I believe I mentioned this theory on a previous one of your videos on colichemarde smallswords, but as a mechanical engineer my opinion is that the main purpose of such a feature would be to further stiffen the beam for penetrating more resistive targets. Beam deflection is inversely proportional to the second moment of area (a function of how much mass is placed how far from the bending axis in the cross-section), so the wider base there would take significantly more force to bend the same amount, and doing so at the base can give the same benefit as reinforcing the entire blade that way with a smaller effect on the center of mass. I'd imagine some would pick a colichemarde because they expected to fight more heavily-clothed opponents, didn't want to "take any chances" that it wouldn't penetrate, or had less confidence in the penetrative power of a smallsword thrust in general, where others would see it as overkill and pick the sufficiently stiff blade of a "normal" smallsword for it's nicer movement in hand. Of course, I have no historical evidence for this, so this could simply have been a side effect of a feature added for some other purpose, but it's a side effect that ought to be noticeable, so I would think it would have been one influencing factor in the decision, even if not the main one.
You have to consider that there's plenty of bones in the human body and a flexible blade hitting a rib, sternum or clavicle (assuming a 'killing' thrust) might just stick into it and bend, where a very stiff blade might either break the bone and continue penetrating, or 'slide off' the bone and continue penetrating. I've only foil fenced, so a hard thrust to my opponent's chest saw my blade just flex, but I have to say that sometimes that was disconcerting to my opponent anyway. I wanted to fight epee or saber, so you could really whack your opponent, but had other things on my mind in those days (yes, college, sex, drugs and rock'n'roll.)
Hi Matt! Just checked in Gallica (online ressources of the French National Library), and the "colismarde" (first occurence 1751, so definitely a period spelling, while "colichemarde" first occurence in database is from 1822, in a novel) is defined in 1822 by the colonel Hermann Cotty (also author in 1806 of a book on the manufacturing of small arms, so definitely a guy with some service in the army) as follows: COLISMARDE. Long and narrow sword, but widened 8 inches from the guard, to better deflect, in the parry, the opposing blade. gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5797522n/f78.image.r=colismarde So congratulations Matt, your assumption seems to be backed by period evidence!
There's not much more to look into right now. But you might check your period sources for that "colismarde" spelling and variants. There is another dictionary, published in 14 volumes from 1841 to 1851 by the général Bardin (who is responsible for the design of both the 1816 and 1817 "united" French officer (dress) swords), which describes colismarde as follows (very literal translation): COLISMARDE, or COLICHEMARDE. Thrusting weapon mainly used for fencing. The etymology of this word seems to belong to the Spanish language. The Colismard differs from the CARLET in that about 20cm from the guard, the blade suddenly widens to the top, and forms a thin heel, but 25 to 30mm wide in order to increase opposition of the parries, and to deflect the ennemy's thrusts. Because of its shape, Englishmen have called it broad sword, or espadon. Trusting the Encyclopédie du dix-neuvième siècle (at the word Arme), the Colismarde was a sort of "coutille" - Some authors consider the Colismarde as a brétailleur* weapon, and confused it with the BRETTE, which is longer, older, and from another country. gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5784365h/f76.image.r=colismarde *brétailleur: not that easy to translate. From my research, it seems that in French, in 17th and 18th century sources (and later 19th century novelesque use), everything linked with what we nowadays uniformly call rapiers, was associated with quarrelsome behaviors, swashbucklers, lawless soldiers, braggarts, etc. Expressions such as "traîne-rapière" (rapier dragger) were common. Even in 17th century sources, rapiers are almost always described as old/obsolete. Brette seems to have been a synonym of rapière, and a "bretteur" would be a brette/rapière wielder, but "brétailleur" is even more pejorative. The etymology of "rapière" is quite uncertain. I'm not really buying the theory that it comes from "espada ropera". The English word "rasp" comes from French "raspe"/"râpe", and "rasper"/"râper" is to rasp. Considering that rapiers are swords with long blades, almost always associated with individuals who just want to make trouble (a long blade is like a red flag saying "I'm looking for troubles", and the dragging is noisy, and gets in the way of people, which are more likely to trip on it, giving excuses to start a fight), I think the name "rapière" comes from the very fact that it's "rasping" on the ground. That was the etymologic minute. Bardin mentions the name "carlet" (could also be spelt "carrelet"), which would probably be a period name for what is nowadays called in the English-speaking community a "regular" smallsword. But it seems quite wrong that colichemardes were actually called broad swords or espadon in England, as Bardin states.
