Keith , this is a fascinating and well presented assessment of the 'colichemarde'
conundrum, and reflects the amazing and tenacious depth of the research you have completed on the mysteries of the Shotley Bridge sword production.
In the years I have studied sword history in general, there were of course general mentions of the phenomenon of German sword makers in England, which pertained to two periods and situations. First there was HOUNSLOW from early 17th century but interrupted by the English Civil wars.
Later in the 17th c. came the SHOTLEY BRIDGE enterprises which again used German makers, and with some degree of connection to the Hounslow venture.
This was all but vaguely described in the literature, and well laced with lore and supposition, but little in the way of organized analysis and history. ...with what little existed being so esoteric few ever pursued it.
You changed all that!!!
your book is not only thorough, but fascinating!
Nobody ever realized the amount of intrigue and complexity that existed in all this.
Now these aspects of these situations on English sword making reflect the perplexing questions which persist, and the mysterious gentlemans sword called the 'colichemarde' is the key player.
The question of exactly when the 'squeezed' blade evolved into the later ubiquitous trefoil (hollowed) blade. The term hollowed has long thrown people into fanciful notions of a literally hollowed blade, however the grinding of the faces of the blade presenting a triangular cross section are what is meant.
The use of such blades with this kind of section whether trefoil or quadrefoil have long been in use, since the ESTOC of centuries earlier, which was a long straight bladed sword with thin section with multiple faces (rather like the concept of iron girders) which strengthened the blade for thrusting with deep penetration. These were typically worn under the saddle, and used in final combat dismounted, with the narrow blade finding vulnerable spot within armor covered areas.
The colichemarde blade was basically a narrow thrusting blade of rapier form which was double edged, but with added feature of the widened upper third of blade. This was intended for the parry as dueling began to use both cut and thrust in blade to blade combat. Prior to this,the duel was primarily circling movement with carefully executed attacks using the thrust with very little blade to blade contact.
So essentially, the colichemarde was a distinguished type of 'dueling' sword and to the gentleman, a sort of badge of honor and formidability. It is unclear as far as I know exactly when the two blade forms became separate and of course likely were contemporary for some time. As seen with the 'old' blades remounted in newer (1760s) hilts, it must have been a matter of preference or perhaps heirloom blades.
The most perplexing element of what you are discussing are these VERY mysterious machines, which were of course to perform the arduous task of the hollowing faces of these blades. While this was of course done by hand by skilled artisans (grinders) for centuries, in earlier times the numbers of blades were not in the extensive volume of these later times. The nature of commerce of course set forth new requirements, and 'machines' which offered more volume with less time and labor (hence the Industrial Revolution).
The mysteries of Shotley, and the clandestine activities going on involving intrigues of subversive activity, smuggling, financial scams, etc. seem likely to have ended up with so little known on these 'machines' in the Shotley situation.
The 'Luddite' situation in Solingen with Burtons visit in the 1860s and his noting the lack of machines etc. is notable, and evidence that guilds were still strong, much as unions. It would be hard to determine if such machines did indeed exist outside the areas he visited. Solingen was not a single compound but various shop and artisans over wide area.
The notes on Gill, and the unusual issues of the 'sword scandals' of early 1790s is yet another conundrum. How he, as a relative newcomer to the blade making industry (his father was a tool maker) went directly into making the highest quality British blades of the time is curious. He was it seems very competitive (=arrogant) and not well liked by his peers. His swords (assembled) seemed to follow German fashion, and his blades holow ground in the German manner.
Wooley had blades of montmorency section and followed French design in the hilts.
The so called 'tests' were using machines designed by Matthew Boulton, a friend and colleague of the Gills.
Not sure if I stayed on course in this missive
but indeed, British sword making was complex, and has far more history than commonly observed.