Smallsword Duelling

[urbanspaceman]

Jim mentioned duelling with smallswords, so here are two pieces I came across durinmg my research. They may be well known to some but others will find them intriguing to say the least: I certainly did. Here's the first:

Duel with Small Swords - The Graphic - February 1897
Towards the end of the seventeenth century, a very significant and important change of sword play came into fashion, and consequent on this the long weighty rapier gave way to the dress small sword with its lighter blade, grip and guard.
The Fronde in France and the Civil War in England had been conducive to much ruffianly bravery, but with a more quiescent state of affairs came a less pugnacious, though at the same time a more effeminate influence over the two nations, and the sword began to be in requisition merely as an ornamental appendage to the dress, though it was not till the reign of Queen Anne that it became what is called the " Small Sword," developing eventually into the perfect Court and duelling sword of the period of George II. and III. , and later still of the School of Angelo, upon which the modern French school of fencing is founded.
Though small and unimportant looking, there was still the necessity for making it a deadly weapon on an emergency; hence the evolution of an entirely different system of fence.
Owing to the comparative lightness of the new weapon and the much shorter blade, the attack became more rapid, the feint more intricate, and the lunge itself more involved. With the earlier forms of about 1650, it was not possible to execute the same rapid succession of parries and ripostes as are attainable with the modern duelling rapier, which is practically the same as the small sword of the latter part of the eighteenth century.
The shape of the blade varied, but the bayonet or triangular form was universal. A shape known as "Colichemarde" obtained great favour from 1730 to 1760. Here the forte of the blade was made much broader with the idea that the parry would have greater force. It had, however, the defect of throwing the weight too near the hand, allowing the point to be dangerously high and the lunge in consequence less direct.
A notable feature in all swords of this period is the very small size of the shell or protection to the hand, proving how much the science and finesse of the parry had increased, keeping pace with the lightness and delicacy of the weapon. The introduction of a larger shell in the modern French duelling rapier is due to the fact that now so much play is made to touch the hand or forearm, thereby disabling the opponent and bringing the duel to a close without fatal results. In the days of the small sword the adversary was invariably run through the body, and if death ensued the successful duellist was tried for murder, being acquitted or not according to the circumstances of the case.

And the second:

Mad and Bad:
a very interesting small-sword duel took place on January 26, I765, between Lord Byron and his neighbour Mr. Chaworth. These gentlemen were dining with others at the Star and Garter Tavern in Pall Mall about seven in the evening when the conversation turned upon the subject of game on their estates (precise story varies). This resulted in a drunken altercation, after which Lord Byron left the room, and meeting Mr. Chaworth in the passage stated that he wished to speak with him.
He then called a waiter and asked if there were any room disengaged. The waiter showed them to an unoccupied room and left them with a candle, which was all the light in the apartment except a dull fire. As Mr. Chaworth turned round after shutting the door, he perceived Lord Byron with his sword half drawn, who instantly exclaimed "Draw." Mr. Chaworth immediately complied, and at the first thrust his sword passed through Lord Byron's waistcoat, and he thought he had wounded him, when Lord Byron, shortening his sword, gave him a fatal wound. A struggle then took place between the parties, for they were found grasped in each other's arms by the landlord and waiter, who, hearing the noise, hurriedly entered the room.
A surgeon was immediately sent for who pronounced the Chaworth wound mortal, the sword having entered on the left side of the stomach, and, passing obliquely upwards, had made its exit five or six inches higher on the left side of the back.
It appears that when Mr. Chaworth's sword passed through the waistcoat of his antagonist, he expressed his apprehension that he had seriously wounded him. Now under such an apprehension it is probable that he was thrown off his guard and Lord Byron quickly shortened his sword and ran him through.
Writhing under the agonies of his wound, Mr. Chaworth several times declared that, although he well knew that he was in immediate danger of death, he had rather be in his present situation than live under the misfortune of having killed another person. He also observed that when, after closing the door, he turned round, he perceived that Lord Byron's sword was half-drawn and knowing his man, he drew his own as quickly as he could, and had the first pass at him.
After three months incarceration the House of Lords found William, Lord Byron, "not guilty of the felony of murder, but of manslaughter," and his lordship, being a Peer and claiming the Benefit of Clergy and the statute of Edward VI., was discharged after paying his fees.
The two swords involved were preserved: at Annesley, and Newstead.
nb. About 300 aristocrats a year died of duels in France in the 1600s.