It seems Sir William Hope confused "Konnigsberg" ad "Konigsmark". But the weird thing is that knowing how name are "frenchised", there's much distance between "colismarde" and "Konigsmark". The usual frenchisations I find are "Conigsmarc", "Conismarc", at worst "Conimarc". But to get to "colismarde" (the old form of "colichemarde"), the N has to become a L, and the C a D, which is much change to happen in a really short time, linguistically speaking, while there already was a competiting frenchisation, and that I can find to transitionnal form (like "colismarc" or "conismarde"). 19th century French authors seem to agree on a Spanish origin of the term: could it be possible that between "Konigmark" (German) and "colismarde" (French), there is a Spanish missing link that would explain that amount of alteration (unconsistent with usual ways of frenchisation and sound shifts in French, at least not in that short time period)?
From a materials science point of view, a straight, relatively flexible blade running into a rigid hilt will have a significant stress riser right at the upper end of the hilt. The increased stress at that point will tend to significantly increase metal fatigue there as well. OTOH, the tapered blade of the Colichemarde will tend to spread that stress and concomitant metal fatigue over a much larger area. Additionally, the relatively rigid base of the Colichemarde blade will significantly increase the overall rigidity of the blade (since the flexible part is shorter), which, as you emphasized, is a significant advantage in the thrust. Against these two advantages, is the disadvantage of reduced nimbleness and length of the wider blade for a given mass. Shockingly, it would seem there might be a tradeoff. 8-) The existence of both blade styles would seem to indicate that there wasn't/isn't a dominant choice.
It's that Matt says things like "At this juncture.." that makes me love this channel so much. His choice of vocabulary is often as archaic as his interests, which is a very fine thing indeed.
I'm starting to appreciate small swords. They are like the subcompact 9mm of bladed weapons. Also, they are elegant and in fact pretty mean with that triangular section spike.
I like the design of the slim one so much when made a hilt (knucklebow, finger rings, single round plate guard) for my hema smallsword (based on short epee blade) I copied it as best I could... Not exactly as I used bar stock and hand tools but the overall theme of a small round domed guard and a knuckle bow... what's funny is for years I always thought double shell guards were where it's at... Thanks for showing this one!
Something that occured to me with this and lindybeige's video on the five finger dagger is that a wider base and shorter length makes it comparitively easier to draw in a hurry and more resilient to impacts even if the extra mass at the base isnt for parrying itself, the sturdyness it lends to the blade might still be helpful
my idea as a smallsword student is, that it is all about angles. Most smallswords were intended to be used against other smallswords. Now if you have a thrust only combat, every millimeter, every millisecond counts, and the colichemard design gives you a slight advantage in deflecting or parrying a thrust (as in the cone of light we are talking about when thinking about bucklers for example). You can keep your parrying movements smaller and still be able to lead the opponent's tip away from your body. So the wider section of the blade gives you the opportunity to have smaller parrying movements, therefore giving you a small timing advantage over the user of a narrow blade whose hands have to cover more distance to reach the same effect.
I was wondering, could you please make a video about prussian cavalry sabres? I've always wondered if the shape on those lion head sabres from the german and prussian armies have any function.
Bartolomeo Bertolini states that smallswords (dueling swords) with broad blades (he doesn't mention the colichemarde, though) are better in defence (from other smallswords), by way of making a better opposition. My impression is that this "better opposition" works well also against cuts, once you're in the bind and what I mean by that is: it's more difficult for the boad sword man to counter cut you in opposition. So, in conclusion, I think the broad section is there to help you preventing a double once your point's in.
The same way cut vs. thrust was a debate in the 19th century, so was single-action-only vs. double-action-only. The wide and finely edged forte of the that blade could be, I think, used in grappling distance to "saw" on an opponent. I've learned that technique for knives and machetes when you're too close to strike. Just but the blade on him and saw rapidly. Works for unarmored people, anyways. Thanks, ColdSteel.
