Albion MKII (squire line)
Aug 24, 2015 20:09:18 GMT
Post by Iradei on Aug 24, 2015 20:09:18 GMT
The late 13th century Great Sword - MKII
Introduction
To the best of my knowledge the second version of Albion’s late 13th century Great Sword has thus far never been reviewed here, or anywhere else on the internet. To make matters worse, nor is there much information to be found regarding this particular model, which, you would admit, is quite a shame. Well, I guess it is all the more reason for me to acquire it and share my insights !
Despite my inborn yearning to hew things to pieces, I simply cannot bring myself to take my next generation swords out of my shrine for a cutting session. It seems too much of a sin to cut with such gorgeous masterpieces. How could someone live with this without falling into the bottomless pit of remorse ? Hence the need for a less attractive sword which won’t give me unbearable pangs and qualms each time the blade goes through the target. And, less attractive it is ! Or at least so I thought when I first laid eyes on it.
Even though this sword is obviously very much akin to the Albion Baron – in retrospect it is the Baron, only in its cruder form – I originally purchased it as an alternative for the Steward (already reviewed here), so that I should keep the said Steward in mint condition and use the MKII to practice with.
I therefore expected to receive something of similar size, weight and balance as my Steward, which clearly, had I looked at the dimensions on the Albion site beforehand, I might have known it would not be the case. Only after opening the box did it dawn on me how massive the sword really is. Needless to say that I did not quite get what I expected…
Well ! Lesson learnt : never blindly or solely rely on pictures when buying a sword !
Be that as it may, given that the Steward it is the only sword I have to compare it with, I shall strive provide you with a comparative review. I figured it could always be interesting to see the difference between the two swords in so far as they do share common features, both in their general design as well as in their history since both were in use at the same time.
Disclosure
Now for the part you’re all dying to read : I have no affiliation whatsoever with Albion. I purchased the reviewed sword directly via Albion Europe.
Hang on ! That’s not true. Actually I am biased to the bone given that Albion gave me this sword for free so I could review it and talk people into buying it. What’s more, I usually have a hard time writing anything objective. Nevertheless I hope you’ll find the reading of this review worthwhile, thank you.
Can’t we honestly dispense with this part once and for all ?
Now let’s get to the nuts and bolts :
General overview and initial impression
As previously hinted at, the difference between the Steward and the MKII is quite overwhelming : The former is nothing short of a feather when held in one hand whereas the latter literally is a tank of a sword in two. Although it remains wieldable in one hand, it would wear its master out in a matter of minutes – all the more so if wearing armour. The MKII is indeed bulkier and, let’s say it, more suited for war and battlefields. The sheer blunt impact once the blade gains momentum is most likely the stun any opponent on its path, no matter what protection they might be wearing. The Steward on the other hand, albeit nimbler, lighter and quicker, does not quite feel like a weapon of war. It certainly looks like it due to its broad and long blade, but once held, one almost gets an impression of flimsiness, as if the blade were so light and fragile it would shatter on impact. The similitude in their general looks set aside, these two swords are therefore drastically different, in the narrower sense of the term. One might say they are as far apart as a dagger is from a gladius. But more of this in the “balance” section.
When it comes to the overall design, the least one can say is that it has quite an imposing bearing, as the following pictures can tell :
Aesthetically speaking, the whole weapon has been pared down to the essentials – no frills whatsoever to be expected. This more austere and basic shape is what clearly sets it apart from the next generation swords whose blade, pommel, guard and grip have been endowed with a more appealing look. Yet, in its nakedness, the MKII does have a charm and flair of its own. In truth, I would even go as far as to say that such bareness imparts a certain degree of elegance to this sword. It is indeed relatively neat-looking, very well-proportioned, and can boast dainty features as shall be seen below. Although there is nothing fancy the MKII can brag about, it must be highlighted that it is on no account unshapely, and no less functional or interesting for that matter.
Based on its dimensions, weight and handling properties one could easily be led to believe that this weapon straddles the line, as it were, between hand-and-a-half and two handed swords. In my opinion, whether the MKII belongs to the first category or the other highly depends on its wielder, or more specifically on his stoutness. A heavily-built man is likely to classify it as a bastard sword while someone with a more slender body is sure to use it exclusively as a two handed weapon. As far as I’m concerned, being not exactly what one could call an athlete, it remains wieldable in one hand but it is rather sluggish when handled so and does require a lot of stamina. Unless you are accustomed to extensive use with bladed-weapons, you’re bound to end up with a sore wrist after ten minute’s holding in one hand. I also found that cutting with it one-handed does not make it easy to control the sword very well, especially so when dealing with edge alignments.
