That is a lovely example of this sword type, but the Hallstatt culture starts at 800 BC and belongs to the Early Iron Age, not the Bronze Age.
Although I can almost certainly guess what happened here, because the naming system gets really, really confusing during these time periods. See, the problem is that when the Hallstatt period was first defined (by Paul Reinecke), he actually saw a connection between the latest stages of the Bronze Age and the early stages of the Iron Age (aka the Hallstatt culture - not period!), so he decided to start his Hallstatt *period* at around 1200 BC (Ha A).
Unfortunately, there is this pesky Bronze Age/Iron Age divide in the middle of this period, right at the beginning of Ha C, and that does actually come with a number of cultural changes, too, partially prompted by to the collapse of long distance trading, which lead to less cultural uniformity. (This has less to do with the BA collapse in the Eastern Mediterranean and more with the fact that you can find iron in a lot of places, while the components of bronze - copper and tin - were usually mined separately, hence trade was a necessity). So subsequent scholarship has not followed Reineckes logic at all there.
But you also can't change a model like that easily, once it is established. Which is why we are stuck with a system in which the first stages of the Hallstatt period (Ha A and B) actually cover the Late Bronze Age Urnfield culture, and the actual eponymous Hallstatt culture is restricted to the phases of Ha C and D. So while these swords date to the Hallstatt period as originally defined - Ha B, to be precise, according to the dates given by op - they do not belong to the Hallstatt culture.
To make matters more confusing in German, we also distinguish between Hallstatt period (Reinecke's system as outlined above) and Hallstatt time (the Early Iron Age, and the time of the Hallstatt culture).