The colichmarde in the Historic Deerfield collection has a silver hilt and was made in Boston, MA by Jacob Hurd for a clergyman. The article on this sword in " The American Society of Arms Collectors 4/27 to 5/1 1994" does state that the colichmarde blade was favored by military officers, and apparently at least one minister. We also have a small sword with a blade as long as the entire colichmarde used by a local officer in the War of Independence with a steel hilt hilt we call an epee.
Ja, and don´t let ze fact that I ended up getting him killed distract you from ze fact that we were *very* close... I also liked George V Wincest, as he´s now called :3 #BBF #HeikaYaoi #IncestIsWincest
Hmmm, I can't help but wonder if the wider and sharper portion of the blade was to discourage opponents from grabbing the blade near the hilt with their free hand and trying to control it?
You're right it would if both the narrow and wide blades were the same sharpness. I was thinking that maybe the wider portion at the base, being flatter, provided a better surface to make a really sharp cutting edge that you wouldn't want to grab... but that's not taking into account whether the opponent is wearing gloves, or any number of other factors. Interesting little mystery anyhow.
Based on my extensive inexperience, I like that idea. Especially with their shorter blades. If it's a civilian sword, meant for dueling and self-defense, you wouldn't expect to face an opponent with armored gloves. Maybe the military versions didn't bother with the colichemarde since they did expect gloved opponents . I also wonder if it doesn't give some leverage or mechanical advantage in the bind. Rotating a straight smallsword blade would do nothing, but rotating a colichemarde against an opponent's blade would displace one or the other blade by a couple of centimeters. Idk if that matters in fencing, but it seems like a mechanical difference between the two blade types. (FWIW I like your idea better.)
The extra thickness of the blade is when you get upset, reach for the sword and pull it out a bit to express your anger, the blade will look thicker, and your opponents gets a bit more scared than when pulling out a spaghetti type of blade
Natural Selection Etiquette by Matt Easton. Very similar to Baldassar Castiglione book called The Book of the Courtier, but instead his book extolls the virtue of penetrating the soul with steel. Steeled Soul.
Hey Matt - I am not as knowledgeable about historical weapons as you, but I do have some experience making knives and small swords. My intuition is that the base of the sword is designed to control how the blade is likely to flex when it's thrust into something that offers resistance, or lands off center. The vanes help control how/where the blade is going to behave/bend when stressed and they give you a lot of ability to direct the stresses away from points where the blade is likely to fail.
8:11 it's obviously for cutting, and yes the cutting bit being that far down does work, when the opponite gets past the point, you use that part to whack them, if that part of the blade was the same width as the top, then the injury wont cut much at all, so basically it's an cut and thrust sword boiled down to the essentials.
Matt Easton, Just wondering, about the flared region of the blade and its purpose. Is the small sword with the flare any easier to pull from the scabbard than the small sword without the flare? You have mentioned, many times, about how important ease of accessibility is for a weapon, and how they must be worn in such a way that they can be drawn quickly. Could having the corresponding flare on the scabbard, let the sword be drawn in a grater range of angles than one without the flare, or allow for a more natural movement when drawing the sword. you could try drawing both from their scabbards to see if there is any difference. What do you think? then again maybe it's there to make it easier to sheath.
Some test thrusts might be nice, but at the same time, I doubt he'd want to use a historical sword for that and probably doesn't own a modern smallsword. On a bit of a tangent, I'd like to see demonstrations of cutting with a rapier (the highly evolved thrust-centric variety that we tend to think of as the 'true' rapier, not the earlier side-swords which can obviously cut). I've seen varying comments on cutting with rapiers. Although part of that might be because of different definitions of rapier.
possible explanation why Colichemarde blades were used may very much be that right there, at the base, these swords were highly decorated. and the wider that section was, the more room for engraving there was. P.S. i'm making a 3d model of a small sword and one one of your videos helped me to understand the geometry of the blade. There is no really good info about that on the internet, that i could find.
I would argue that the main reason for that aprt to be present is to increase the stiffness of the blade related to the handle. Another possible reason is in case of complete run-through, the sharp widening could inflict a less focused cutting wound which could end off the person if the point wasn't able to.