It must however be stressed and emphasized that it handles by no means like crude iron bar. The fact of the matter is that its heft and mass distribution substantiate what has been previously stated; namely, that such swords were meant to be drawn out of their scabbards on battlefields to oppose fully-equipped warriors. In short, the MKII could accurately be regarded as the epitome of the so called “sword of war” – as a matter of fact even more so than the Steward.
That being said, it would indeed be melodramatic to fulminate against the Squire Line finish inasmuch as it does bestow some kind of flair upon the general weapon. The coarser, greyish patina on these two parts makes the whole weapon quite attractive to the eye; all the more so since it resembles Albion’s antique finish, which is incidentally much appreciated by a goodly number of sword enthusiasts. It must be added that notwithstanding this cruder finish (though “crude” is honestly overblown here), the pommel and guard are very decently shaped. By “decently” I mean that the concave slopes on both sides of the pommel are very nicely-done, the flat sections evenly-made and parallel to one another, the oval form well executed and so forth. In short, the finish might be considered by some to be less subtle and neat-looking than Next Generation swords, but the shapes and details are no less so.
The blades however of both the Steward and the MKII do share the exact same satin finish. Consequently, the absolute contrast between the well polished, glittering blade and the dark Gothic guard, pommel, and handle (should it be black) emphasises even more the commanding presence of the blade, and rightly so as will be seen below.
As to the fit, flawless is the word which instantly pops up in my mind. All the different parts look very tightly-assembled and the whole sword conveys a most sturdy construction when handled. The gap between the shoulders of the blade and the middle slot in the cross-guard is as slender as it should be, that is very narrow indeed; which, having encountered issues with excessively wide slots in this area, thereby resulting in a loose, rattling guard, is a detail I now pay due attention to. So everything appears to be tight and rock-solid.
The 95cm blade definitely dwarfs that of the Steward, which, in and of itself is saying something, the Steward being by no stretch of the imagination what one could call a “puny-looking sword”. Interestingly enough, though the two blades only differ by 7cm in length, one can genuinely feel the additional length of the MKII’s. By this I mean that as negligible as it might seem, this extra 7 centimeters at the tip does make a tremendous difference in terms of reach; so much so that upon taking the attached pictures, I negligently stabbed both the wall and the ceiling quite a few times.
Contrary to the Steward, the blade does not unfairly favour the cut at the expense of its thrusting potential. This point can be substantiated by two elements. For one thing, the MKII’s edges strongly taper near the end of the blade in a rather acute point, as opposed to the Steward’s tip whose shape could accurately be defined as a textbook example of what “spatulate tip” stands for. Obviously enough it makes all the difference in the world to thrust a target with a sharp point or with a spoon-shaped one. For another, the blade has been endowed with a relatively thick lenticular section. It hardly needs saying that excessive wobbliness often turns out to be an issue with such flat-sectioned blades. None the less, this is something the MKII definitely does not suffer from. Contrariwise, the Steward could arguably be criticized for being too flexible, which, I infer might also be a slight disadvantage when cutting. Though it is not overly flexible, it is unequivocally more so than the MKII. Aside from the additional weight it gives to the blade – which can only be beneficial to the cut – this fleshier lenticular section bestows considerable stiffness upon the blade, thereby enhancing its effectiveness both in the cut and in the thrust.
This has led me to believe that the types XIIa and XVI, though utterly different in shape, share much closer bonds than might me expected at first glance. Should we consider the MKII from a functional standpoint, its blade would indeed turn out to be quite reminiscent of the Albion Crecy’s; often held as the very archetype of the “transitional sword”. Meant to defeat padded clothing, potentially protected by plate armour, the Crecy could indeed be qualified as a versatile sword : versatile in that it was effective against various kinds of protections, but also to the extent that it can cut more or less as decently as it can thrust. With regards to the latter part, I can assuredly say that there is no reason type XIIa blades could have envied their type XVI descendants. Even though the MKII’s sharply-tapering point is likely to glance off any kind of the later period armours, it would indeed make short work of leather clothing and stuffed gambesons. As to its cutting power, a mere look at this broad, flat, heavy blade is more than enough to deduce it would fare as well as – if not better than – the Cecy against cutting targets. To sum it all up, let’s just say that both swords could effectively be used either for stabbing or slashing.
