Estoc sword of type XVII ?

[Cerjak]

O.L. 127.5 cm ; blade L. 109 cm; blade width at cross 3.2cm
Passau wolf mark in one side.
Grip: made from horn (about 11 cm)
Blade: flattened hexagonal section With a Fuller running from the cross till the tip.
Pommel: Oakeshott type T
Cross guard 20.8 cm of square section
Type XVII would be the nearest type of Oakeshott who could correspond to this sword.
Période 1470-1530 ?
Any comment on it will be welcome.

Best

Cerjak

[Roland_M]

Hi Cerjak,

what a beautiful sword! I am looking since years for such a sword.

In my opinion this is a cavalry sword (in german "Reiterschwert" for "Rider sword").
An Estoc is more massive and normally with a triangular or square cross section, designed for powerful stabbing through plate armour. Or more precise, designed to find the gaps in the enemy plate armour.


Roland

[Cerjak]

Hi Roland,

Many thank for your comment.
Do you know other riding swords with similar simple cross guard ?

Best

Cerjak

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by Cerjak

Hi Roland,

Many thank for your comment.
Do you know other riding swords with similar simple cross guard ?

Best

Cerjak

Hi Cerjak,

until now i only found this sword from 1547. I am sure, that an Estoc has no groove in the middle.

Your example of the ridingsword is quite unusual.

Can you check the weight please? The ridingsword weighs around 1450-1650 Gramm. The quality and value of a ridingsword is normally much higher than an Estoc.

I can see four possibilities:
1: a riding sword
2: a very early rapier
3: a symbol of authority (like the sword below)
4: a composite piece (improbable)



Best wishes,
Roland

[Cerjak]

HI Andrea

This sword is about 1260 gr.
Also the point of balance is 10 cm from the cross.
This sword is very well balanced Cornelistromp who had it once in hands could confirm it.

Best

Cerjak

[Roland_M]

Hi Cerjak,

with a weight of 1260 Gramm, a blade length of 109 cm and the balance point you described, i would classify it as an early rapier.

The rapier is a further development of the longsword, the so called "hand and a half sword".


Roland

[Cerjak]

This sword in the metropolitan Museum has the same type of cross guard.
Of course the geometry of the blade is different but I believe that the 2 swords are from same the period and origin.
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collect...t=sword&pos=33
Any comment on it will be welcome.
Best
CERJAK

[Cerjak]

an example with same type of pommel and blade geometry said to be Circa 1490

[Foxbat]

Even though I agree with Roland that the typical estoc blade was triangular or square/diamond shape, I have seen estocs with fullers. Less common, yes.

Considering the rather long dimension, I would be inclined to put this nice sword in the same group - by application - as the more traditional estocs.

[Victrix]

I think it is a Reiterschwert with that blade length and width, and with the fuller reaching all the way down to tbe tip. The quillons and tbe pommel indicate this sword was made for fencing. Are the edges of the blade sharpened for cutting with? As far as I’m aware, estoc blades tend to be longer and thinner with very sharp and solid (fuller, if any, ends higher up the blade to increase strength) tips. They are made for thrust rather than cut. The steel had to be especially hardened for their purpose.

[Tordenskiold1721]

Its a very nice sword, Congratulations ! I agree that this sword is for use by the horse mounted carry or in German language "Reiterschwert", as some choose to use. In English, Reiterschwert = Riders sword.

The dating to the late 1400'hundreds also looks about right. We can say for sure that it is not an Estoc. The blade is not made for piercing plate armor or good quality mail of the period.

Definition of the Estoc:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoc

The grip and handle on the sword could easily have been fitted with an Estoc blade but it is not. The length of the blade is also about the same as on an Estoc as the Estoc's is also made for the horse mounted man.

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Tordenskiold1721

We can say for sure that it is not an Estoc. The blade is not made for piercing plate armor or good quality mail of the period.

For clarity, estocs were not meant for piercing plate armor, or even good quality riveted mail for the simple reason that they were not capable of doing that. They were capable of defeating leather armor, gambesons and low quality mail, but not much more than this.

[Tordenskiold1721]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

For clarity, estocs were not meant for piercing plate armor, or even good quality riveted mail for the simple reason that they were not capable of doing that. They were capable of defeating leather armor, gambesons and low quality mail, but not much more than this.

Please provide your references ?

