II made this post in order to gather photos and specs (mostly blade width at base) of traditional swords that feature an estoc-esque blade, (most seem to be XVa with ridges).
[ Linked Image ]
Hand-and-a-Half Sword, Italy, circa 1560. Ridge on both sides.
Overall length: 42.13" (107 cm); Blade length: 31.5" (80 cm); Approximate blade width at base: 4.5" (11.5 cm)
Provenance: Collection Conan Doyle, Galerie Jürg Stuker, Bern, December 1974 Los 369th. Copyright © Hermann Historica Auction House
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=965654516813632&set=a.761188147260271
Opinion: I dont know about thrusts, but the blade seems thin, the ridge was apparently intended to give structural rigidity.
--------
[ Linked Image ]
Bearing Sword of Dublin, dated c. 1390`s (re-gilded twice in the 17th century).
Overall length: 1387mm. Blade length: 1094mm. Blade Width: 68mm. Crossguard Width: 426mm.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25516042
Blair claims it was not originally intended to be simply a cerimonial sword. Although the sword seems to have been more substancional when he measured it (1988), he noted that stuff like sharpening and edge damaged cause the removal of part of the blade material.
------
[ Linked Image ]
Longsword-Estoc of MET Museum (Accession Number: 08.261.8), dated c. 1525. German or Swiss
Overall length: 48 1/4 in. (1225 mm). Blade length: 39 1/4 in. (996 mm). Blade Width: 28.56 ~ 28,75mm (see note). Crossguard Width: 7 1/4 in. (18.4 cm); Weight. 3 lb. 2 oz. (1417.5 g)
Note: MET doesnt give blade width, so I made a calculus through the photo using blade and guard as reference, with a minimal margin of error. Most actual estocs have a blade width of an inch (25.3cm), so this is slightly above them.
-------
[ Linked Image ]
https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/my/collections/3926533--thetumz/armory/objecten#/NG-141,3
Two Handed Sword-Estoc at Rijksmuseum (141.3), dated c.1500-1550.
Overall length: 1248mm. Blade length: 979mm. Blade Width: 35mm. Crossguard Width: 285mm. Handle (including pommel and guard): 287mm.
Note: the museum doesn't specific which measure belongs to what, but the blade length and width came together so there's no error on that
-------
EXTRA: I estimated the rapier-hilted estoc blade at MET, finding a blade length of 2.795cm (or 27.95mm), so it`s likely that the rest of the blade behaves like a normal estoc.[/url]
Swords with medial ridges or 'hollow ground' cross-sections go back to the Bronze Age in Europe, but the first sword is so broad that I doubt it is stiff enough to push through difficult targets. I like the idea of looking at estocs alongside blades like the 'sword of Henry V' but not all of these blades will be equally stiff.
| Sean Manning wrote: |
| Swords with medial ridges or 'hollow ground' cross-sections go back to the Bronze Age in Europe, but the first sword is so broad that I doubt it is stiff enough to push through difficult targets. I like the idea of looking at estocs alongside blades like the 'sword of Henry V' but not all of these blades will be equally stiff. |
I remembered the Bronze Age ridges about the time you posted this comment, which is also a reminder of how some medieval solutions, even without a continuous transmission, was done by people from way older times: just as some Roman Spathae and Gladii had flat diamond sections, fullers, and other things; or how the Lindholmgard Iron Age Sword, from Denmark, was pointless because it was intended as a cavalry slashing sword (this was done extensively by Arabs and Turks, as you can also see in Skanderbeg sword).
It saddens me that most Henry V sword's reproductions don't use the ridge, though I think this is hardly done in the nowadays market (Carlos Cordeiro is the only one I remember doing it, and when he showed me one of his ridge blades I remember saying it how ugly it was haha).
But what you generally see in those Oakeshott Typology swords with ridges is that they always have thin blades (I mean when the idea is to have a whole medial ridge instead of an exotic fuller). This arrangement would provide enough stiffness to keep the potent slicing blade doing it's cutting job, though the piercing, as you said, depends on the rest of the geometry. Due to how short Henry sword is (reproductions do blades 69-70cm long and 5-5.5cm wide) I think it would be amazing at both functions.
By the way, considering Dublin and Henry V's swords, doesn't this indicate these swords were generally made for high nobility buyers?
