Shotley Bridge swordmakers

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

In a bid to tie Shotley Bridge to Scottish forms I need to prove more links and in doing so cite the trade link below where a Shotley Bridge sword is paired with a Scottish Scabbard. It was common practise to have the sword made at one place and the hilt and/or scabbard made at another. There is no picture.

A BRASS HILTED OFFICER'S SWORD, LATE 17TH/EARLY 18TH CENTURY with double edged blade retaining traces of a brief inscription within a short fuller and stamped with the running fox of Shotley Bridge on each side (pitted), brass hilt comprising double shell-guard engraved with the owner's name 'Sir H, Liddell Bt', knuckle-guard, an additional pair of scrolling bars joining the knuckle-guard to the shell front and back, and spherical pommel (button chipped, quilon removed), and wooden grip with later copper wire binding, in an associated brass-mounted lather scabbard, the locket inscribed 'R.S.' on the front and with the maker's name 'J. Hunter, South Bridge, Edinburgh' (worn) 80cm; 31 1/2in blade Sir Henry Liddell (before1660-1723) gained the title of 3rd Baronet Liddell and was M.P. for Durham City, 1688-98, and for Newcastle 1701-5, and 1706-10.

[Jim McDougall]

More interesting entries Ibrahiim. The one regarding Gill and the ongoing competition and difficulties between German sword production and the English makers struggling to prove their skills which had been going on for over a century or more and lasted well through the 19th. In the 1780s these tests mentioned led to him and some others to begin using phrases and terms such as warranted, or in his case 'warranted never to fail' on their blades.
This practice continued until around 1810 or slightly later with Gill, Osborne and perhaps one or two others.

I think that the iron deposits known in Shotley areas were mostly 'ironstone' and inadequate for quality needed in blade forging. The steel imported was from Sweden I understand, much as it was to Solingen. As noted, the wood required was abundant.
In most of the entries in references I have seen, it is suggested that primarily Shotley was 'finishing' forged blades from Germany, probably via Holland (the ship Mohll's cargo was on was from Rotterdam). These seem to have been heavier broadsword or backsword blades for military swords and hangers (which appear to have been already mounted from the sound of the single bundle in the shipment).

The running wolf conundrum :
It seems that the Solingen applied running wolf was typically an almost chop mark type image, often barely recognizable as a specific creature. This was in accord with the way these had been applied in Passau in earliest forms.
There was little, if any, uniformity in these images, and in Wagner ("Cut and Thrust Weapons", Prague, 1967) the chart of these 'wolf' marks depicts the variation, but misleadingly adds years, suggesting any such chronology existed. It was entirely a matter of the worker applying the mark in nominal form.
Actually, by the time of Shotley Bridge in the latter 17th century, as far as I have known, the running wolf occurring on Solingen blades would have been an anomaly. In my opinion the blades with Shotley Bridge and running animal (looking more like a dog and actually recognizable) were probably finished there, and likely 'blanks' from Solingen.

The later canine figures used by Harvey (and possibly Dawes) in Birmingham seem to be a running fox (note plumed tail) and with Harvey using his initials enclosed. It would seem these were in earlier blades and alluded to the German quality which had been known from Hounslow times and Shotley. Remember that these blades were highly esteemed and still circulating. In later Harvey blades there were various marking with his name and initials but no fox.
The fox may well have recalled Shakespeare who used the term 'fox' to describe a fine sword blade in some of his works, and for a time became a colloquial term (' thou diest at the point of fox').

It seems like there were some blades with Shotley marks which were more of the rapier form with central fuller known on some of the English cup hilts, but I have never heard of a Shotley colichemarde. But then as previously noted, it is really unclear what they actually produced aside from the examples of military backsword or broadsword blades and some hangers.

Maybe somebody out there has seen Shotley marked blades and might post here in addition to those already shown.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Thanks Jim, It does seem that the formation of The Hollow Blade Company... and with it The Sword Blade Bank were subsidiary to the Sword Makers of Shotley Bridge but entirely separated by some sort of legal wizardry!... This allowed the Banking arm to operate in very murky waters indeed and with the South Seas Company (later implicated and of the South Seas Bubble fiasco) who were up to their necks in the slavery business. Many would argue that the slave trade financed in part the Industrial Revolution in the UK.. The upshot being that the big names simply used the Swordmakers credentials in pulling in finance and other names for their own grandisement.

