repurposed rapier blades

[urbanspaceman]

Hello Folks; wishing you all the best for '25.
Hi Jim. You will recall that just last week I suggested that the Portuguese and Spanish appeared to prefer their slim rapier blades on small-sword hilts, rather than the rapidly becoming ubiquitous 'hollowed' blades. I wondered if there was many examples of Iberian smallswords with hollow blades.
I have two swords: one is a Portuguese smallsword/court-sword with a re-purposed slim rapier blade, and the other a Spanish court-sword hilt, again on a slim rapier blade (see below).
Until the arrival of Klingenthal manufacturing, hollow blades only came from Solingen and Shotley Bridge; I don't know what political circumstances existed between these countries which may have made it necessary – or opportune – to re-use what would obviously have been a profusion of rapier blades in Portugal and Spain.
I have never seen a hollow-bladed smallsword distinctly attributed to Portugal or Spain and I am beginning to suspect they did not predominate; however, my experience is limited and – consequently – I call on the forum to disabuse me of my suspicions if necessary… Fernando would know for sure.
It seems absolutely possible that the blades they had carried and fought-with so effectively, and for so long, would not be abandoned causally, and certainly not to oblige fashions.

[Jim McDougall]

Keith, thank you for posting this interesting conundrum!
As we have discussed, it seems that the Spanish rapier blades of the 16th century remained in favor for virtually generations after the demise of Toledo in the mid 17th century. By about the 1630s, the innovative machine of Solingen was producing blades spuriously marked with markings and names of famed earlier makers of Toledo. These were mostly broadsword blades and others, but included the thin thrusting blades common to the Spanish rapier.

The Spanish swordsman was known for the mysterious, geometrical and occult oriented system of fence known as DESTREZA, commonly referred to in fencing references as 'the Spanish fight'. By the end of the 17th century, the beloved cup hilt rapiers of Spain were giving way to a smaller, lighter and faster sword for fencing regarded primarily as a French innovation though it as well known across Europe.

The 'French' style of fencing primarily based on the 'smallsword' became dominant through the 18th century. The Spaniards, in the Peninsula largely adopted the French manner and of course the swords, nominally.
However, in the colonies in the Americas outside the direct influence of the Spanish courts in the Peninsula, the traditional elements of destreza remained very much in practice.
The strong hold to Castilian tradition remained in place in the Americas well through the 18th century into the 19th,

In the latter 17th century, the Solingen made blades for various types of swords were shipped in volume to the Americas and certainly well into the 18th, the double edged rapier blades were profoundly in these numbers.

In recent years, the wreck of a Spanish nao was found off Panama with many crates of these raoier blades, and had gone down in 1681. These raoier blades had continually been exported into the Americas literally for generations, and were regarded as 'TOLEDO' blades (for the familiar markings) despite typically being of Solingen production. Attached photo of one of these blades.

In the Americas, well into the 1800s, officers and those of high station used the now familiar small sword, however rather than the typical trefoil blade used in most European versions, Spaniards preferred the traditional TOLEDO blade. This is well noted in "Spanish Military Weapons in Colonial America 1700-1821 (Brinckerhoff & Chamberlain , 1972). where three of these swords, stated origin MEXICO clearly with small sword hilts and TOLEDO blades. These date end of 18th century.

While these examples are from the colonies (i.e. Mexico) and likely mounted with blades long already in these regions, possibly either stored or long in circulation, they do in degree reflect the propensity for Spaniards preferring their traditional rapier blades.

In my own experience, I must agree to not having seen examples of any Iberian smallswords or court swords which were mounted with the type blades (trefoil or colichemarde) characteristically on the European (or American ) versions. Obviously there will likely be exceptions, however I agree that 'typically' the earlier form of Spanish rapier blade prevailed on Spanish swords, as well it seems even on some English swords.

[urbanspaceman]

One thing is for certain, and that is the balance/weight of the rapier blade in a smallsword hilt: it is much further forward compared to a trefoil blade. This will certainly influence the style of fighting; the rapier blade will demand a great degree of destreza compared to the modern smallsword techniques. I would imagine this alone would influence to repurposing of the rapier blade.
I will pull down some swords from the wall and measure them to include in my next post.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

One thing is for certain, and that is the balance/weight of the rapier blade in a smallsword hilt: it is much further forward compared to a trefoil blade. This will certainly influence the style of fighting; the rapier blade will demand a great degree of destreza compared to the modern smallsword techniques. I would imagine this alone would influence to repurposing of the rapier blade.
I will pull down some swords from the wall and measure them to include in my next post.

Well observed Keith! The destreza is much different in that there is much less contact, more traversing (circling) one guard (right angle, point and shoulder in line). There is less blade to blade contact.
With the small sword, more dynamic, faster and more blade to blade, parrys etc.
The balance on this espadin is remarkable. Blade 31.5".

