Colichemardes

[Radboud]

Thank you, the inscription, N Tol, is very similar to the one pictured on page 211 of Armes Blanches Symbolisme Inscriptions by Jean L'Hoste.

But as you say it could well be a Solingen blade especially if sword production had halted in Toledo by that stage. I think it dates from the late 17th to mid 18th Century. The blade is robust and not a floppy court sword.

The ICB sword I believe is 1780s to 1800s but that’s only a guess based on the shape of the pas d’ane shell guard and the makers mark.

[Jim McDougall]

Radboud, outstanding details, examples and observations, which are important in studying these.
I have been involved in research on Spanish makers lately, and it seems Toledo virtually ceased production during the 17th c and by1700 was all but done. It was not until 1761 that Carlos III was determined to reopen but had great difficulty as all the makers were gone.
It was in production finally but mostly with bayonets, though some sword blades were being made. According to "Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America 1700-1821" (Brinckerhoff & Chamberlain 1972.p.90) the Toledo made blades were subject to breakage, so Catalonian were preferred.

RDC Evans ("The Plug Bayonet") notes that the Real Fabrica de Toledo inscription was changed to note 'Artilleria' Fabrica de Toledo, when he directed the activity to that arm of the military.

In Aylward, it is noted that the original colichemarde type blades seem to have been ground down from hexagonal flat blades and by later in the 17th to the triangular (three edge hollow ground) form (c. 1680s?).
While these went out of fashion in civilian circles, the military still kept them, but by 1780s Aylward points out the return the the flat face blade.

One thing I am suspecting is that Bilbao, a port in the northern Basque country has something to do with small sword blades with the Burton (1884) reference calling that triangular section blade 'Biscayan' (Basque).
Their close proximity to the French border and Bay of Biscay offer some possibility I think of cross influence?

Peter, crossed posts!! Excellent notes on the blade form! Another conundrum

[Peter Hudson]

Hi Jim, and Seasons Greetings !!!

I was talking also to Keith at Urbanspaceman and referring to his opener as to where these strange blades were produced for which there is some proof that Shotley Bridge may well have been involved and knowing their dubious links with Solingen I can well see how. The Swedish spy noted there was a machine in Shotley Bridge so it is known they had the gear... and clearly they had the distribution potential and on a tasty blade like the Colichemarde they must have realised its potential as a good earner.

Naturally therefor, the question at #1 is not simple since if blades were being churned out as blanks in huge quantities where did these blanks go to? and since Colichemardes were in great demand who was finishing them and how much was a finished machine made blade compared to a hand made item..?
Regards,
Peter Hudson.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Peter, and wishing y'all a Happy New Year!

This hollow blade conundrum has been pretty baffling. Indeed, WHERE did they go? and there has to be something somewhere on this machine.

[urbanspaceman]

I haven't had the opportunity, or the contacts, to research the Mohll family in Solingen archives, but...
Johann Mohll Senior was listed as a grinder - but he was not a guild member!

This is what first made me suspicious, as in Solingen you HAD to be a guild member and membership was severely restricted - usually to family.

It is my opinion, and the issue that needs local verification, is that Johann Mohll owned the Huguenot built machine/s for speeding-up fullering and hollow blade production as opposed to hand filing.

Hermann Mohll, his son, operated out of - and into - Shotley Bridge; owning the big grinding mill complex directly under the bridge after he arrived with all the other immigrants in 1687.

His brother Abraham spent 3 years there, then returned to Oak (?) in Solingen where the grinding mill location they inherited became a paper mill.

Neither brother was ever under contract to the syndicate, or the company who owned the SB enterprise; and nor were they ever Solingen guild members, which is why they were not listed in the indictment by the Solingen authorities in 1688.

There is first hand evidence (and illustrations) of the existence of one of the 'hollow blade' machines at Shotley Bridge from Swedish spy Angerstein when he visited Oley's works in 1754 and observed hollow blade production, and acid etching, in full swing. Oley had long since owned the Mohll grinding mill (1724).

The crucial issue here is that every colichemarde I have seen (and globally they only amount to 0.3% of all smallswords, with the biggest number in the Greenwich Maritime Museum: 6 out of 120 smallswords) features a rolled lower hollow of constant width.
Actually, a friend of mine up here in the North probably has more than six in his collection.

It is not possible (even today) to automate and machine, in one pass, a reducing radius hollow into a blade; but a constant width groove (as we see in all colichemardes - and many smallswords) is a simple procedure and more than possible for those ingenious Huguenots.

I consulted various professors of engineering to establish just what was possible then... and now.

Given that the machine came out of Solingen with Herman Mohll, and also given that machines were subsequently banned in Solingen, I am of the opinion that colichemardes are the sole product of Shotley Bridge.

Quite a bit to consider... I know, but that is precisely what I have been doing for the last five years. The issue that remains unrevealed is the name.

BTW: an interesting idea (and more than plausible) was that those flat blade colichemardes were simply cut down broadswords. I really do want one of those!

[urbanspaceman]

Following on from my last sentence regarding the possibility/probability that flat blade colichemardes are modified broadswords I have to ask if anyone has any information regarding the time of arrival of this style of blade?

If the arrival of the smallsword had encouraged the learning of a new style of fighting, with an emphasis on the thrust, but the cost of the new hollow blades was (and it certainly was) discouraging, even prohibitive, then the conversion of a broadsword blade must have seemed like a good idea on more counts than merely financial.

I know that many were unconvinced by the efficacy of the smallsword due to its apparent delicacy when opposing a heavy battlefield blade - in particular the Scots - believing it to have little blocking and parrying ability; this reason has been suggested on more than one occasion as the justification for a 'squeezed' blade.

It suggests to me that the cut-down broadsword was the beginning of what would become the traditional hollow blade colichemarde.

Has anyone seen flat bladed colichemardes retaining a smith's marking and if so could they let me see them?

Curiously, Diderot does not show this style; and equally, does not show the style with the rolled lower groove that would eventually predominate. See attached for what is shown: