those mysterious Colichemardes

[urbanspaceman]

Hi Jim. Thank-you for your erudite and considered follow-up to my post; as usual your contributions make all the difference to the forum's threads.
Your mention of Matthew Boulton reminded me that the first of the two Gill swords has exceptional hilting by his Soho factory. It is exquisite work, albeit seriously impractical as a defensive effort. As a naval officer's sword I don't think much serious activity was forecast.
I've never stopped looking for detailed information on the hollow blade colichemarde history, but if there is anything out there it is beyond me. Maybe someone knows. I'll post my essay on the Arms and Armour Society Facebook portal and maybe stimulate a response.

[urbanspaceman]

Just as an afterthought, here is a selection of blade shapes from the Diderot encyclopedia that shows the squeezed blades.

[Jim McDougall]

Paraphrasing from "Schools and Masters of Fencing" (Egerton Castle, 1885, pp.235-239), it seems that at the end of the 16th c. the best fencing masters professed the cut and thrust play, but actually prejudiced to the thrust.

Long slender blades (regarded as 'tucks' or 'estocs') were almost devoid of cutting edges and with a lozenge (diamond) section almost square and became incredibly long (so much so that a footman had to carry these behind the duellist).
These were apparently called 'Verduns' for the French city most commonly producing them (p.235). These long bladed swords favored by 'swaggering' duelists, were regarded disdainfully in England and blades became shorter.

The 'prismatic' blades were retained in dueling swords until middle of the 17th century, when it was abandoned gradually in favor of the deadly and lighter three cornered (trefoil) fluted blade.
However, the most USUAL blade until middle of the 17th c. continued to be the double edged type.

It seems that the trefoil fluted blade which had gained favor in France as noted c.1650-60 came into fashion in England about the time of the Restoration.

The French were of course the first to discard all cutting from rapier fencing, and first to adopt the lightest blade form for thrusting alone, which developed the familiar 'small sword'. The blade of the small sword though much lighter than the double edged rapier, was still 'heavy about the point' (p.239).

Between 1680-1690 first in France, then Germany and England the COLICHEMARDE blade came into fashion. This is what is described as the 'squeezed' blade as the great width of the fort, which abruptly becomes slender at the faible, thus a light and 'fast' point, and broad,stiff fort.

In these notes it is not clear exactly where or when in the time of the advent of the colichemarde type blade, there was any distinct variation between the older double edge type blade in the combination or the trefoil.
Perhaps it might have been a matter of preference as some may still have preferred cut and thrust over the French style of thrust alone.

As these blades were produced in various centers, the degree of which in each remains the question especially as pertains to the entry of Shotley Bridge into this enterprise for these highly desirable blades.

The note in 'Castle' mentioning 'Verdun' as a blade making center in France suggests maybe more research into how long their blade making, which seems to have been focused to 'dueling' swords, might have become a 'player' in the colichemarde.

It is worthy of note that in the private sector, this 'highly perfect' form of blade seems to have been in use 1685-1720, when the civilian small sword gradually returned to the tapered trefoil blade through the rest of the century. However, the military, staid in their tradition, had the colichemarde blade remain in favor with officers contemporary to the civilian forms also through the century. George Washington owned one.

[urbanspaceman]

Hello again Jim. Thank-you for running with this ball. You bring up in my memory two issues that might benefit from exposition: firstly, did the fluted blade arrive with Charles 2nd and brother James? The smallsword certainly did but... we have looked - recently - at the re-hilting of slender rapier blades, could it be possible that these found favour prior to the arrival of the trefoil blade? They certainly persisted long after. Also, I have seen squeezed blades that taper abruptly to a very narrow rapier blade.
Returning to the initial essay I submitted, there's something I wish to interject:
a petition to The Council of State from John Cooke who had a mill in Hounslow (cross and star mark) occurred in 1655 "seeking to encourage him in his manufacture of hollow ground smallsword and rapier blades". At the time he was supplying the Tower with Hounslow Hangars (600 in 1658 is recorded) for Naval use. This looks like yet another example of the Mohlls trying to get their machines over to England. Apparently Cooke had Johannes Dell grinding for him back then.
What reinforces this presumption is that there is a curious incident occurred in 1686 that is recorded in the London Cutlers Company archives:
Lord Dartmouth (the Master-General of the King's Ordnance) revealed a plan to the Company to produce hollow swordblades with a secret machine: a scheme that would result in the creation of the Hollow Swordblade Company in Shotley Bridge - which by then was already underway. Dartmouth (a staunch Jacobite) was informed by the Crown of the new syndicate and their imminent Shotley Bridge endeavor; and here's the vital bit: AN ENGLISH HAND-GROUND HOLLOW BLADE HAD BEEN PRESENTED TO DARTMOUTH ALONGSIDE A 'MACHINE-MADE' EXAMPLE FOR COMPARISON. This is a very important occurrence as it poses two crucial questions: first, which smith in England, in 1686, could have hand-ground a hollow blade that was worthy of competing; and second, where did that machine-made blade come from?
BTW. Re. Washington: he had two colichemardes: this one was never seen before by me.

