[Jeffrey Faulk]

Gripping the pommel is one of those hotly contested HEMA topics. I think it's obvious there's more leverage and thus hitting power if you do so (depending on the position of the leading hand), but on the other hand, for less experienced HEMAists there may be control issues with your hands that far apart.

It's all a matter of experience, practice, and not getting locked into one mindset above another. If gripping the pommel lets you win a fight, then by all means do so, unless it's specifically forbidden in the rules you're playing by.

On the issue of practice swords: Plastic (as in PVC? it's a hard white plastic like cutting boards) wasters are becoming increasingly popular and the pricing is fairly competitive compared to steel feders.

There are also a number of European smiths who are happy to do blunt steel versions of almost any sword, often for fairly reasonable prices. The shipping is what will hurt there, though...

[Hector A.]

[Craig Peters]

[Craig Peters]

As a side note, I would also say that the larger and longer your steel sword is, the more appropriate it is to space your hands apart. Sword size is a factor in determining how to place your hands.

[Peter Johnsson]

If you look at swords of the period that the Steward belongs to stylistically, you se *many* swords of exactly this size, with grips of this dimension.
It is almost a modern obsession that sword grips must be roomy. It might follow from our idea of a comfortable life: XXXL cars, XXXL servings and XXXL grips on swords.

All discussion today wether a grip is too short or not functional must be seen in context. It worked back then and swords of this size are common enough for us to take the trouble to give them a closer look. Perhaps we will even learn something new in the process?
If you want to study what historical swordsmanship is all about, it would seem that it is a good idea to use swords that are similar to the ones used in the period you are interested in?

Surely there were swords that were bigger. Such swords are currently represented by the Baron, the Duke and the Archduke.
But if you want a representative of those swords that are large enough to be classified as war sword, that are on the smaller end of the scale, then the Steward might be a good choice.

The Albion NG swords express typical design features of period swords of specific types.
That is the central idea behind this line of swords.
This affords contemporary swordsmen to learn by direct experience and to evaluate the validity of their interpretations of ancient fighting styles.

[Craig Peters]

I would like to second what Peter says about great swords with shorter grips, from the perspective of manuscript illustrations. If you look for images of great swords with longer grips in 13th and 14th century images, you'll find nearly none. Those images showing great swords almost invariably show them with grips only just long enough to facilitate the use of two hands. Great swords with short grips are just as representative of long swords of this period as those with more massive grips. If, as Peter says, we are interested in historical accuracy that must include swords whose grips are outside of our modern notion of what a great sword grip should be like.

There were undoubtedly medieval warriors with large hands who wielded great swords that had shorter grips. That they would have had to do so argues in support of the idea that there must have been a way to comfortably grip the sword. Gripping the pommel with the left hand is certainly one possibility; holding both hands closely placed together on the grip is another.