Balance
“The exquisite balance stunningly belies its weight”
Alas, I’m afraid it would be a bit farfetched for me to say so. Not that it is poorly balanced, far from it, but I can tell you I was genuinely puzzled by is bulkiness upon opening the box; all the more so since I am used to lighter swords and, as said above, was expecting something similar to the Steward in terms of handling properties.Based on its dimensions, weight and handling properties one could easily be led to believe that this weapon straddles the line, as it were, between hand-and-a-half and two handed swords. In my opinion, whether the MKII belongs to the first category or the other highly depends on its wielder, or more specifically on his stoutness. A heavily-built man is likely to classify it as a bastard sword while someone with a more slender body is sure to use it exclusively as a two handed weapon. As far as I’m concerned, being not exactly what one could call an athlete, it remains wieldable in one hand but it is rather sluggish when handled so and does require a lot of stamina. Unless you are accustomed to extensive use with bladed-weapons, you’re bound to end up with a sore wrist after ten minute’s holding in one hand. I also found that cutting with it one-handed does not make it easy to control the sword very well, especially so when dealing with edge alignments.
It must however be stressed and emphasized that it handles by no means like crude iron bar. The fact of the matter is that its heft and mass distribution substantiate what has been previously stated; namely, that such swords were meant to be drawn out of their scabbards on battlefields to oppose fully-equipped warriors. In short, the MKII could accurately be regarded as the epitome of the so called “sword of war” – as a matter of fact even more so than the Steward.
Fit and finish
Here lies the primary difference between Albion’s high end Next Generation line and their more affordable swords labeled under the Squire line seal. Obviously enough, the first thing to be noticed is that the smoothness and lustre of the pommels and cross-guards in the former category cannot compare with that of the latter, the latter being nowhere near as “shiny-looking” as the former.That being said, it would indeed be melodramatic to fulminate against the Squire Line finish inasmuch as it does bestow some kind of flair upon the general weapon. The coarser, greyish patina on these two parts makes the whole weapon quite attractive to the eye; all the more so since it resembles Albion’s antique finish, which is incidentally much appreciated by a goodly number of sword enthusiasts. It must be added that notwithstanding this cruder finish (though “crude” is honestly overblown here), the pommel and guard are very decently shaped. By “decently” I mean that the concave slopes on both sides of the pommel are very nicely-done, the flat sections evenly-made and parallel to one another, the oval form well executed and so forth. In short, the finish might be considered by some to be less subtle and neat-looking than Next Generation swords, but the shapes and details are no less so.
The blades however of both the Steward and the MKII do share the exact same satin finish. Consequently, the absolute contrast between the well polished, glittering blade and the dark Gothic guard, pommel, and handle (should it be black) emphasises even more the commanding presence of the blade, and rightly so as will be seen below.
As to the fit, flawless is the word which instantly pops up in my mind. All the different parts look very tightly-assembled and the whole sword conveys a most sturdy construction when handled. The gap between the shoulders of the blade and the middle slot in the cross-guard is as slender as it should be, that is very narrow indeed; which, having encountered issues with excessively wide slots in this area, thereby resulting in a loose, rattling guard, is a detail I now pay due attention to. So everything appears to be tight and rock-solid.
The blade
Undoubtedly the most impressive part of the sword : its breadth, length and overall shape make for an altogether awe-inspiring weapon. In a battle or melee, the sheer charisma inherent to this blade is likely to keep a goodly number of opponents at bay. You certainly do not want to mess with a guy wielding such a beast !The 95cm blade definitely dwarfs that of the Steward, which, in and of itself is saying something, the Steward being by no stretch of the imagination what one could call a “puny-looking sword”. Interestingly enough, though the two blades only differ by 7cm in length, one can genuinely feel the additional length of the MKII’s. By this I mean that as negligible as it might seem, this extra 7 centimeters at the tip does make a tremendous difference in terms of reach; so much so that upon taking the attached pictures, I negligently stabbed both the wall and the ceiling quite a few times.
