Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanspaceman
Hello Folks. I have always - instinctively - considered this style of colichemarde to be much earlier that the traditional smallsword variant but, as always, my lack of experience warns me not to make pronouncements until I am certain.
One opinion I proffer is that this style of sword perfectly exemplifies the theory that the pronounced forte was to provide the best of two worlds at a time when regular heavy rapiers and heavier battlefield weapons were a possible opponent.
I understand alternative opinions have been voiced regarding the defence against heavier blade theory... those opinions seem curiously odd.
The appearance of this style of colichemarde is distinctly similar to the thin rapier blades with no possible cutting ability, that were obviously intended - and used - as civilian carry and duelling, but rarely, if ever, battlefield.
It seems obvious to me that the expanded forte was intended to remedy this shortcoming; yet why anyone would wish such a blade on a battlefield, or indeed as a civilian/court carry defies logic. It would certainly not present an attractive look when in its scabbard; the later styles were often considered a bit gross - despite Washington's presidential opinion.
My attention has long been distracted by the business of the colichemarde because I have certain theories regarding its history that need to be corroborated. If we ignore the earlier variants and concentrate of the typical hollow-ground smallsword style, can anyone provide me with definitive indication of its first appearance; furthermore, can anyone provide proof of their birthplace?
|
This is the best I can do as far as proof goes, its the only pictures ive got left sadly, but the blade was signed " SEBASTIANO HERNANDES" and on the other side " EN TOLEDO" there were two maker marks on each side of the ricasso of of wich i can show you only one clearly.
kind regards
Ulfberth