See https://books.google.com.om/books?id...20bank&f=false

The thrust of this segment of my input suggests that the naming of the company and its association with the Shotley Bridge sword makers was irrelevant except for the prestigious linkage with certain branches of Royalty and influential business names and of no substance to do with blade production whatsoever. It therefor largely represents a degree of importance in the general smoke screen when unraveling this puzzle along with the blade in the hat story and the mercury in the hollow blade. The biggest flanneling escapade may yet turn out to be the entire story of the Hollow blade as quite unfounded and that no hollow blades of the Colichemarde form ever got made at Shotley Bridge.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

To underline my last words above see https://oldswords.com/articles/Small...ibles-v1i1.pdf

Where at page 35 the author; the reknowned E. Andrew Mowbray in Men at Arms Magazine states~

Quote" There is no evidence that hollow blades were ever produced at Shotley Bridge.'' Unquote.

[Jim McDougall]

Keith, my apologies I entirely missed your post (#36) and the illustration of the hilt with marks. Could I see the entire sword?
These 'regimental' marks on the hilt seem to have been more of a convention of the mid to latter 18th c. in England, though I am not saying such cases did not exist earlier. There was little standardization and such unit stamps were simply applied incidentally it seems.
The '2' with hyper link D and 'B' would certainly be plausible as 2nd battalion.
I am curious at how the Oley attribution to the blade is made.

By the marking crown over 9, this seems indeed an inspection mark, and these are described by Robson in his "The British Military Sword" (1975) but I do not have my copy at hand. It seems these kinds of marks were not used until the second half or latter 18th c. but again could be wrong on that.

If this is as I suspect, a mid 18th century infantry hanger (possibly the heart shape guard known as 1751 due to the Morier paintings) and dating to the Revolutionary War period, then it would be fascinating to see an Oley blade from Shotley confirmed. If Shotley was indeed producing military swords that late, I am curious why it is not included in any of the literature that are compendiums and listings of such makers over the past 60+ years.
It could be of course that old hanger blades from Shotley were remounted just as the case with numbers of blades with both Hounslow and Shotley markings, however evaluation of the sword as a whole is necessary.

Ibrahiim, thank you so much for the link to the wonderful article by Andrew Mowbray, which if not mistaken was in the first volume of "Man at Arms" magazine back in 1979. He was one of the most helpful and knowledgeable men in the arms community, and truly an inspiration to me.

I think he well surmised the Shotley situation, and there was indeed no doubt that blades were being brought in to 'salt' the works, and to appease investors anxious about the production. His description of the colichmarde matter is excellent, and well explains the purpose of the heavier forte section of the blade in dueling, which of course inherently exceeds fencing parameters in use of these unusual maneuvers. I had not thought of grabbing the blade in the manner described in the article. That the feature on a blade suddenly appeared is no more reliable a notion than its alleged limited use and sudden disappearance.
The curious blade profile with dramatic reduction in the blade to narrow foible to point is known in more ancient swords in blades known as 'carps tongue' if I recall correctly (Oakeshott, 1962, "Archaeology of Weapons").

The idea that some rather showy instances of blade production were probably emplaced in degree seems logical, but it would be unlikely to find accurate detail considering the covert and rather unconventional legal matters at hand.

Keith, it has been known that Benjamin Stone was very much the driving force in Hounslow, and though he was not a maker or craftsman, but an enterpreneuer/deal maker, he did have his own stamp or mark....a bunch of grapes. That he was getting blades from these many centers is not surprising as trade in blades was long a key industry, though he likely acquired these in lots through locations such as Holland, which like Liege, were international arms dealers.
Naturally the occurrence of various marks, names and inscriptions would be seen in almost a happenstance manner in these dynamic dealings, so to try to set rigid guidelines, axioms or classifications would be futile.

Keith, it is great to be discussing this intriguing topic with you and Ibrahiim as it seems at last I am learning more on what seemed quite baffling as I tried studying it decades ago. I hope you will keep us posted on progress on your book and looking forward to it!!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Thanks Jim, In bringing on Benjamin Stone he was indeed a maverick dealer...and outlined at https://books.google.com.om/books?id...0MAKER&f=false is probably the real reason why the Germans were brought in to rejuvenate English sword making ability...