Contrary to the Steward, the blade does not unfairly favour the cut at the expense of its thrusting potential. This point can be substantiated by two elements. For one thing, the MKII’s edges strongly taper near the end of the blade in a rather acute point, as opposed to the Steward’s tip whose shape could accurately be defined as a textbook example of what “spatulate tip” stands for. Obviously enough it makes all the difference in the world to thrust a target with a sharp point or with a spoon-shaped one. For another, the blade has been endowed with a relatively thick lenticular section. It hardly needs saying that excessive wobbliness often turns out to be an issue with such flat-sectioned blades. None the less, this is something the MKII definitely does not suffer from. Contrariwise, the Steward could arguably be criticized for being too flexible, which, I infer might also be a slight disadvantage when cutting. Though it is not overly flexible, it is unequivocally more so than the MKII. Aside from the additional weight it gives to the blade – which can only be beneficial to the cut – this fleshier lenticular section bestows considerable stiffness upon the blade, thereby enhancing its effectiveness both in the cut and in the thrust.
This has led me to believe that the types XIIa and XVI, though utterly different in shape, share much closer bonds than might me expected at first glance. Should we consider the MKII from a functional standpoint, its blade would indeed turn out to be quite reminiscent of the Albion Crecy’s; often held as the very archetype of the “transitional sword”. Meant to defeat padded clothing, potentially protected by plate armour, the Crecy could indeed be qualified as a versatile sword : versatile in that it was effective against various kinds of protections, but also to the extent that it can cut more or less as decently as it can thrust. With regards to the latter part, I can assuredly say that there is no reason type XIIa blades could have envied their type XVI descendants. Even though the MKII’s sharply-tapering point is likely to glance off any kind of the later period armours, it would indeed make short work of leather clothing and stuffed gambesons. As to its cutting power, a mere look at this broad, flat, heavy blade is more than enough to deduce it would fare as well as – if not better than – the Cecy against cutting targets. To sum it all up, let’s just say that both swords could effectively be used either for stabbing or slashing.
Then again, judging by the characteristics of type XVI swords ( the mid-ridge on the last segment of the blade and the edges meeting in a virtually needle-sharp tip ) one cannot help but say the Crecy seems to have a slight tilt, as it were, towards the thrust; and normal that it should given the increasing development of plate armour at the time. Conversely, the MKII and all its type XIIa contemporaries being broader in the last section of the blade and relatively thinner, appear to be more cut orientated swords.
If we were to delve into the details, I would therefore say that although both the MKII and the Crecy are very good “do-it-all-swords”, the latter slightly favours the thrust over the cut while it tends to be the other way round with the earlier XIIa brotherhood.
Like the Steward, this sword does have some degree of distal taper. Despite the fact that it is not very acute – and understandably so due to the thinness at the base of the blade – it does help to make it feel livelier in the hand.
By and large I am truly fond of the simple aesthetics of the MKII’s blade : broad at the base and sharply arched at the tip with a gorgeous satin finish to enhance the visual aspect… Merely exquisite ! When stoutness is mingled with grace and elegance, the result is indeed bound to be stupendous.
Yet, for all these worthy qualities, I did find a most troublesome issue, or, should I say something the blade direly wants, namely : Fullers. A Deep fuller flanked by two sharp ridges on each side of the blade is something I very much value in such early period swords.
Nevertheless both fullers on this sword are sorely lacking depth and width. Notwithstanding the blade’s tremendous broadness at the point where it shoots from the cross-guard, the fullers in its center are indeed exceedingly narrow and shallow. It really looks as though they were added as a mere means to tell the buyer “hey ! This sword has two fullers” since, functionally speaking, neither do they strengthen the blade in the least, and nor do they have the slightest impact on its weight. “Better have superficial fullers than none” you might say. True enough ! It must indeed be pointed out that without these the blade would look quite bland. However that may be, I just wish they were at least deeper; even more so as a lencticular-sectioned blade is already dull enough as it is.
The sharpness
I am well aware that it would make a good deal of sword collectors grind their teeth to purchase so expensive a sword and get it with the degree of sharpness I received it with. Now I do not know what “butterknife sharp” really refers to but I guess the edges on this particular one were not very far from it. Both were, to say the very least, not sharp AT ALL or UTTERLY dull, whichever suits you best. So here is a notable difference between Squire line and Next Generation swords, the latter having a much – and I stress “much” – keener edge. The MKII failed both miserably and ludicrously at the paper cutting test, and I eventually decided I would not even venture to strike water bottles with it since they were more likely to be projected into outer space and hit alien vessel rather than being cut to the slightest degree.
With the light reflection you should just be able to see the bevels at stake here.
