French colichemarde

[Radboud]

do these photos help?

[urbanspaceman]

This is a machine rolled fuller.

Actually, the word fuller was originally the name of the tool used to hammer in the hollow. Anyway, a steel roller under huge pressure bore down on hot stock wedged into a mold cut into the anvil top producing the two upper hollows (same way as they made estocs, then later on Brown Bess triangular bayonets.
Sorry, I am editing here as it is confusing, the upper pair of hollows (with a medial ridge) are on the bottom of the hot stock. They are known as the top of the blade, even though they are below in the en guard position... I think.
It was how they could produce a hollowed smallsword blade in a single pass, as a reducing radius hollow was impossible.
As far as I am aware - hence my question regarding colichemardes - all colichemardes have the groove, a product of the machine which was chased out of Solingen due to the guild's Luddite viewpoint.
The Mohll family owned it and brought it to Shotley Bridge to produce hollow blades at a reasonable price as there were tariffs and heavy taxes on German imports.
The conclusion I recently reached was that the French would not be buying from Shotley Bridge, hence my search for French hilted colichemardes. Even George Washington's colichemardes had to come from England.
All of the dealers and collectors I have consulted agree that there are none but it is not totally impossible.
Does your sword have a groove? Also, why do you think the hilt is French?

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Does your sword have a groove? Also, why do you think the hilt is French?

Yes, there is a groove on the underside of the blade that terminates about where the blade begins to broaden out.

My sources for why my sword is a m1767 are other collectors and Michel Petard ‘Des Sabres et Des Epees’ Volume 3 pg 67.

[Radboud]

and Jean L’Host ‘Les Epees Porters en France des Origines a nostalgic Jours’ Pg 187 & 188

[urbanspaceman]

Thank-you for your help with this issue, it is much appreciated.
There seems to have been a rather wide variety of hilt styles with this pattern: mine (shown earlier) is different again with the pronounced double quillons.
What is most unusual is to have that French hilt on a Shotley Bridge blade.
I suppose French cuttlers could have access to London merchants during that period; let's face it, business is business, regardless of all else.
Do you happen to know what Matt had to say about it?
Anyway, thanks again. Keith.

[Radboud]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

There seems to have been a rather wide variety of hilt styles with this pattern: mine (shown earlier) is different again with the pronounced double quillons.

Hi Keith, why do you think the smallsword you posted has a m1767 hilt on it?

All the attributed examples I've seen follow a fairly uniform (for the time) pattern. As seen in the texts I've posted above.

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

What is most unusual is to have that French hilt on a Shotley Bridge blade.
I suppose French cuttlers could have access to London merchants during that period.

When I run my finger along the inside of the fuller/grove in the back of the blade, it isn't completely uniform. There is a noticable change in depth closer to the tip of the blade. This is different to my English smallsword which also has a grove (but no colichemarde), which is very uniform. Maybe the French blade was hand forged or not a Shotley Bridge supplied blade.

Re Matt Easton, I haven't asked him about my sword, I don't think he attributed any model to it when he had it.

[urbanspaceman]

Hello again. I was thinking the same thing. I bought it purely on the basis of "like the look of that" and it was some time later that I saw a sword that looked remarkably similar and was titled 1767 etc. I didn't do any thorough research because it fell outside of my Shotley Bridge quest at the time. It was only when you posted your example that I began to give it my attention.
I've never really considered it a smallsword but it is, isn't it? Albeit, a battlefield weapon rather than a civilian one. The blade is superb, just stiff enough for penetration AND razor sharp. It has a most curious cartouche with an even more puzzling motto that, so far, has defied translation. It is identical on both sides.

If it is not a pattern 1767 then I can't imagine what it is… maybe it is just a sword, custom made to suit. Regardless, I am very fond of it.
OK, enough of that, now the colichemarde: it is certainly a typical colichemarde blade but then again there are different versions of the groove. Here are four, from my friend Mel again (he has specialised in collecting smallswords ) and in one case you will see the roller traveled right up to the ricasso.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by urbanspaceman

Thank-you for your help with this issue, it is much appreciated.
There seems to have been a rather wide variety of hilt styles with this pattern: mine (shown earlier) is different again with the pronounced double quillons.
What is most unusual is to have that French hilt on a Shotley Bridge blade.
I suppose French cuttlers could have access to London merchants during that period; let's face it, business is business, regardless of all else.
Do you happen to know what Matt had to say about it?
Anyway, thanks again. Keith.

Hi Keith,
While not able to add a lot here, I still follow as most interesting as always, Your command of Shotley and all related is unsurpassed.
Regarding the 'French connection' , there were always cross influences and diffusion between England and France AFIK. I know that during the Jacobite matters from late 17th through Culloden there was of course a great deal of 'staging' for the cause in France.
It seems there were many cases of blades with fleur de lis marks, and that at some location there was a 'fluer de lis' street in England where cutlers would acquire bundles of blades. I unfortunately cannot locate the source again (perhaps Aylward?).
I have seen blades with fluer de lis in British hilts pre Culloden, and there are suggestions this was a mark used in England...also suggested as the mark for the Paris arsenal.

What Im getting to is, would it be likely that French hilts, as a matter of fashion, would be mounted with Shotley blades?

While of course out of context, in the Spanish colonies in the Americas through the 18th century, it was not uncommon to see Toledo blades mounted in French hilts in the 'espadin' (small sword).

[Jim McDougall]

In rereading this thread, there is attention to the French M1767 regulation sword, In my understanding, the character of most 'regulation' swords in many if not most cases, is an official recognition of a standard pattern in use in a certain capacity by regular military forces. Often these simply record the forms already in use and simply record this and note as 'officially' sanctioned.

For example, with the British hangers of mid 18th century, these regarded as 'official' patterns were actually recognizing the two ubiquitous German style forms in use as depicted in two paintings for illustration of uniforms. The 'pattern' years were taken from the dates of the paintings.

With the colichemarde blade type, it seems to me that while evolved in the 17th century surrounded by a certain amount of 'lore' , it was intended primarily with the intent more pragmatically to respond to dueling or combat. According to some sources, these had fallen out of favor in the private sector by the latter part of first half of 18th c. and generally the trefoil blade had become more standard.

Meanwhile, the military with typical adherence to tradition and the attention to fashion and degree of flamboyance of officers, the colichemarde type blades remained popular with officers well through the 18th century.
The notion of its associations with dueling and robust character naturally appealed to most officers in the expected hubris oriented associations.

Military officers of course privately acquired their weapons, and nominally adhered to regulations in degree, but often notable variations occurred.

PS Radboud, thank you so much for adding these pages from these rather hard to acquire references!!!