[urbanspaceman]

Hello Folks. As I have mentioned earlier in this thread, I am still 'on probation' so my postings must pass muster with Mr. Moderator, which means I'm appearing out of sequence.
I posted a picture of a running fox inscribed on a blade with a verifiable probity, as the vendor was from SB and knew the history of the sword i.e. an Oley blade. This style of fox is identical to the one on the blade I bought some time ago. Also, the sword that Nicholas Oley is shown holding i.e. the last blade made in SB by his grandfather (which puts it at approaching 1840) looks identical to the one sold by the ex. SB resident and also to my acquisition.
Non-the-less, in the case of my sword, it looks to me like a poor fit in the hilt, but the blade looks like it has been much used, sharpened and polished in its life, so it may indeed have been re-hilted.
I will post pictures of the verifiable sword first, then pictures of mine.
[IMG]

[urbanspaceman]

Originally Posted by
A BRASS HILTED OFFICER'S SWORD, LATE 17TH/EARLY 18TH CENTURY with double edged blade retaining traces of a brief inscription within a short fuller and stamped with the running fox of Shotley Bridge on each side (pitted), brass hilt comprising double shell-guard engraved with the owner's name 'Sir H, Liddell Bt', knuckle-guard, an additional pair of scrolling bars joining the knuckle-guard to the shell front and back, and spherical pommel (button chipped, quilon removed), and wooden grip with later copper wire binding, in an associated brass-mounted lather scabbard, the locket inscribed 'R.S.' on the front and with the maker's name '[B

J. Hunter, South Bridge, Edinburgh[/B]' (worn) 80cm; 31 1/2in blade Sir Henry Liddell (before1660-1723) gained the title of 3rd Baronet Liddell and was M.P. for Durham City, 1688-98, and for Newcastle 1701-5, and 1706-10.

Hello Ibrahiim.
I had a look in Bezdek's book and I found four J. Hunters operating in Scotland. It looks like the scabbard was made between 1560 and 1580 then was re-used. We could probably find out what RS stood-for if we cared-to but there is no-one amongst his ancestors.
I gather there was no maker's mark on the hilt. It may have been an old hilt with his title added or he may have had a new one made. I can't say 'for his new blade' because this man never did any fighting (other than in Parliament) so the wear of the blade was not down to him or any of his descendants; one of whom was father to Alice of Wonderland fame. It was obviously all old when he acquired it - apart from his title on the hilt - and may have been assembled by various folk over the years.

Sword slipper James Hunter 1538–1548 Perth

Cutler James Hunter 1780–1810 Edinburgh
Sword slipper • Made midshipmen’s dirks and cold stream guard officers swords.

Armourer James Hunter 1560–D1580 Edinburgh
Sword maker • Master Armourer, 1570.
• When he died, he had 62 swords and 125 blades in stock.

Armourer James Hunter 1598–1608 Dundee
Sword maker • Son of David Hunter.

[urbanspaceman]

Of course, the brief (and faded) inscription may not be Shotley Bridge and the fox could have been from anywhere in the past - including Hounslow - if he bought it in London, or Solingen then hilted in Scotland in the 1500s; so the sword and hilt and scabbard may well have been contiguous.

[urbanspaceman]

I took this last week when I was out at Shotley Bridge.[IMG]

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Thank you for the excellent additions to library ... I am on page 50 of your first copy and how interesting it is... There are many interesting features which I need to compile ..

As a matter of interest the sign on the Crown and Crossed Swords is a relatively new one ... Apparently the old one was removed in about 1965 and this new one was the replacement and quite different to the original. The previous sign being more the crossed sword form, flatter and of the basket type...

[urbanspaceman]

Hello Ibrahiim. Yes, that is how I always think of the sign, so I must be recollecting old images of the village; can't say I'm much impressed with the replacement. I was in the adjoining bar, which is dreary and forlorn, (a typical old English village pub) and the barmaid mentioned guests, but I have to confess the hotel did not look like it was doing business; the main front door hasn't been opened in some considerable time, and the insides of the big windows were dirty. There's plenty of money thereabouts, so it could do well as a typical rural gastro-pub with the right chef and manager, but that's not the way it is at present. Sad.
However, I am certain Mr. Richardson and Mr. Bygate would be happy to know their work lives on in the right circles. Actually, I must check to find out if Bygate is still alive - he may not be dead, as it was only 17 years ago when that book was published and he was not that old then.[IMG]

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I think that was the adjoining place and is mentioned in a document I saw about architecture in the village as being quite different in construction to the original Crown and Crossed Swords which was to the right. That could make that The Commercial Public House ...Possibly now absorbed... I think the Menu Sign to the right of the door has the original style of Crown and Crossed Swords on it?

