement could help with that aspect. Of the same opinion that a gap with a quality sword hilt like this one is not what I would normally expect either. Also being in complete agreement that it’s a very well done example of hand finishing. 
Bookmarks