[Jim McDougall]

Excellent topic!
Deriving from the discussion of the 'colichmarde' blade, which in generally held tradition was named for the Count von Konigsmark of Sweden. This soldier of fortune had come to London in 1661, and involved in a scandalous duel , which enlarged his reputation as a renowned duelist. While it cannot be proved that he 'invented' the blade, the term for this form is believed a French corruption of Konigsmark, and somehow regarded as named for him.

As Keith has noted, these type blades, while notably popular, do not seem to have been as prevalent as presumed, possibly because they were a bit more difficult to produce(?) or simply that the majority of smallswords were simply dress accoutrements and 'dueling' features were not necessary.

While obviously not a discussion of a specific weapon, the duel was indeed a specific use of swords, many of which had design features intended to facilitate that purpose. Despite firearms taking precedence in combat, even in later times, matters of honor were often settled with the blade, naturally a choice of weapons was given, but the sword still had its high standard so was often selected.

[urbanspaceman]

Firstly, I must apologise for my statement about the number of colichemardes in Greenwich being the greatest number: Royal Armouries at Leeds have over a dozen.

In regard to the source of the name: I've read several dissertations regarding this business and am firmly convinced there was no relationship. However, if anyone has evidence to the contrary it would be of great interest to the smallsword cognoscenti.
Here is a link to a paper written recently that covers every aspect of the colichemarde in a detail that defies condensing:
http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/34663/

I have also posted an image of a Dutch smallsword/duelling rapier from the second half of the 1600s in the hope that someone can confirm its purpose: was it a civilian carry or was it designed specifically for duelling?
The blade features a series of X type crosses on each side.
I find it hard to accept that anyone interested in self-defence would wear such a sword.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Firstly, I must apologise for my statement about the number of colichemardes in Greenwich being the greatest number: Royal Armouries at Leeds have over a dozen.

In regard to the source of the name: I've read several dissertations regarding this business and am firmly convinced there was no relationship. However, if anyone has evidence to the contrary it would be of great interest to the smallsword cognoscenti.
Here is a link to a paper written recently that covers every aspect of the colichemarde in a detail that defies condensing:
http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/34663/

I have also posted an image of a Dutch smallsword/duelling rapier from the second half of the 1600s in the hope that someone can confirm its purpose: was it a civilian carry or was it designed specifically for duelling?
The blade features a series of X type crosses on each side.
I find it hard to accept that anyone interested in self-defence would wear such a sword.

It is hard to place hard numbers on sword type based on surviving examples or holdings in museums or collections, so estimating the actual presence of the colichemarde in circulation as discussed can only be speculative.
In references I have seen in discussion of sword blade types in the 18th century, of twelve forms presented, the colichemarde was not called by name and only 2 were included, as 'reinforced forte'.

The entire story of the form itself and term is of course apocryphal, and part of the ever lingering sea of lore surrounding sword history.

Regarding this example, as it is Dutch and in that period the Netherlands were largely under Spanish rule. The Spaniards were known for the excessive length of their rapier blades, which at times reached ridiculous lengths.
Quite possibly this example was somehow in accord with that situation?

It seems agreed in most references on 'fence' that the blade for a sword should be adjusted to the stature of the owner, with the most common length @ around 31" to perhaps 34". The key factor with length was of course thrust reach and accessibility to opponent, but speed, and long blades are anything but fast.

In dueling in most cases, they seem to have been more often affairs of a great deal of 'posturing' and circling, rather than pitched combat. In most cases actual exchange of blows and parry were hardly more than seconds and quickly ceased to return to posturing movement, unless any blood was drawn, which typically ended the event.