[Jim McDougall]

Keith, my pleasure of course, as this is a fascinating though challenging sector of sword esoterica. I am unsure of exactly when the 'fluted' blade arrived in England, but Burton (1884, p.135) says "...the small sword was introduced in England during the 18th century"....but this cannot be correct in accord with the production of small sword blades in England in mid 17th.

Interestingly, Burton in this text also notes in describing blade cross sections (fig. 124, #4)the BISCAYAN shape, which seems to be the 'fluted' trefoil.
He notes, "the Biscayan shape, the trialamellum of more ancient days, with three deep grooves and as many blunt edges by which the parries were made".

Further noting, "..there is so much difficulty in making the blade straight and of even temper that many professional men have never seen one not crooked or soft. Yet this is the small sword proper of the last century, which stood its ground as far as the first quarter of the present century".

Going to Castle ("Schools and Masters of Fencing", Egerton Castle, 1885. p236):
"...the prismatic shape of the blade was retained in many dueling swords until the middle of the 17th c. when it was gradually abandoned in favor of the still more deadly and lighter THREE CORNERED FLUTED BLADE. The most USUAL blade however remained until the middle of the 17th century one of the DOUBLE EDGED type. "

The scientific term 'prismatic' does not do well in this case in blade study, and what it refers to is geometrics, in this case a 'lozenge' (=diamond) section blade, which Burton (1884,p.135) describes as "making a strong, stiff, and lasting but very HEAVY sword. He notes further this type blade (previously noted as the tuck, estoc or 'Verdun' was known to English armorers as the 'Saxon' type blade, to workmen often as the 'latchen' blade.

The only reason I add these notes is that while going through period references describing blades etc. these terms might be helpful semantically.

Returning to the colichemarde topic, and again Burton (p.135) notes the introduction of these blades around 1680, and that this was ",...a trialamellum very wide and heavy in the whole string quarter near the hilt, and at about 8 inches suddenly passing to a light and slender rapier section. ".

Further "became a favorite dueling blade, the feather weight at the point making it the best of fencing weapons. It remained in fashion during the reign of Louis XIV, then suddenly disappeared".

In a footnote to that text, it is noted that it was suggested in 1881 by an English writer that the colichemarde had fallen out of favor due to its COSTLINESS and inelegant appearance when sheathed. ??

Most of these references, while not of any great help in most of the questions posed here, are simply to frame the context of these colichemarde blades and the difficulty, thus cost of making them. These would seem of notable consideration with the desire to have a machine that would not only be more efficient in quality but volume in producing these blades.

The mystery of what English maker could have produced such a blade as you note remains a conundrum, and much deeper diving into the resounding esoterica of English blade production .

[Jim McDougall]

This I found in "Small Arms Makers", Col. Robert Gardiner, 1963.

MOST perplexing! This reference shows this mark remarkably like the bushy tail fox of Shotley, but to Austrian maker of Steyr...1620?
This reference seems pretty reliable, so the mysteries of Shotley deepen. This is the ONLY time I have seen the BTF in this sort of context, and wish there was some note on how or where it was found.
Steyr in upper Austria was center of many conflicts during Thirty Years War when it was under rule of Duke Maximilian I of Bavaria, and the Peasant War of Upper Austria in 1626 took place, There was a tradition of arms making in later years there, and wonder if Oleys might have had any connection?
It is an intriguing thought.....I had always thought the bushy tail fox was sort of a parody of the Solingen running wolf, but perhaps Oleys had these kinds of connections ?

Though digressing from the topic, these markings have been curious as long as we've discussed Shotley.

In "The Catalog of the Sword Collection at York Castle Museum", P.R. Newman 1985:
CA833 (p.51) is an English hanger of Hounslow type hilt with blade marked with a 'RUNNING HORSE' ?
CA822 (p.49) another hanger of Hounslow type with blade marked with 'RUNNING DOG'? with letter H incorporated.....suggestion made for a 'Birmingham maker, Harvey'? Obviously this refers to Samuel Harvey of Birmingham, but he was much later, mid 18th c. with SH within the figure not just H.

[urbanspaceman]

It is mysterious Jim. Such an elaborate rendering of the Passau Wolf is entirely possible on an expensive blade down in Austria at that time. I will keep looking, because the fact that an almost identical rendering was used on a 1760s colichemarde suggests it may not be entirely alone.
ps
The talismanics are typical of Passau blades back in the 1620s; not just Solingen.