The Sword of St. Maurice of Turin

[Sir William]

I think that AA's version is much more historical, at least for the period in which it is supposed to have been made (pre 11th C) - as with all other Windlass models of late, the blade is ahistorical (note the diamond shape of the lower part of the blade near the tip below the fuller) although they do make a stab at the hilt components.  Overall it is a pretty sword...but not one I'll be adding to my collection at all.  What're your thoughts, brethren?

https://www.museumreplicas.com/p-2032-sword-of-st-maurice.aspx

[Sir Edward]

Yeah, it seems that most of the more affordable versions of famous swords tend to only approximate the appearance, and not much else.

In contrast, Albion has gone to great lengths to get the dimensions, blade geometry, weight, balance, and so on, as accurately reproduced as possible. Here's Albion's version:

http://www.albion-swords.com/swords/johnsson/sword-museum-stmaurice.htm

Granted, with Albion you'd have to pay $1725, versus $325 for the MRL version. A difference of $1400. So you could get the MRL version AND another Albion for that price.

I have to say though, this is probably the only Albion I've ever picked up that I didn't much care for. That is, it's so blade heavy and dead in the hand, that it doesn't suit my tastes at all. However, this is an accurate re-creation of the historical original, so I don't have much room to complain.

[Sir William]

I have never held the Albion one, but the Arms & Armor one is similar in vein...tip heavy, strong blade presence.  I'd call it a wrist breaker for someone such as myself...Sir Brian might have a better time of it. 

The Albion Gaddhjalt is another wristbreaker, but not as much as that Maurice sword..which has a CoB something like 9" down the blade?

[Sir Edward]

Here's what Albion posted on their site:

Specifications
Overall length: 41.38" (105 cm)
Blade length: 36.13" (91.7 cm)
Blade width (at base): 2.13" (5.4 cm)
CoG: 9" (22.86 cm)
CoP: 21.13" (53.66 cm)
Weight: 2.96 lbs (1.34 kilos)

... so uhm... Yeah. 9". Ouch!


Here's A&A's model:

http://armor.com/sword145.html

And they only posted basic stats:  Overall length: 43.3"; Blade: 37.5" x 1.75"

[Joshua Santana]

Quite interesting.  But I agree with Sir Edward, forget the MRL version.  You Sir William would be better off with either AA or Albion version.  Personally, I think it is your call.    

[Sir William]

Oh, I'm not going for either, I was just posting the MRL one because it was one of the first ones I'd seen with a stab at historical accuracy, at least from the naming of it.  After having become better acquainted with swords, I have learned that what MRL puts out isn't necessarily what I want.  Oh, they have a few pieces here and there that I do like...their Ulfbehrt and XIV swords were very well done, but they have a lot on the other end of that spectrum as well.

[Sir Wolf]

del tin makes a version that i really like. i dont much like the look of this one but to each his own. check into the del tin version1!!

[Joshua Santana]

That's right, the Del Tin version, why didn't I think about it earlier.  Yes, Sir Wolf is right, check out the Del Tin version when you can.   

[Sir William]

DT's normally come blunt, don't they?  I noticed that their was a significant price hike on DT's within the last few months or so.  I don't know if I ever held one, but I can tell you I have never felt compelled to get one either.

[Joshua Santana]

DT's normally come blunt, don't they?  I noticed that their was a significant price hike on DT's within the last few months or so.  I don't know if I ever held one, but I can tell you I have never felt compelled to get one either.

Del Tins are always blunt.     I have my eye on some Del Tin Sideswords that have caught my eye.  But that is another project in the future.   

[Das Bill]

There's some confusion here.

Albion's sword is the Turin St Maurice sword, which is from the 13th century.

The MRL and the A&A sword replicate the coronation sword of the Holy Roman Emperor, and from the 10th century (though the engraving was added two centuries later). Same saint; Different sword.

As I understand it, the Turin sword was a cavalry sword, and thus had quite a bit of blade presence for sweeping cuts from above on horseback to footsoldiers who weren't standing there parrying and riposting. When thought about in that context, it makes more sense for the balance to be what it is. The other St Maurice sword, being a coronation sword, probably wasn't designed with balance or proper handling in mind.

I suspect the A&A more closely resembles the handling characteristics of the original (just guessing, as I've never handled the original), but the MRL one probably has a more "lively" feel so as to cater to the modern market who doesn't care about how accurate it is. The MRL one looks pretty "chunky", but the price point is certainly reflective of that.

[Sir Brian]

I have never held the Albion one, but the Arms & Armor one is similar in vein...tip heavy, strong blade presence.  I'd call it a wrist breaker for someone such as myself...Sir Brian might have a better time of it.

I wouldn’t be sure of that! …especially since I’ve been trying to recuperate from a bout of chronic ‘sabre’ elbow – which is the same as tennis elbow but sounds *cooler* 

[Sir Edward]

There's some confusion here.
...
Same saint; Different sword.

Ahah! I never compared them closely. Thank you for setting it straight!

[Sir James A]

Great point, Das Bill. Gravity is the friend of the mounted warrior - unless someone is trying to pull him off his horse. Tip-heavy will help blast through whatever it's swung at when it's horse-propelled and traveling downwards.

[Sir William]

Thanks Bill...as it stands, I was thinking of the Albion version when I wrote my post, despite saying 'A&A'.  I imagine the man who would've wielded such a behemoth would be quite burly.

'Saber elbow'...I like that way better than 'tennis elbow' as I don't play tennis.  Do you, Sir Brian?