It is not the armor plate itself that is to be pierced but the small openings areas were the plate armor connects such as were the Paulerons, Vembrances, Rerebrace, Cuter, Tassets, etc. And yes a good Estoc will penetrate good mail. Chain mail primarily protects against cuts and slash but is vulnerable to trust, tightly connected mail rings(high quality) and lesser tightly connected rings(low quality). Thinner/ weaker blades such as the one shown here might break when driven between the Paulderons and breast plate.

Please see this very good definition of the Estoc again and its purpose again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoc

Its actually a good explanation made in short and clear.

Unfortunately I am traveling right now. So I can not show you photos of my own period armor's and chain mails and armor piercing and fighting weapons. Its a interesting subject in it self. Subject such as Estoc, armor piercing daggers, war hammers, pole arms, pole axes etc :-) The original items makes it easy to understand the connections regarding the aforementioned.



Hand and a half Estoc fighting during tournament. Note how the combatants are searching for the opening in the opponents plate armor

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Tordenskiold1721

Hand and a half Estoc fighting during tournament. Note how the combatants are searching for the opening in the opponents plate armor

That is correct, but searching for openings is very different from the common perception of piercing the armor - which is plain impossible.

On subject of mail - there have been many, many attempts at piercing it, so generally speaking, a very thin blade in most cases fails to split even one ring on a high quality riveted mail. In few cases when it was able to, it certainly did not produce anything even close to a disabling wound. In order to produce it it would have to split many, many rings - remember, usually there was a gambeson under the mail.

Fortunately for the estoc owner, great majority of fighters didn't have such armor. So estoc was potentially quite effective in the battle, but not because it was able to pierce the plate.

Just clarifying...

[Victrix]

I read Cerjak’s post again more carefully and the sword is very long with an overall length of 127.5cm and blade lenghth of 109cm. This seems to suggest that it could be described as a ”longsword” although the hilt is not that big? Cerjak describes it as ”well balanced” and it weights only 1260g, which suggests that it was made for fencing with despite its considerable length. Are the side edges sharp? Then we have the grip made from horn which is a material more common for hunting equipment.

Cerjak also posted a picture of the sword from the Metropolitan museum with gilded pommel and quillons and silk covered grip, which seems to be made for tournaments. Then Tordensiöld posted the fascinating picture of combatants with huge estocs, equiped with special grip supports on the blades. I wonder if Cerjak’s sword could be a special duel/tournament sword?

The estoc changed its shape and form over the centuries that it remained in use. The sword pictured below is a much later Hungarian estoc/panzerstecher/koncerz from the end of the 17thC. These were used mainly for penetrating chainmail, which which were still in use by the Ottomans at the time. The sword is overall 120cm long, blade length 109cm, width at forte 2.4cm, width at ricasso 1.7cm. The blade is diamond shape in cross-section with a sharply pointed tip but the edges are not sharp. The blade is rigid stiff. It has a fuller near the hilt but this is only 19.5cm long. These were used by mounted hussars who would charge the enemy at speed with the estocs. The idea was that the tip would enter a ring in the chainmail, and then the momentum of the charge would expand or collapse the ring, enabling the estoc to penetrate deeper.

[Tordenskiold1721]

Originally Posted by Victrix

The sword pictured below is a much later Hungarian estoc/panzerstecher/koncerz from the end of the 17thC. These were used mainly for penetrating chainmail, which which were still in use by the Ottomans at the time. The sword is overall 120cm long, blade length 109cm, width at forte 2.4cm, width at ricasso 1.7cm. The blade is diamond shape in cross-section with a sharply pointed tip but the edges are not sharp. The blade is rigid stiff. It has a fuller near the hilt but this is only 19.5cm long. These were used by mounted hussars who would charge the enemy at speed with the estocs. The idea was that the tip would enter a ring in the chainmail, and then the momentum of the charge would expand or collapse the ring, enabling the estoc to penetrate deeper.

Thanks for posting this important and very good Estoc Victrix !! It's a pleasure seeing it.

As you point out it is designed to penetrate mail armor, a job the sharp and strong tip would do with ease when trusted hard into mail. Mail of any quality does not hold up well against a good trust from a solid sharp tipped blade.

I found two of the old History channel documentaries that might be of interest to some. It is orientated around the development of armor from chain mail and how, when the mail armor was not strong enough to stand piercing weapons the plate armor started developing. Here we also see some tests of the weaknesses of mail against trusting weapons:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98hRtOJqOYE&t=121s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syPjIZIrG7k

The plate armor was developed due to the weakness of the mail armor and especially the weakness the mail has against trusting weapons. The above two History Channel documentaries explains this development.