THEN AGAIN, the blade is sharpened evenly and both planes meet in two crisp edges. As a result I am sure one could to give it a very good edge in literally no time flat, which I incidentally plan on doing. It therefore is not that big of an issue for me but it might (understandably enough) bug a few people out of their wits.
As opposed to the Steward and other Next Gen swords, the blade of the MKII does have, to a certain extent, a secondary bevel – though the term “secondary bevel” seems quite overblown in this case. It is indeed worth mentioning that these secondary slopes, if I may call them so, could not possibly be said to have a sheer or steep gradient. It’s more like a smooth running slant on the last 2mm towards the edge than anything else. At this point talking of secondary bevel does not seem quite accurate in so far as it would definitely not hinder the blade in the cut or have the slightest effect on any other aspect for that matter.
Blimey ! It took me half an hour to write that sentence down and when I read it I am not even sure that I myself understand it ! Ever noticed how lame words are when it comes to describing something spatially ?
Anyway, let the good old pictures do their job :
The guard features eight smooth running planes, each flanked by two well defined ridges, thus revealing a flawlessly-executed hexagonal section.
Both quillons gently flare at the extremities as well as in the center, thereby boasting a delicate wave-like theme. This subtle contrast between the bumpy pattern running along the legth of the cross and the strict hexagonal section gives it both character and charm.
All in all, a beautifully-executed guard in its simplicity – beauty and simplicity often being two elements not so easy to unite in a sword.
That’s what should be highlighted in the description of the MKII.
Indeed, if this is not a wide pommel than I cannot conceive what could be. For the record, when I first held it in my palm and enclosed it with my fingers – or at least attempted to – I thought to myself there was no way on earth I could wield the sword properly. Being a right-hander, "properly" here means with the right hand grasping the grip close to the guard, while the left one firmly clasps the pommel.
Give or take a few centimeters, and its diameter could well be said to be in the vicinity of the breadth of a small-sized orange, or at least a tangerine of medium size. For the sake of comparison I would suggest that, from the rivet to the grip, the Steward’s pommel is three centimeters larger than a ping pong ball. I guess this poor analogy would give you a pretty accurate idea as to the difference in size between the two pommels. In case it should not, here is a rather telling picture to support my point :
Try to wrap your fingers around that !
Even though this problem could easily be circumvented by placing the left hand above the pommel (or indeed below depending on which way up you visualise a sword), it feels rather awkward to wield the it so; especially as you need all the leverage power you can possibly get to maneuver such a long blade.
It must be reminded that, in spite of their resemblance, these two pommels were actually classified differently in the Oakeshott typology : one belonging to type J and the other to type K.
Other than its general wideness, the latter is considerably flatter than the regular wheel pommel as we know it. Not only does it contribute to its general bulkiness, but indeed, it also makes it even harder to hold securely in the hand. I must confess I am not particularly fond of such pommels as they genuinely do not allow for a comfortable grip. Obviously enough, a smaller pommel would been out of tune with its general size.
Also the pommel is not circular in the true sense of the term as its diameter is slightly longer crosswise than it is lengthwise. Then again it is only a matter millimeters and to call it an oval pommel would indeed be farfetched.
With the light reflection you should just be able to see the bevels at stake here.
THEN AGAIN, the blade is sharpened evenly and both planes meet in two crisp edges. As a result I am sure one could to give it a very good edge in literally no time flat, which I incidentally plan on doing. It therefore is not that big of an issue for me but it might (understandably enough) bug a few people out of their wits.
As opposed to the Steward and other Next Gen swords, the blade of the MKII does have, to a certain extent, a secondary bevel – though the term “secondary bevel” seems quite overblown in this case. It is indeed worth mentioning that these secondary slopes, if I may call them so, could not possibly be said to have a sheer or steep gradient. It’s more like a smooth running slant on the last 2mm towards the edge than anything else. At this point talking of secondary bevel does not seem quite accurate in so far as it would definitely not hinder the blade in the cut or have the slightest effect on any other aspect for that matter.