It will take me a while to absorb the brilliant pdf work you have added and I have to say what an important set of documents these all are. Thank you.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I POSTED THIS AND IT IS A NOTE AT #62

A BRASS HILTED OFFICER'S SWORD, LATE 17TH/EARLY 18TH CENTURY with double edged blade retaining traces of a brief inscription within a short fuller and stamped with the running fox of Shotley Bridge on each side (pitted), brass hilt comprising double shell-guard engraved with the owner's name 'Sir H, Liddell Bt', knuckle-guard, an additional pair of scrolling bars joining the knuckle-guard to the shell front and back, and spherical pommel (button chipped, quilon removed), and wooden grip with later copper wire binding, in an associated brass-mounted lather scabbard, the locket inscribed 'R.S.' on the front and with the maker's name



As is commonly mixed up with the fox/wolf;...This description comes with no picture of the weapon thus it is suspect as being confused between the two animals. I think the weapon is stamped with the Passau Wolf NOT the fox. Clearly the wolf or running wolf which has several all stick like images of wolves was the Passau wolf famous on Solingen blades but reproduced in other schools of sword making excellence as a blade of quality mark. It is very different in structure to the running fox.

As will be seen ... The Running Fox was never done by Shotley Bridge...whereas the Passau wolf was... After all many of the sword smiths there were originally from Solingen. It remains to be seen if Shotley was importing a load of blades regularly from Solingen if the Passau wolf marks were all done at Shotley Bridge or already on the blades when they arrived ...or both! If Shotley was not stamping the Fox who was? It would appear that Samuel Harvey is in the frame at Birmingham...anyone else?

[urbanspaceman]

Hello Ibrahiim. The image on the sword sold in auction last year (see post #25 of this thread) with first-person confirmation of probity i.e. an Oley blade from SB, is definitely a Samuel Harvey like fox not a Passau/Solingen/early SB wolf. I am waiting to hear from the auctioneer as to whether the vendor (an ex SB resident) will commune with me.
here's the other half, and the original half, of the pub.[IMG]

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Then it is not a Shotley product. It is however a Birmingham one. It is a Samuel Harvey. Nice picture by the way... Thanks.
The stick like construction of the Passau Wolf mark was a favourite of Solingen and often used by other sword schools of manufacture to signify a quality blade much in the same way that Andrea Ferrera was struck on blades throughout history. Swords emanating from Shotley Bridge often sported this mark...but never the bushy tailed Fox.

[Jim McDougall]

This discussion is going great! and Keith, you have brought up some very good questions on some of the blades which may well have comprised some colichemarde blades as these were often of three edge section. While the blades termed 'colichemarde' had a wide forte and to considerable length near center....the foible was dramatically narrow for speed and thrust.

You asked what marks etc. were to be found on these types of blades, which is indeed important to see if perhaps any were produced at Shotley Bridge.
As has been noted, this type of blade, much favored by duelists, seems to have appeared sometime around third quarter of the 17th c. and given way to the typical three edge (hollow ground) blades for small swords around 1720s, but in the civilian sector.
Military officers continued their favor of these, most of which seem to have produced on the Continent, and have decoration and engraving by various outfitters and furbishers. Often these were jewelers and goldsmiths, as was typically the case with most small swords.

It would be interesting to see if any small sword blades, regardless if colichemarde or other types of blade bore any mark or inscription to Shotley Bridge. As I have mentioned, the Hounslow enterprise seems well represented in many of the reference sources, however in those listing examples, only few have Shotley blades shown. Of those seen, I have not seen any small sword or colichemarde to Shotley mentioned or shown.
It would seem that they should be as a list of Shotley makers from Hoppe (Hooper) and the Oleys through the 18th c. to 1808 is listed in Aylwards
"The Small Sword in England".
Yet, in illustrations and text, no example is shown or described, despite the Oley's noted as proprietors and 'bladesmiths'.

If this was they case, why is no blade marked to any Oley?


To the WOLF/FOX:

In the considerable research I have done on these markings, which concur with Ibrahiim's notes here, I have found that the conundrum of these curious images cannot be conclusively asserted. What does seem clear is that the 'running wolf' (called the Passau wolf for its believed origin) was used in Solingen by the 16th century. These often incredibly stylized (sometimes indiscernible) 'animals' were placed on a single side of the blade and typically chop type marks filled with brass or copper.