I hardly believe, though, that these "pseudo-estocs" would have a long life of service: thinner edges would be damaged quicker, as it happened to the Dublin sword posted earlier.
Keeping the series, I remembered a pair from Livrustkammaren in Stockholm, Sweden
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
Gustav II Adolph's sword, 1652. Livrustkammaren, Sweden (AM.060041)(LK 2047).
Ridge on both sides, a tall over a flat on one side, a modest ridge turning into a shy flat diamond section on the other.
Overall Length: 910mm; Blade Length 1120mm (112cm); Blade Width 53mm; Weight: 1250g
Note: all info given here: https://digitaltmuseum.se/011024415885/varja
I particularly doubt the max blade width be 5.3cm, as the museum once gave this King's war rapier the width of 2.7cm (while it should be some 3.5cm) but not specifying it was the ricasso width.
-----
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
Gustav I's longsword/estoc, 1550. Livrustkammaren, Sweden (10972_LRK). Square section blade (thick diamond)
Overall Length: 1252mm; Blade Length 1019mm (101,9cm); Blade Width 31mm; Weight: 1500g
https://samlingar.shm.se/object/8A9DE47A-C65B-4289-A0FA-E0ED4264B207
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
Gustav II Adolph's sword, 1652. Livrustkammaren, Sweden (AM.060041)(LK 2047).
Ridge on both sides, a tall over a flat on one side, a modest ridge turning into a shy flat diamond section on the other.
Overall Length: 910mm; Blade Length 1120mm (112cm); Blade Width 53mm; Weight: 1250g
Note: all info given here: https://digitaltmuseum.se/011024415885/varja
I particularly doubt the max blade width be 5.3cm, as the museum once gave this King's war rapier the width of 2.7cm (while it should be some 3.5cm) but not specifying it was the ricasso width.
-----
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
Gustav I's longsword/estoc, 1550. Livrustkammaren, Sweden (10972_LRK). Square section blade (thick diamond)
Overall Length: 1252mm; Blade Length 1019mm (101,9cm); Blade Width 31mm; Weight: 1500g
https://samlingar.shm.se/object/8A9DE47A-C65B-4289-A0FA-E0ED4264B207
| Pedro Paulo Gaião wrote: |
| Keeping the series, I remembered a pair from Livrustkammaren in Stockholm, Sweden
Note: all info given here: https://digitaltmuseum.se/011024415885/varja I particularly doubt the max blade width be 5.3cm, as the museum once gave this King's war rapier the width of 2.7cm (while it should be some 3.5cm) but not specifying it was the ricasso width. |
When I measured the photo of Gustavus Adolphus' sword with GNU Image Manipulation Program, the blade width: overall length ratio is 51 : 1091, so if the sword has an overall length of 112 cm, the blade would be 5.2 cm wide where it meets the shells of the guard.
I think this cross-section is not in Daniel Parry's typology, so possibly its more common for broad swords and estocs than narrower blades with rapier hilts?
Olympia Auctions is selling a long Spanish-style rapier with a + shaped cross section in the debole https://www.olympiaauctions.com/auction/lot/lot-158---a-fine-cup-hilt-rapier-circa-1640-brescian-or-spanish/?lot=44925&so=0&st=&sto=0&au=129&ef=&et=&ic=False&sd=1&pp=96&pn=2&g=1 Stamps on the blade suggest that it is by a Pedro de Lezama of Toledo and Seville.
Closeups in a YouTube video by Matt 'scholagladiatoria' Easton https://yewtu.be/watch?v=vn2XkN3BK3Q
Closeups in a YouTube video by Matt 'scholagladiatoria' Easton https://yewtu.be/watch?v=vn2XkN3BK3Q
Matt Easton has some videos on nineteenth-century European sabres with a ridge (period name: pipe-back) such as "Pipe-Back Blades: Where and Why did they Originate?" https://yewtu.be/watch?v=aK34V1P07bs
I think blades like this would be annoying to polish, so that would have raised the price. Easton has seen 19th-century sources which complain that you can't trust troopers with a blade like this and we know that people today are prone to chipping extremely wide thin-spined blade like an Oakeshott type XVIIIc sword.
I think blades like this would be annoying to polish, so that would have raised the price. Easton has seen 19th-century sources which complain that you can't trust troopers with a blade like this and we know that people today are prone to chipping extremely wide thin-spined blade like an Oakeshott type XVIIIc sword.
Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum