English blades

[urbanspaceman]

This seems like another simple question but I have a feeling it may prove otherwise.
During my research there has been one unavoidable issue that remains unanswered:
why could the English not produce sword-blades of the same quality as the Germans - at least until the 2nd quarter of the 18th century?

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

This seems like another simple question but I have a feeling it may prove otherwise.
During my research there has been one unavoidable issue that remains unanswered:
why could the English not produce sword-blades of the same quality as the Germans - at least until the 2nd quarter of the 18th century?

You should be asking "why most of Europe could not produce sword blades of the same quality as the Germans?"

And the answer is, "yes, they could."

The quality of the blades made in Toledo made them even more famous than the most famous German blades.

Also the blades made in Northern Italy (Milano, Caino, etc.) were by no means inferior to their German counterparts.

But what the Germans managed to master better than anyone else was mass producing sword blades with consistently high quality and they exported them throughout the world. While both Toledo and Milano could and did produce blades of superb quality, they produced very few of them, while the Germans produced them in industrial quantities.

Now why English sword makers didn't produce blades of the same quality like their German counterparts, I don't know. But since the technology/know-how of making a high quality sword blade is quite complex, it may be because the English smiths were not familiar with all the tricks of the craft?!

Or, it may be that the English smiths simply did not have access to raw materials of the same quality like their German counterparts?!

Or maybe they did manage to produce blades of quality matching the quality of German blades, but they did not manage to do it cost efficiently (in time and effort) and could not efficiently compete in a market saturated with German products?!

[Jim McDougall]

This is an excellent explanation Marius!
I would add that Aylward (1945) noted that the English apparently certain prejudicial attitudes concerning the dark working with metal, and believed that 'foreigners' possessed occult secrets about the manufacture of arms & armor which were outside their scope.

While this may sound 'silly' as the topic of superstition and fears and notions on the occult and 'magic' etc. are in a manner of thinking, much 'avoided' today. However it is not the fear of evil effects but more associating these long outdated beliefs with ignorance and low awareness.
In the study of arms, this has often been my experience with analysis of markings, inscriptions and often features in weapons.

It was not until the progressive posture by Henry VIII in bringing foreign armorers into England that the advent of English arms production moved ahead. Until then England had relied on Spain, France, Germany and Italy for most armor and blades.

Interestingly there were knife makers apparently, but this industry seems outside the realm of sword blades and armor. It seems odd that blacksmiths functioned as well known , and along with cutlers who mounted the blades.

In "The Sword in Anglo-Saxon England" (H.R.Ellis-Davidson, 1962. p.34), concerning sword blades as early as 9th century, "...pattern welded swords may not have been made in many workshops and as yet there is no evidence they were ever produced in England or Scandinavia, though there seems no convincing reason WHY THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN. "(my caps).

There were apparently adequate resources in numerous locations in England, as seen in the later developing industry of blade making.
Interestingly despite resources, much of the steel used for forging was produced in Sweden and exported to various countries in later years. It was shortages of this Swedish steel that brought issues into Germany during the Thirty Years War.

[fernando]

Like for whisky and textiles, you chose a place near a river where the water is pure and full of properties, to install your mill.
Toledan sword smiths and cuttlers may not have chosen the place but they have benefitted from the Tagus river waters. Apparently the Romans envied their results; those which derived from not only the Tagus but from their demanding for a reliable raw material, that from the Mondragon mines. But was is more accentuated as techiques go, is the Tagus waters ... and its sands (where gold abunded and all ?). This is where history is cocktailed between the magic properties of the river and the extremely complex skill they used to forge their blades; to a point in that they (the early ones) wouldn't know if the result was achieved by their own ability alone or the magic resided in the river waters.


.

[Jim McDougall]

A very good note Fernando, and the access to running water is key to placement of mills, of course to turn the machinery.
This is noted in references to various blade forging places, and there are numbers of thoughts and suggestions of quality achieved by the 'magical properties ' of the water and/or minerals etc. in it.

This was not lost to writers and romanticized notions,

"...a sword of icebrook temper, of the very best quality. The Spaniards used to plunge their swords and other weapons while hot from the forge into the brook Salo (Xalon) near Bilbilis in Celtiberia to harden them. The water of this brook is very cold. It is a sword of Spain, the ice brook temper".
-Shakespeare, Othello v.2
from "Brewers Dictionary of Phrase and Fable" E.Cobham Brewer, (1894).

As you know the term 'bilbo' was commonly used for various Spanish swords (Im not sure if Portugal used the same term) in 17th, 18th c.
There has been notable debate on the origin of the term, many thinking it has to do with Bilbao in Basque country, but there is some mention of the Bilbilis having association.

The water is indeed a most important factor as you point out, in addition to the raw materials needed to forge steel and iron.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... As you know the term 'bilbo' was commonly used for various Spanish swords (Im not sure if Portugal used the same term) in 17th, 18th c.
.

The term 'bilbo' when adopted for swords typology is an english speaking attribution. It is not used as such by Portuguese ... and neither by Spanish, i guess.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... There has been notable debate on the origin of the term, many thinking it has to do with Bilbao in Basque country, but there is some mention of the Bilbilis having association ...

It should have to do only with the Basque; actually the (non weapon) bilbo term also exists in Basque.
Augusta Bilbilis was already renamed Calatayud (Qal'at 'Ayyūb) when the Moors imposed their castle in the VIII century; indeed a place also of skilled arms makers, in the route between Zaragoza and Toledo.

[urbanspaceman]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Or maybe they did manage to produce blades of quality matching the quality of German blades, but they did not manage to do it cost efficiently (in time and effort) and could not efficiently compete in a market saturated with German products?!

Here is an edited piece from Bezdek on the run-up to establishing Hounslow:
In 1621, King James I declared that he needed military swords for 12,000 men (for the Thirty Years War). Previously, he had to buy most of his swords from foreign sources, mostly from swordsmiths in Solingen; at that time, the Greenwich Royal Armouries were providing very few swords.
The king hoped to enlarge England’s arms making capacity and provide employment for his subjects. In early 1621, he granted Thomas Murrey (cutler and secretary to the Prince of Wales; probably the wardrobe supplier to the prince) a patent for the sole manufacture of sword and rapier blades in England.
In July 1621, Thomas Murrey presented his first group of sword blades to the Cutlers Company for inspection. The company rejected them saying they needed much more work to come to “perfection,” and the expense to make them was too high.