[Jonathan Harton]

Alright fellers,

I'm stuck, dead stuck. I want one of these beautiful blades, but I can't make up my mind which.
Anyone who owns either of these, PLEASE HELP ME!!!! Both have amazing qualities, I just can't decide.
This is going to be used for conquest era and Crusader reenacting as well as flourish training and test cutting.
With my short statue (5'4) and not so glaringly strong self, I need a blade that is aglie while not too long nor too blade heavy. Both swords seem to fit the bill.
Ya'll just throw whatever pointers ya'll can and help me out of this endless madness of stairing at pictures online for hours! You guys at Albion are cruel with these things, man.

[Jeremy V. Krause]

Well Jonathan I will attempt to provide what help I may,

I own the Reeve in a red grip and like it very much indeed. It is a real contrast to my Norman and Templar, and to the Gaddhjalt I have handled yet do not own. All of these blades are contemporary but very individual. the Reene is by far the most "handy," in that it does have a bit less blade pressence.

I say go for the Reeve because the brazil nut pommel was so popular during this period and disc pommels, though cool, are really a dime a dozen on the reproduction market- not to take anything away from the Bayeaux which is a cool and classic design. The Reeve, I think, commands more attention- more time to examine and consider the shape of it's pommel.

I just think that the brazil nut pommel makes the sword more individual. This, though, may depend on what swords you own already. The only issue with the Reeve which is really a non-issue is having to get used to striking with the sword. I find dealing with the whole hammer grip/handshake grip and somewhat "pointy" pommel to be educational and a little annoying as it can be something to get used to as I find that the side of the pommel can sort of jam into the heel of my hand/wrist area in a strike.

That said both a re great swords and you would love either so don't give yourself a headache!


Jeremy

[Patrick Kelly]

Obviously I prefer the Reeve since I bought that one.

I find the Type X blade combined with the brazil-nut pommel to be one of the classic designs of the 11th century era. I love a good wheel pommel but the type saw a much broader range of use than the brazil-nut. Consequently, the Reeve is the one to get if you're going for a conquest era impression IMHO.

[Aaron Schnatterly]

On a performance basis, both are really great swords - handled them side by side last week. They are different, but either would be handy for you. From this aspect, I'll be completely useless to you and say 50/50, flip a coin.

From an aesthetic point of view, I prefer the Reeve. Both pieces are rather understated, but that Brazil nut pommel is fascinating in how complex the geometry really is... I couldn't resist that alone, and now I, too, own it.

[Roger Hooper]

I'm a Reeve owner too, and I say go with the Reeve. You will find the plain type G pommel on swords from 900 to 1500, but the brazil nut was used over a much smaller period of time. There are fewer replica swords on the market with this pommel type, and the Reeve's is IMO the best carved that I've seen.

Now that Aaron owns one, at least 5 Reeves have been sold -- we are 1/20th towards the 100 sword ceiling for this model.

[Jonathan Harton]

I have smaller hands than I'll bet most of you at least, so I'm not worried about a cramped grip. However, how do the rest of you feel about the pommel getting in the way when striking on the Reeve? This is one major point I am considering b/t the two and would just like to hear what ya'll think.

[Patrick Kelly]

[C.L. Miller]

I'm another satisfied Reeve owner, but I'm actually going to recommend you purchase the Bayeux for a Norman/Crusader kit. The wheel pommel was an extremely common design during this period and one which seems to have remained in service, in greater numbers, for a longer period than the Type A brazil nut. My own interest in the Reeve was sparked by the prominent appearance of swords of this type in the Gospel of Otto III (circa 997 CE) and the Bamberger Apokalypse (circa 1000 CE). Either sword would serve you well, and would be historically accurate, but I feel (and I may be wrong about this) that the Reeve has an earlier period look/feel to it and that if you're hoping to have this sword do double duty in a conquest era kit and a (slightly) later crusader kit the Bayeux may be somewhat more representative. Plus, you can always point to the Bayeux tapestry itself and show off the representations of Norman swords just like yours.
On top of that, everyone else here already has a Reeve, we need some balance.

[C.L. Miller]

[Aaron Schnatterly]

I have yet to cut with my Reeve, but in dry handling, I found no issues with interferance. If it feels odd at first, work with training your hand/wrist to move appropriately. As Patrick mentioned, it's an historical design that was repeatedly used, so it's not an oddity that was tried once and abandoned...

Don't know how many Reeves have shipped, but it's not in danger of going out of production in the immediate future...

[Patrick Kelly]

You may want to consider the Senlac as well. That one has me really intrigued. It looks like it's straight out of the Bayeux Tapestry and would fit well in a slightly later 1st crusade kit. If Albion had introduced that one before the Reeve I may have gone with it instead, I don't know.

[Aaron Schnatterly]