In the drawing below it seems as the mounted rider to the left is penetrating his enemy's mail with an "Estoc" type weapon rather than an lance:

[Foxbat]

We tend to romanticize the things we like, and estoc is no exception. The fact it had limited utility does not detract from that fascination. I have several of them in my collection, and have done tons of reading on their capabilities and application, and I love them, but I will not claim some miraculous power to them.

Truth be told, it didn't have to pierce the plate or high quality mail to be effective on the battlefield, as there were plenty of targets, suitable for its blade. Other weapons, things like maces and hammers, plus the pole arms, were more commonly employed against the armor.

[Tordenskiold1721]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

I have several of them in my collection, and have done tons of reading on their capabilities and application

Hello Foxbat, this is good news, I am always looking to expand my library. If you have references to your literature and pages on the subject, that would be great ! We should both share some photos here that shows the subject matter weapons. I will when back from my travels. I would love seeing your Estoc's.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Tordenskiold1721

Thanks for posting this important and very good Estoc Victrix !! It's a pleasure seeing it.

As you point out it is designed to penetrate mail armor, a job the sharp and strong tip would do with ease when trusted hard into mail. Mail of any quality does not hold up well against a good trust from a solid sharp tipped blade.

I found two of the old History channel documentaries that might be of interest to some. It is orientated around the development of armor from chain mail and how, when the mail armor was not strong enough to stand piercing weapons the plate armor started developing. Here we also see some tests of the weaknesses of mail against trusting weapons:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98hRtOJqOYE&t=121s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syPjIZIrG7k

The plate armor was developed due to the weakness of the mail armor and especially the weakness the mail has against trusting weapons. The above two History Channel documentaries explains this development.

In the drawing below it seems as the mounted rider to the left is penetrating his enemy's mail with an "Estoc" type weapon rather than an lance:

Many thanks for posting the interesting links and the pictures, Tordenskiold! I have never seen contemporary pictures of estocs in action before. It seems the rider in the picture is clasping his estoc close to the chest to absorb the shock from the impact? I have heard suggestions that the wearer sometimes grasped the hilt under his armpit to wield the estoc like a lance. This must have been relatively rare however, as the estoc is very much designed as a sword with a hilt and a grip to hold in the hand.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

We tend to romanticize the things we like, and estoc is no exception. The fact it had limited utility does not detract from that fascination. I have several of them in my collection, and have done tons of reading on their capabilities and application, and I love them, but I will not claim some miraculous power to them.

Truth be told, it didn't have to pierce the plate or high quality mail to be effective on the battlefield, as there were plenty of targets, suitable for its blade. Other weapons, things like maces and hammers, plus the pole arms, were more commonly employed against the armor.

I suppose estocs were less effective against well designed plate armour than chainmail and disappeared from use in the Western European theatre of war, especially when the matchlock and wheellock gun was introduced. In Eastern Europe however, the estoc continued in use together with the mace and warhammer well into the 18thC. This was not at all for romantic reasons, it was just that the Ottomans continued to use chainmail until then and these weapons continued to be useful for their purpose. I would certainly not dare to test wearing a chainmail and be subjected to a charge by the Hungarian estoc posted above!

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Cerjak

an example with same type of pommel and blade geometry said to be Circa 1490

Nice room, Cerjak. I especially love the halberd rack.

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Tordenskiold1721

Hello Foxbat, this is good news, I am always looking to expand my library. If you have references to your literature and pages on the subject, that would be great ! We should both share some photos here that shows the subject matter weapons. I will when back from my travels. I would love seeing your Estoc's.

That sounds good! For starters here is the pair of the more traditional Saxon estocs.

[Cerjak]

Originally Posted by Victrix

Nice room, Cerjak. I especially love the halberd rack.

Hi Vitrix
This room is not my room but only some pictures I found on a similar sword

[Tordenskiold1721]

Originally Posted by Cerjak

Hi Vitrix
This room is not my room but only some pictures I found on a similar sword

Reference to the dealer were you can see more detailed photos of the same sword is:

http://www.antik-sammlerboerse.info/

The items:

http://www.xn--antik-sammlerbrse-d0b.de/

[cornelistromp]

similar pommel in stibbert Museum Firenze.

best,
jasper

[Cerjak]

Many Thanks Jasper
very interesting I hope to find a better picture with information about this sword
Best

Jean-Luc