Hello All, I know I don't post too often here. Things being what they are in my mind,
I hope to change that a lil bit. B-)

Having taken a bit of a hiatus from acquiring new swords, I've finally purchased
another Albion blade -- with gift-certificates given by friends helping to pave the
way !

Let me say, no secret here as to what helped me choose The Templar. I look into
the Reviews time and time again when becoming interested in a sword, and the
one done by Chad Arnow contributed to my decision. It was a tough choice between
The Reeve, which I'd seen written about by Patrick Kelly ...

Here's a closer look at the grip. While Chad Arnow's review hinted at the
unforgiving performance-factor of The Templar, I'll add that its size and
weight give it something of a " crow-bar " like feeling in my hand. And I
don't say this in a bad-way ...

Looking at The Templar you see, which CA also suggested, an elegant
simplicity -- kinda reminds me of my Albion Duke. But the heft is very
apparent when you take it up. Almost daunting, if you follow me. As
though, given a choice, a warrior might put The Templar down and take
up another blade; not realizing what he is passing up ...

Hi Matthew,

Nice to read about another owner of the Templar. It is a fine sword and the deep fuller and relatively tittle taper give it a noble look. I really like the blade cross-section as it has a more 3d sense than most cut oriented swords.

I must say that I may disagree about the handling, though it may just be the way I am reading your post- I think the Templar nice dynamic handling for a sword oriented to the cut- I prefer it's handling to my Norman which has a bit more of a tip heaviness. My preference is simpy personal. I would like to get the chance to cut with it. I think you made the right choice versus the Reeve- which I also own. THe Reeve is a really great sword but is more "specific" historically. Now that you have the more archtypical Templar you can move towards the Reeve which I do reccommend.
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy ...

Thankyou for your comments, and I have to excuse myself with regards to handling --
I do not practice cutting targets, but do handle and try to get a feel for the sword. I am
a big fan of " blade presence " -- and this characteristic, to me, can make itself felt in
different ways. Sometimes its sheer size, sometimes the way it tapers, sometimes
how the weight feels distributed. I'll sight CA's review where he writes -- " this sword
feels very solid in the hand, as if it would be the consummate shield-cracker. " You
and CA both agree that this sword appears oriented for cutting, rather than thrusting,
and I would heartily agree. B-)

As for acquiring a Reeve, well Jeremy, I'll have to get past financing The Regent first.
Which I hope to introduce here as a new member to my collection next !

Matthew,
I'm glad the review was helpful. That's always the goal. :)

The Templar was an interesting sword. I'd love to get the chance to play with one again.

Hm.....


Well I guess this will have to be the first albion I order!

I have fallen in love with the Templar simply because of it wonderfully simple and subtly beautiful design. It will take a while for me to get $700 though :\


Ah well, Kudos for getting it, certainly a well spent lump of money if I'm not mistaken :D

(BTW: this is my first post on myArmoury!)

I have a question for anyone who owns one of these.

I picked one up recently (and quite like it), but I'm curious about one thing. The Albion site & catelog, and the myArmoury review from 2004, say the blade is over 34.5 inches, whereas Kult of Athena says its just under 33.5. My blade is consistent with the second measurement (33 1/3). Is it possible that Albion changed the blade at some point and didn't update their catelog?

I realize this is a pretty trivial question, I'm just curious.

JD-

I bought mine back in 2006. The blade length is 33.5 inches. If the blade length was changed, it must have been done early...

-Tim

I'll check mine out and get back. I need to find a measuring tape though. . . (looking around)

I have noticed that Howie tends to use an existing sword page as a template for a new page (a couple pages have had wrong model names, etc. from time to time as a result). It is quite possible that the page for the templar contains info for another sword and that that particular detail did not get caught.

-Greyson

Good question on the length. It's possible they've redesigned/tweaked it. They've done that on other models, though I'm not aware of many )any?) where the blade length changed appreciably. It's also possible I was sent a prototype for review rather than a production version and there could have been subtle differences between them.

In short, I don't know. :)

It's often best in these situations to simply ask the maker if you're not sure. They should be the best source of info on their current product lineup. :)

Hi!

The Templar has not been subject of any shortening of the blade as far as I can remember.
It is one of the very early models, but I can´t recall that being the case.

It simply be a miswriting in the blade description.

Thanks for bringing it up.
:)

Thanks Peter, I'd say that's a definitive answer. Also, as someone else pointed out before, its really a more slender and elegant looking weapon than the artistic depiction on Albion's web site (the photos are more accurate of course).

By the way, with its Xa blade, H pommel, and type 5 cross, I wouldn't be surprised to see a sword like this amongst Leppaaho's late 11th century grave finds. Of course they might have been made/used for another 100 years, so one could easily imagine swords like this in the hands of the first wave of military monks.

I have two sets measurements taken from two different examples of the Albion Templar sword.

Chad Arnow, the author of our hands-on review, took measurements in 2004 and has the blade blade length at "34.6 inches"

My own measurements, taken in 2005, have it recorded at "34.375 inches"

Hmmmm... then something still doesn't quite add up. Sounds like something changed between 2005 and 2006.

In some cases the seating of the blade in the guard may be of slightly different depth. The waxes are all made and finished by hand before being sent to the foundry. Then each casting is finished by hand and fitted to the blade.
Each blade is ground by hand after the blank is milled. In each step there are margins of slight variation.

Contrary to popular image, these swords are not machine made. They are mostly made by hand, with only some steps having "standardized" parts. But even among these standardized parts there can be variations, that demand individual tweaking and fitting. That is why the craftsman building the sword has to be knowledgeable and skilled at his/her work.

Even with this, swords tend to fit pre made scabbards with very good precision.

That you have differing measurements could be a case where the odd outer ends of the variable spectrum has been measured and published.

Don´t know what the case is here. Just wanted to provide a perspective.