King Arthur Cue by Marcus Dienst

King Arthur Cue

General Cue Description-

Marcus Dienst from Frankenthal, Germany is one of the leaders in the growing number of European cue builders. Along with his standard cues, he has been making a name for himself in high-end ultra-fancy cues. A precision machinist by trade, Marcus draws inspiration from the Old World which is rich with thousands of years of history and mythology. This cue is based on the story of King Arthur and the legend of Camelot. Marcus partnered with German scrimshander icon Ewa Halat to complete this masterpiece.

Here’s what the experts think-

Dick Abbott

Dick Abbott

Wow, I can’t imagine the amount of time put into the finely detailed scrimshaw art in this cue. The scrimshaw is exquisite; the consumption of ivory is overwhelming. As your eye moves up the cue it transforms from extra-fine detail to a cartoon like representation of the castle’s spire, at this point the concept shoots itself in the foot. A lot of cue, a ton of work and very expensive but not quite a monster.

Fred Agnir

Fred Agnir

Groundbreaking. Breathtaking. Awe inspiring. For any cuemaker with decades of cue building experience, this would be a monster upon monsters. The fact that Dienst has only been making cues for a few years enhances the spectacular level on this cue. This is the very definition of “taking it to the next level.”

Deno Andrews

Deno Andrews

First-class scrimshaw and the Celtic knot work instantly boggle the mind. However, those masterpieces are joined by inlay work that lacks depth and perspective. Flat-looking columns and the castle-top segment look like they belong on a much less spectacular cue. Collaborative designs should compliment each other. Elements of the cue are exquisite and hundreds of work-hours are obvious. However, this cue mixes perspective and design values are inconsistent. It’s a very beautiful and expensive non-monster.

Jimbo- Jim Brennan


I really wish I could see a full length picture of this cue, or better hold it in my hand, it has so much detail to it that it’s hard to take it all in. I have gone on record as saying that I don’t care for cues that are just large hunks of ivory where the scrimshander does all the work. But it’s clear with this cue that the cue builder has done more then enough with inlays and design elements to where that is clearly not the case. The story the cue tells is extensive and the details are very intricate. This cue is a Monster.

Jim Stadum

Jim Stadum

This is a very elaborate design that fits nicely into the “Theme Cue” category. I think the scrimshaw is excellent. I also think the overall design was very well thought out. IMO most cues that are sent out to scrimshaw artists do not have the same credibility as cues that were made entirely by the cuemaker. To me it makes the cuemaker more like a talented picture frame maker rather than an artist. Very unique, time consuming and beautiful cue, but no monster.

CueZilla says-

CueZilla thinks this is the nicest NON monster so far…

What do you think? Submit a comment and rate this cue yourself from 1-10 with ten being the best. Don’t forget to justify your rating! (must be logged in)-

12 comments to King Arthur Cue by Arthur Queues

  • SactownTom

    Not a fan of scrimshaw but I do appreciate the enormous amount of time to create this beauty. I can’t imagine this as a cue. NON-Monster. But MONSTER Scrimshaw work. Just not Monster Cue..

  • Disclaimer: We are probably going to be making cases for Arthur Cue.

    Ok that said I want to correct one statement by one of the judges. Fred said that Marcus has only been making cues for “a few years.” This is not correct as Marcus was making cues at least as early as 1993 if I remember correctly. I knew him then when I lived in Germany and would frequently make the tournament circuit. So with that in mind this cue comes to life through a cue making veteran with at least 16 years experience.

    Now, on to the cue. At the recent ICCS a little debate broke out about whether scrimshawed cues which were scrimmed (is that a word) by someone other than the cue maker were or should be treated as highly valued as those which the cue maker or shop did themselves.

    With that in mind I find that the focus here is entirely too much on the scrimshaw. I asked myself would this cue be a monster without it? Just based on the inlays and execution I would say yes. At the risk of getting ridiculed I liken this cue to Bob Meucci’s groundbreaking Crown Jewel cue and the Taj Mahal. It sets a theme and then executes it in fine details. This is not just a cue where someone did four ivory windows with some scenes in them. Had it been then I would have agreed with Mr. Stadum in his comment about the cue becoming a fancy frame for someone else’s art.

    In this cue the scrimshaw art is definitely framed but it’s framed by the castle built by Arthur’s cues masterful inlays. The way this whole cue comes together is what makes it a monster. This is how scrimshaw should be framed if one is going to use it.

    This cue is 100% a monster and one of the biggest that exists in the world of cues.

  • P.S. I’d like to see the Taj Mahal up on here for consideration.

  • Thomas Wayne

    I have seen a number of Marcus’ cues. Overall he does some pretty interesting work, and some of his cues undoubtedly qualify as monsters. This cue, however, is not one of them.


  • chrisl1802

    Here you can find the cue gallery from Arthur queues.

    Regards from Germany

  • cornerstone

    this cue is a total ivory cue from head to toe! the celtic knots are incredible. this cue has to be seen in person!the fine detail in the windows and roof. and the total flow of this cue is immense! not his most elobrate but one of his best and i think its a total monster!


    Maybe it might be a hit in England?
    Lot of work, but not aesthetically pleasing to me at all.

  • dustyseale

    im with bill monster for sure

  • scottr

    I fall on the non-Monster side of the fence with this cue; and, to be honest, with most of Mr. Dienst’s work. Several design elements are super, but overall it just doesn’t do it for me (other than an appreciation of the inlay execution).


  • MONSTER. 10 of 10. I just love this cue. Would be proud to own, if I didn’t need to put a kid thru college… 🙂 No worries for me on scrimshaw. Like inlay, it takes years to master, and a steady hand. Utilizing scrimshaw on a cue just adds another tool for other cue makers to use, to further their creative expression. Any other opinion, is sour grapes…..

  • Matt_24

    This cue hurts my eyes.

    The design of the royal characters so carefully scrimshawed into the ivory is boring and cliche’. The execution of the scrimshaw work itself is average. Not bad, mind you – but not superb. I sometimes wonder if some of these scrimshaw artists have ever tried to just stiple the designs on paper with a pen first before going to the ivory. I have no choice but to give it a 10 in complexity of design and execution – but it does NOTHING for me. Yet, because of the clean execution and complexity of the design I must classify it as a monster.

  • franko

    A lot of Ivory, a lot of work, but this cue does not grab my attention at all.I agree almost word for word what Dick Abbott wrote abt.this cue.A cue maker has to know when enough is enough, sometimes less is more this is one of those times.

Leave a Reply