Shotley Bridge swordmakers

[urbanspaceman]

I'm posting a link to a pdf of a chapter from Richard.D.Bezdek's book: Swords and Swordmakers of England and Scotland. I've exclaimed before just what a monumental work this is; and here is another example of that splendid endeavour. It is the history of swordmaking at Hounslow, and by extension Oxford. Apart from giving a full account of Benjamin Stone's significant achievements, it also introduces names that would become important in the Shotley Bridge venture. It further indicates the applications of petitions filed prior to Shotley Bridge for the exclusive right to manufacture hollow sword-blades, by the patented grinding process, at Hounslow, which is very significant in my opinion.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams Keith ~ What an interesting article that is...I still couldn't see any reference in it to the type of mark; wolf or fox, if any, at Hounslow though several of the bladesmiths used the Me Fecit term...and as you say several went to Shotley Bridge. Good luck with that hoard of blades you are looking into... and the meeting with the council people etc...

[urbanspaceman]

I have unearthed such a treasure trove of information on the SB swordmakers today that it will take me several days to go through it all and extract the missing details of the story. Info from both the Shotley Bridge Heritage Trust and the Consett Heritage Trust.
Perhaps when all the facts are established (and that may never actually occur of course), the mystique may dwindle, taking the attraction of the adventure with it - but I doubt it.

[urbanspaceman]

Apropos of ‘Hollows’: do you think it is possible that when they referred to hollow blades they were talking about fullers? I’m not convinced that Colichemarde and later were ground hollow; I’m wondering if they were drawn or hammered into shape… or both. Looking at my one hollow blade (from Klingenthal) it doesn’t seem practical from a materials point of view to start with a solid chunk of steel then grind the hollows into it. How is it done today, does anyone out there know? .

[urbanspaceman]

attached is the 1703 agreement sword specs

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Apropos of ‘Hollows’: do you think it is possible that when they referred to hollow blades they were talking about fullers? I’m not convinced that Colichemarde and later were ground hollow; I’m wondering if they were drawn or hammered into shape… or both. Looking at my one hollow blade (from Klingenthal) it doesn’t seem practical from a materials point of view to start with a solid chunk of steel then grind the hollows into it. How is it done today, does anyone out there know? .

Certainly the Solingen people had a machine with little wheels...presumeably small grinders..and hollows were the heavily grooved out blades as seen on Colichemarde blades. Below is how the normal fullers were hammered into a flat blade but this was a different process to Colichemardes. I dont believe these blades were drawn out like wire... but ground out with spinning grindstone wheels..The Forte being left flat for strength though you will see some coli blades with three faces all the way to the guard and no squared off Forte.

Below the black arrow denotes the mallet...for ordinary fuller placement on flat blades.

[urbanspaceman]

Yes, I watched a video of a smith putting hollows into a Brown Bess bayonet and he hammered them in, resting the blade on a former in the anvil. I was thinking that, after that stage. the grinding would be minimal and the waste material also. Considering that they were having to spend a lot of money on stock and getting into heavy debt as a result, it seems that grinding it all away was wasteful and expensive.
The hollow blade I have has one large hollow and two smaller hollows, and it looks like it could easily have been hammered into that shape then ground smooth.
Does anyone actually have first-hand experience of this miraculous machine that is at the heart of all the controversy, mystery and contention?
I keep coming back to the requests for patents and exclusivity from the ex Hounslow smiths after the civil war here: all claiming to be able to produce hollow blades; it doesn't ring true to me.

[urbanspaceman]

Looking at the list (above) of required blades from the SB smiths in 1703, we see many mentions of hollows - sometimes three hollows; what is that all about?
I don't understand some of the terms used to describe blade types so I don't understand what they meant by three hollows. Any help here anybody?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Yes, I watched a video of a smith putting hollows into a Brown Bess bayonet and he hammered them in, resting the blade on a former in the anvil. I was thinking that, after that stage. the grinding would be minimal and the waste material also. Considering that they were having to spend a lot of money on stock and getting into heavy debt as a result, it seems that grinding it all away was wasteful and expensive.
The hollow blade I have has one large hollow and two smaller hollows, and it looks like it could easily have been hammered into that shape then ground smooth.
Does anyone actually have first-hand experience of this miraculous machine that is at the heart of all the controversy, mystery and contention?
I keep coming back to the requests for patents and exclusivity from the ex Hounslow smiths after the civil war here: all claiming to be able to produce hollow blades; it doesn't ring true to me.

Its a good point and since they were all smuggling the basic Colichemardes into England at the time I personally don't believe there was a machine in the entire country doing this work. They were all making it up !! If there was a machine then... where is it now? There wasnt one ... It was baloney !!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Although Burton was wrong at page 135 in his epic Book of Swords where he indicated Colichemarde going suddenly out of fashion at the time of Louis 14th he does show interesting perspective on the same page with Biscayan blades not much different to Colichemarde.