[urbanspaceman]

Well… so much for my theory!
I compared the Portuguese, rapier bladed, smallsword with a typical silver-hilted French hollow blade smallsword and surprise, surprise: both have 32" blades and both have a balance point at 4" from the shell; identical!
Admittedly, 32" is generally the maximum length for a small-sword, although colichemardes tend to be at least that, and often a little longer.
If you look carefully, you will see that the tang of the rapier blade has been reduced at the ricasso as well as being shortened at the foible, producing this balanced weight.
All together, I would imagine there is little to choose between the two as far as technique is concerned which would have been very satisfactory back then with all those rapier blades to choose from.
ps
Note the King's Head punzone on the ricasso.

[Jim McDougall]

Im not sure your theory is deflated Keith, and I cannot speak with any authority on the trefoil smallsword blades, Ive never handled one. What I know is this is by far well balanced and light, certainly well suited for destreza in which your arm is extended directly in line with the shoulder. This is the prime guard for destreza, in fact the only guard position.

As you noted earlier, and I was remiss in not noting, if Fernando was here he could truly set these matters straight as his knowledge on Iberian rapiers was beyond reproach. He is truly missed.

[urbanspaceman]

One thing I didn't indicate was the weight of the two swords:
the hollow blade French smallsword is c.35g
the rapier blade Portuguese smallsword is c.40g
So, a little heavier, which is apparent when holding them.
I see no-one has jumped in to tell me they have seen many hollow blade Peninsular smallswords... I don't know if this is significant or not. Maybe they are waiting for the weekend.

[urbanspaceman]

Up here in the North of England, and over into Scotland, there existed (I know this because many still do) a lot of smallswords with narrow double edged blades.
It seems that, at first, the hollow blades were not popular up North.
I have two Shotley Bridge smallswords from 1688, with 28 and 29 inch double-edged, 1 inch wide (at the shell) blades. Both have very sharp edges but are not especially pointed.
One is 60g, the other 65g, with mainly the hilts contributing to the difference. Balance points: 4 and 4.5 inches.
I believe we are seeing a lack of accessible instruction for the new smallsword techniques, but predominantly a 'dyed-in-the-wool' confidence in weightier, sharp-edged swords.
The hollow blade smallsword was not everyone's cup of tea.

[Radboud]

Keith, do you mean 600 and 650g for your two smallswords? If that is the case, they are very much on the heavy side, especially with those short blades (might have lost a little from the tip over time?).

Are there any markings on the blade to suggest a military use? That might be one reason for the extra weight.

Personally I’m not a big fan of the ‘re-purposed rapier blade’ theory. I’m sure it happened, but logically it should have been rare. The effort needed to re-profile a 40 inch blade into a 30-32 inch one and get the distal taper and balance correct would have been considerable. Furthermore, who would do the work? A cutler? Their speciality would have been mounting blades on hilts, so the blade would have needed to have been supplied re-profiled. This does lend to the ‘family blade’ possibility, which we know happened, but it just increases its scarcity in my view.

We know from surviving examples that a whole plethora of blade profiles were used throughout the history of the smallsword and into the courtsword period. But this is to be expected, the majority of these swords were individual purchase custom pieces. Even ones that follow a pattern, very, very often have custom blades. It is the nature of the smallsword, and while there are facts we can determine, such as the need for specialised equipment to economically produce tri-foil blades, that can’t be used to fix a lenticular blade to any specific era or location. Just because Solingen had the tools to make tri-foil blades, didn’t mean that they stopped making lenticular ones. Of that French customers stopped buying them.

Looking at the fencing styles of the period is very useful, and what stands out from the confirmed Iberian smallswords is that they often have functional annuletts, long after they became decorational in the French styles. This allowed the user to pass their finger over the cross-guard ‘ala-rapier’. Additionally, because the Iberian / Southern Italian fencing styles retained some of the rapier cuts, the longer ‘rapier style’ blades were retained.

My main issue I have with the “re-purposed rapier” or “transitional rapier” names is that they are all to oftern miss-used by sellers to upsell what is a perfectly normal and honest smallsword. It’s like the black grip Lugers were sold as SS “black widow” Lugers when all the evidence points to it being a simple production change. And yet the myth persists.

And while Keith’s blade may be a re-purposed rapier, there are other simpler reasons for the placement of the mark or ricasso modification, that are also possible. Maybe the cutler needed to re-profile the ricasso to get the balance correct on the hilt. Or the tang broke, or it was miss-struck by a drunk worker maker didn’t care enough.