A very long sword blade, of course kept your opponent at distance, and in the event of a thrust, the riposte with long blade would of course be likely fatal. It seems the retreat with sudden stop at the opponents thrust was a deadly attack, but sort of in reverse.

Returning to the sword here, most small swords were in effect 'walking swords' or 'dress', and in these occasions any excessive length would be disruptive or 'difficult', obviously a long blade in close circumstances is impairing. Then it would seem, such a blade would be probably for the duel, or a situation where such confrontation would be imminent.

[urbanspaceman]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Returning to the sword here, most small swords were in effect 'walking swords' or 'dress', and in these occasions any excessive length would be disruptive or 'difficult', obviously a long blade in close circumstances is impairing. Then it would seem, such a blade would be probably for the duel, or a situation where such confrontation would be imminent.

Yes, that is something I had not considered, but in this instance it is only a 28inch blade; the slim profile makes it look much longer than it is: the widest part is only half an inch.

I have heard references made to the lack of a knuckle-bow being indicative of duelling rapier/smallswords.

As I said, it does not inspire confidence when possibly dealing with a brutal battlefield blade and I suspect there may even have been a pair originally.

[mariusgmioc]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOBTFfHJjV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2KWTEhyVX8

[urbanspaceman]

Considering the swords they use in those two clips - both with knuckle-bows - it still seems likely mine is a duelling piece due to the blade. I've been a fan of this film since its first release. I've read endless criticisms, both positive and negative but I remain captivated.

Carradine didn't lose half a leg and a whole arm and still keep going, just a little puncture wound and he was out for the count. Realism is so refreshing sometimes.

I read that, during the Peninsular War, British medics remarked on the invariable deaths of British soldiers compared to the survival rate of the French, and postulated that the thrust was invariably more deadly than the cut. This doesn't compute for me as the British would be using the 1796 pattern, right?
I am out of my depth here. Any help gratefully accepted.

p.s. Ridley Scott is a Tyneside lad like me.

[Chris Evans]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Firstly, I must apologise for my statement about the number of colichemardes in Greenwich being the greatest number: Royal Armouries at Leeds have over a dozen.

In regard to the source of the name: I've read several dissertations regarding this business and am firmly convinced there was no relationship. However, if anyone has evidence to the contrary it would be of great interest to the smallsword cognoscenti.
Here is a link to a paper written recently that covers every aspect of the colichemarde in a detail that defies condensing:
http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/34663/

I have also posted an image of a Dutch smallsword/duelling rapier from the second half of the 1600s in the hope that someone can confirm its purpose: was it a civilian carry or was it designed specifically for duelling?
The blade features a series of X type crosses on each side.
I find it hard to accept that anyone interested in self-defence would wear such a sword.

Hi,

Egerton Castle, in his Schools and Masters Of fencing (pg237-8) describes such a sword as a 'Flamberg", an intermediary between the transition rapier and the small sword. He also wrote that these gradually gained great favour with the expert fencers of the seventeenth century on account of their relative lightness, and adding that they were most commonly used in Germany. According to Castle, part of their appeal was the simplified hilt which permitted fencing with either hand, as taught by some of the masters of that era.

Cheers
Chris

[urbanspaceman]

Thank-you Chris.

[M ELEY]

Fascinating information from all involved. I personally loved that movie 'The Duelist'. Just wanted to add that as far as fencing goes, the German academic schools also were heavily involved and it was quite popular to bare the scars provided by the matches, so much so that it became a Hollywood steriotype to show movie villains of the era with such scars-

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

[Chris Evans]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Thank-you Chris.

And thank you for posting the link to that most informative paper on the Colichemarde.

Apropos to which, the conventional wisdom had it, as implied by Castle, that its demise was due to that whilst it served well parrying against heavier swords it was at a disadvantage, on account of its weight, against the lighter and therefore nimbler uniformly tapering triangular blades that became normative in France.

Having said that, I remember seeing some years ago (for sale) a matched pair of 19th century dueling epees with Colichemarde style blades - As to what purpose the wider fortes could serve in a duel with evenly matched swords I am at a loss to understand. Perhaps they were made on special order to an eccentric customer!

Cheers
Chris