The hilt
I figured that a terse paragraph would be good for a change… So here it is : Even though one’s eyes are instantly drawn to the MKII’s stately blade it is not so huge as to belittle the shapely hilt it is attached to. The hilt is indeed well proportioned and, considering its more basic finish, remains relatively good-looking. All in all, suffice it to say that as the MKII’s blade is massive and elegant, so is its hilt.The cross-guard
As any other part of this sword, the cross guard is larger, thicker, and longer than its equivalent in the Steward. This set aside, I can see only one slight detail by which the two differ : a cusped point protruding in the center where each of the four narrowest planes in the hexagonal section merges symmetrically with the corresponding plane on the opposite quillon; this part of the guard being rounded off in a gentle hill-shaped swell on the Steward. Blimey ! It took me half an hour to write that sentence down and when I read it I am not even sure that I myself understand it ! Ever noticed how lame words are when it comes to describing something spatially ?
Anyway, let the good old pictures do their job :
The guard features eight smooth running planes, each flanked by two well defined ridges, thus revealing a flawlessly-executed hexagonal section.
Both quillons gently flare at the extremities as well as in the center, thereby boasting a delicate wave-like theme. This subtle contrast between the bumpy pattern running along the legth of the cross and the strict hexagonal section gives it both character and charm.
All in all, a beautifully-executed guard in its simplicity – beauty and simplicity often being two elements not so easy to unite in a sword.
The pommel
(if you are to remember one part in the review, this would be it)
“Beware of the pommel !”That’s what should be highlighted in the description of the MKII.
Indeed, if this is not a wide pommel than I cannot conceive what could be. For the record, when I first held it in my palm and enclosed it with my fingers – or at least attempted to – I thought to myself there was no way on earth I could wield the sword properly. Being a right-hander, "properly" here means with the right hand grasping the grip close to the guard, while the left one firmly clasps the pommel.
Give or take a few centimeters, and its diameter could well be said to be in the vicinity of the breadth of a small-sized orange, or at least a tangerine of medium size. For the sake of comparison I would suggest that, from the rivet to the grip, the Steward’s pommel is three centimeters larger than a ping pong ball. I guess this poor analogy would give you a pretty accurate idea as to the difference in size between the two pommels. In case it should not, here is a rather telling picture to support my point :
Try to wrap your fingers around that !
Even though this problem could easily be circumvented by placing the left hand above the pommel (or indeed below depending on which way up you visualise a sword), it feels rather awkward to wield the it so; especially as you need all the leverage power you can possibly get to maneuver such a long blade.
It must be reminded that, in spite of their resemblance, these two pommels were actually classified differently in the Oakeshott typology : one belonging to type J and the other to type K.
Other than its general wideness, the latter is considerably flatter than the regular wheel pommel as we know it. Not only does it contribute to its general bulkiness, but indeed, it also makes it even harder to hold securely in the hand. I must confess I am not particularly fond of such pommels as they genuinely do not allow for a comfortable grip. Obviously enough, a smaller pommel would been out of tune with its general size.
Also the pommel is not circular in the true sense of the term as its diameter is slightly longer crosswise than it is lengthwise. Then again it is only a matter millimeters and to call it an oval pommel would indeed be farfetched.
All this to say that should God have granted you with small hands this very sword was definitely not meant for you.
Conclusion
One would be hard-pressed to find anything really worth grumbling about in this sword. Granted, it has a more austere design. But, in its simplicity it still retains a near perfect aesthetic, all the more embellished by shapely lines and balanced proportions. With regards to the hilt, both the guard and the pommel can boast rock-solid tightness and are respectively well centered on the shoulders of the blade and at the bottom of the tang. Added to this, the whole weapon is relatively well balanced in spite of its general bulk – not to mention 100% historical in design.And all this, I feel confident in saying, remains more than a match for a great many swords on the market !
Yet, it is not perfect per se in that, though it lacks nothing a sword needs to be called such, there is nothing breathtaking either. I would not go as far as to say that it looks dull but, admittedly, the plain leather wrapped handle and the shallow fuller strongly contribute to that impression.
I would therefore say this : Should you turn a blind eye on the price, this sword will not fail or disappoint you in any regards. Then again, it might not be the best alternative for your wallet. I would indeed be quite biased if I were to tell you this is the best “value for money” sword on the market. As a result, even if it will most likely, as previously said, make a fine addition to any collection I do not believe it truly lives up to its price.
I for one do not regret buying it and, the truth is I’ve grown so fond of it overtime that I am now quite loathe to use it even for practise purposes. However, if you can stand saving a little longer I strongly suggest considering the Albion Baron.
At any rate, if I should ever cut with it, I will let you guys know how it performs.
A word to the wise : small-handed knights keep your distance
There you have it ! The review of the Albion late 13th century MKII : A sword of testosterone, a Manly sword boys !