Keith, if you’re looking to increase your sample size of smallsword dimensions, I keep the details of my eight smallswords here: Sword Measurements (the 8th sword is listed under French swords, as m1767 infantry officers sword)

[urbanspaceman]

Yes, I absolutely mean 600 and 650gr... what was I thinking?!
Those are exactly the kind of early smallswords we find predominating up in the North of the British Isles. They were made in Shotley Bridge between 1688 and 1691 but almost certainly nearer to '88. I have seen several more of almost identical design.
They would have been in the hands of local Jacobites and were definitely dress swords. The military versions were horseman's swords with broader blades of the same length (30") but those blades were smuggled in from Solingen and feature the Passau Wolf, whereas the smallswords have the Oley bushy tailed fox.
You make a very valid point re. refashioning rapier blades: the Portuguese one above has a flattened diamond profile which is maintained down to the foible; it is perfect throughout its length. It makes me consider if it was not always that length and if so, for what? Were they buying stock, ready to mount in smallswords? Every question has three following up.
The blade is dedicated to the queen of Portugal which is obviously Maria 1st (1777 - 1816) which helps put it in chronological perspective.
You raise a good point regarding the annuletts but that Portuguese sword has typical short 'branches'; that, of course, is the hilt design which looks much later than Queen Maria 1st so it was a re-purposed blade combination.
BTW. the link to your measurements does not work.
Purely for your interest, I am including my 1767 French officer's sword, of which I am particularly fond. It bears a strong resemblance, in some fashion, to my Shotley Bridge smallswords. A longer blade, but a similar balance in the hand... and very sharp. Let me have an active link so I can see yours; does it feature a cartouche at the ricasso?

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Yes, I absolutely mean 600 and 650gr... what was I thinking?!
Those are exactly the kind of early smallswords we find predominating up in the North of the British Isles. They were made in Shotley Bridge between 1688 and 1691 but almost certainly nearer to '88. I have seen several more of almost identical design.
They would have been in the hands of local Jacobites and were definitely dress swords. The military versions were horseman's swords with broader blades of the same length (30") but those blades were smuggled in from Solingen and feature the Passau Wolf, whereas the smallswords have the Oley bushy tailed fox.

Those are heavy smallswords, my heaviest is the Spanish cup-hilted one at 640 grams and that has a 34.5 inch blade.

What I mean by military use, is that we know some officers would carry swords (such as rapiers, smallswords or hunting hangers) that weren’t strictly ‘military battle swords’. Maybe these gentlemen wanted a sword that gave them more options against a backsword.

Alternatively could they be what was called ‘shearing swords’ on a smallsword hilt? That wonderful grey area we modern collectors love and hate.

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

You make a very valid point re. refashioning rapier blades: the Portuguese one above has a flattened diamond profile which is maintained down to the foible; it is perfect throughout its length. It makes me consider if it was not always that length and if so, for what? Were they buying stock, ready to mount in smallswords? Every question has three following up.

We know that there was international commerce back to ancient times, so specialisation of production was well established by the time your blade was produced. German, Italian or Spanish made blades would be shipped across Europe to be hilted by local cutlers to meet the tastes of the local market. It is not unreasonable to believe that adjustments were made in the final fit and finish.

I think we need to consider the economics of the time as well, materials were expensive while labour was not. Would they throw away steel on a grinder? The re-using of a blade makes economic sense, but how much steel would they be prepared to waste in the process?

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Let me have an active link so I can see yours; does it feature a cartouche at the ricasso?

Odd that the link doesn’t work, it should take you to a page on the SBG Sword forums that lists my swords with links that then go to each sword (photos and stats). Here’s the full text to copy and paste:

https://sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/t...d-measurements

for example the link to my cup-hilted smallsword is: https://sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/post/898439

Or the French m1767: https://sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/post/878362

[urbanspaceman]

Those two smallswords were forged by Adam Oley in Shotley Bridge in c.1688.
They were hilted by a cutler in (The Side) Newcastle, name of Thomas Carnforth.
It is suspected, but as yet unconfirmed, that the larger of the two was presented to the Duke of Northumberland, George Fitzroy, illegitimate son of Charles II, Commander of the 2nd Troop of Horse, along with a Horseman's sword with a smuggled Solingen blade (see pics) and the motifs of the 2nd troop on the shell.
As I said in my opening assertion: we in the North of Britain were slow to adopt the hollow blade smallsword, and were keen to still have some weight and two cutting edges, even when 'off-duty'.
Soon after, John Holles, Duke of Newcastle, commissioned backswords for his militia: they also were forged by Adam Oley in Shotley Bridge (see pic). They were marked SHOTLEY and BRIDGE on either side of the blade.
Holles was a firm royalist, but James II's insistence on a Catholic country (Holles was a staunch protestant) led Holles to support Danby against the King's supporters at York.
I'm afraid all I get when I go to SBG is a blank screen.

[urbanspaceman]

Sorry, that was the wrong shell image; here is the correct one.

[midelburgo]

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...286#post269286

I pictured in that thread a Spanish smallsword from early to middle XVIII th century, with a Spanish rapier blade by Pedro del Monte (working in Toledo, c1610 to c1630). The rapier blade has been ground into a colichemarde shape, and total length is still 1.03m