[Scott Woodruff]

The first was beautiful, but I agree that the second version is much nicer. I know what you mean about having a sword in hand and learning that just a few minor changes are necessary in order to be fully satisfied. I recently felt that I had to overhaul my only long one-hander, by increasing the profie taper and making the point more acute. Many re-creactions of this class of sword have rather blunt points compared to the acute, rather delicate points of the originals. Congratulations on having a really top-notch sword, it really seems as close to perfect as one can get now.

Mart, I don't know if mail mufflers might have had an influence on grip length or not. I have found that short grips with long upper guards or angular pommels like many Migration Era and Viking Age swords work very well with gloves or naalbound mittens, but there is a great difference between those and the later swords like J.D.'s. I very much agree with what J.D. said about the shift from using the upper guard for leverage to using a pommel with a more rounded contact surface purely for it's effect on mass distribution. Even very thick naalbound mittens do not make me feel like I need a longer grip, but I don't know how relevant that is to mail mufflers. When wearing a mail muffler, none of the rings come between hand and grip, so it would not be much different than wearing a mitten, right?

[Craig Johnson]

Hi Scott

I suspect that if the grip was adjusted for a mail mitten the adjustment would be to make the grip narrower. Length would not need to be adjusted much but you would definitely want to reduce the surface to compensate for the increase around your hand due to the mittens. This "may" be one aspect of narrow grips from the time period where mail mufflers where worn.

Grip dimension on swords is something a lot of folks over look in its importance and effect on the handling of a sword. In many cases that modern customer is looking for a grip that is oversized, though this has changed quite a bit over the last decade.

Best
Craig

[J.D. Crawford]

[Craig Johnson]

Its kind of like asking which one of your kids do you like better?

Its a tough call they both had attributes I liked and they are still in close proximity in overall style. I might lean towards the 2.0 version but probably more as I just had it in hand and it felt good

Best
Craig

[Victor R.]

I'll first admit that I haven't spent a significant amount of time researching the XIIIth century to this point; however, based upon what I've seen, to me, the profile taper of version 1.0 matched with the hilting/grip length of 2.0 would be my personal sweet spot to represent this particular style of sword during the period. It may be a play on the perspective or the light, but, well, v2.0 just seems "too pointy" (that's a technical term) to my eye.

Both are terrific works by the craftsmen at A&A, but my aesthetic leans more to v1.0 with a slightly shortened grip. Then again, if someone presented me with either version, I'd be honored to have it!

[J.D. Crawford]