These were not standard by any means, as they were placed by workers of varying degree of skill (certainly not artistic) and often resemble the prehistoric cave type figures almost. Thus they could never be assigned to a particular maker, nor even period or any sort of chronology (as Wagner's chart implies). They were simply and arbitrarily placed on a blade as a kind of imbuement of quality.

As the Hounslow operations ensued in the early years of the 17th century, the Solingen makers who went to England undoubtedly used these simple marks, and in the almost stick figure manner a tradition in Germany . Meanwhile many blades there were imported from Germany and fitted to the developing hilts of Hounslow form.
The reputation of the Hounslow blades was well known, and while the operations ceased by 1650s it seems, the blades continued to have long working lives as heirlooms and rehiltings, even well into the 18th c.

With the advent of the Hollow Blade Co and Shotley Bridge in 1685, it seems some of the Hounslow families were involved. Though there is a great degree of doubt on the production of 'hollow blades', there were a number of military type blades and hunting sword or hangers it seems. Some of these indeed have the German wolf (no doubt brought forth by the German members) of the stick type image with Shotley Bridg inscribed.

As noted, no Shotley Bridge blade as far as known ever used the 'fox'.

The Shotley Bridge entity is said to have continued after the collapse of the very dark Hollow Sword Co. but no swords marked with the wolf or Shotley Bridge markings are known beyond the first years of the 18th c.

The wolf as a blade marking had been long gone from Passau, but at this point it seems to be gone from Solingen as well.

By the 1750s, Birmingham was determined to redeem its value as a blade and sword producer, and the maker Samuel Harvey began to use the canine figure once again, certainly recalling the now fabled 'running wolf' character but now with a British twist ....it was a quite discernible running fox with its distinctive plumed tail. He placed his initials SH within.
It was noted however that on occasion, the fox did not have initials (though some had only an H). It now seems that at least one other Birmingham may have used the fox, but no initials.

In a short time, it seems these 'foxes' ceased, and only Harvey's name appeared on the blade in various configurations.

[urbanspaceman]

To simplify matters in my postings, I want to refer to the tri-form blades - be they colichmarde or otherwise - as history has done and call them Hollow Blades; which, unfortunately, is a poor term, as a hollow in a blade can mean a fuller or simply mean a hollow ground edge re. sharpening techniques; but nevertheless...
So my question is this: of the English hollow blade short-swords in existence today, do they feature any blade markings? If so, can anyone tell me what those markings are?
Coming back to Shotley: I've been considering the issue of a three-wheel grinding machine, inasmuch as I cannot find any evidence that they brought one with them; the declaration cited in the Charter by Sir Stephen Evance only states that they used such a machine in Solingen - not that they brought one with them. However, let's be realistic here: even if they didn't bring one with them, and it seems reasonable to suppose such an enterprise was impractical, they would certainly not be at a loss to manufacture one in Shotley Bridge once they got settled. So, the top and bottom of it all is that they could have produced innumerable hollow blade short-swords, if that was what was demanded.
But! The three original smiths who arrived in SB in 1685 had to be supplemented by an additional nineteen families two years later; so if the first three had no experience of the specialist grinding machine - which is not unlikely, considering they had been in England since the Hounslow days - then the new arrivals certainly did. Yet bringing nineteen families and no grinding machine indicates that the original enterprise of producing hollow blade short-swords was abandoned almost immediately as a result of the inevitable enormous demand for military blades.
Having established a company and acquired Crown approval the Company changed hands rather quickly, and two members were removed and new names introduced: such as Sir Stephen Evance; this was the transition from producing Hollow Blades as a primary enterprise to the beginnings of the dubious business practices thereafter.
At the SB end, I think that being exclusively able to supply hollow blade swords might have been of some prestige, but there is no way that it could compare fiscally with arming thousands and thousands of soldiers. Although, according to the Cotesworth documents, they were being screwed for every penny, to the extent they couldn't pay their bills; mind-you, that is a common enough excuse amongst workers throughout history, and considering Oley's wealth later on, at worst purely temporary.
This is why I am interested to learn what markings were on the hollow blade short-swords here in England at the turn of the century, is it not almost certain that they came from Germany. (When did they begin producing them in Klingenthal? It must have been decades earlier. Did we not import from there?) The statement made to the courts when Mohll was on trial was that the blades found in the river were of a type only produced in Shotley Bridge. Who says? How did they know? Why were the blades not Solingen products? After-all, the ship was coming from Rotterdam. Was that purely to evade a smuggling charge? Very grey area!
The more you delve into this business, the murkier it becomes, unless the obvious is not that obvious after-all.