I have read that the colichemarde was a popular dueling weapon among the Creoles of 18th and 19th century Louisiana. As I understand it, the man challenged to a duel chose the weapons so each man would be using the same sword/pistol/whatever. You might not have the advantage of choosing a weapon with greater reach. When Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr fought they used pistols from a matched set owned by Hamilton's brother in law. I have read copies of newspaper accounts online of some of these duels which took place "under the Oaks" at City Park. They read like modern day newspaper descriptions of sporting events. I think there must exist many interesting descriptions as to how different types of swords were actually used. I do know they sometimes used broadswords, and I have read one account of sabers on horseback with both men shirtless. Interestingly, in that event the smaller man apparently parried his opponent's cutting blow and drove home a fatal thrust. As an aside, there is an account of Confederate cavalry general Nathan Bedford Forrest describing how he was slashed by a Union saber. He said, and I paraphrase: ...if he had known enough to give me the point of his blade rather than the edge I would not be here to tell you about it. It would be a fascinating book project to pull together these newspaper accounts as well as other eyewitness accounts to the duels in Louisiana. I say Louisiana because more duels were fought there relative to the rest of the US, and they were much more likely to involve swords. It is said that on one Sunday in the 1830's ten duels were fought in the city of New Orleans. Sorry for the long post. I enjoyed your video.
Mr Easton it would be great to hear your thoughts about how pattern and regulation swords and sabres started, who did start that and why, and why soldiers back then couldn't just pick the weapon they liked most for war. Also the evolution of sabres confuses me greatly... can you make a video about this in the future? How they evolved throughout the centuries; did they jumped from backswords to regulation swords just like that? Thanks! Great channel btw
I must have that smallsword. That's the coolest one I've ever seen. I hope it goes up on your website soon Matt! I don't suppose it has its scabbard still
Sir William's comment, as already mentioned below, does appear to me to suggest that the colichemarde was generally thought to be better at parrying blows. One possible reason may relate to Mr. Easton's mention of the greater feeling of weight in the blade. When fencing with smallswords against rapiers, backswords and the like I have found that the modern Leon Paul épée blades, whilst good for salle use, are very poor at stopping blows due to being a bit too flexible. Stiff blades such as the Triplette double-wide are a lot more effective, but can still be overpowered. The heavier colichemarde would certainly help. One member of my salle has such a blade and it is somewhat slower to handle, particularly when fencing using the common method. Presumably that is why not everyone liked them, even for military purposes.
Wider near the hilt. So you would need a big wide scabbard. So it would look as if you were walking around with some sort of cleaver strapped to your side. And then, when you draw, the cleaver becomes a nimble fencing tool. Just an idea...
Instinctually, before you’d even said anything I thought that the extra heft might allow a person to better deal with bigger blades. Whether that’s true or not I think the added heft may also help the blade to be more ridged. Whereas a blade that is of a similar width all the way to the hilt, this blade with its wide base would provide a greater deal of rigidity.
About the Colichemarde's blade shape. I felt like there must be a reason for the edge to be fine at that particular spot, and I came up with a reason that satisfies me. I think from looking at your example weapon, that it would cut into the opponent if you ran them through to the hilt, and open up a wider wound. I think this is the case for a few reasons. The sword is designed to deliver the most deadly thrust possible. This wide section is very sharp, which it is reasonable to assume means it is for cutting something somehow. Finally, the section's length appears suspiciously similar to the depth of a human torso. This all leads me to believe that this section was for widening the wound after the point enters.
Really, really interesting. Thanks. And a three genuine funnies. Better than all the comedy on UK television tonight. Matt should be (but isn't) getting 40,000 groats per episode. Apologies. It's only 22:52 here in Sussex, so there may well be some cracking comedy on later; just don't hold your breath. Spaced was 1999. Green Wing was 2007. Oh, good grief.
Hello Matt, great video. I could be wrong obviously but I believed that the colichemardes were the early versions of the smallswords so I would say very roughly 1670-1720 ? The colichemarde could be seen as some early transition between the rapier and the smallsword. As such the base of the blade was more robust. If I am not mistaken, the colichemarde remained in fashion until say, the 1750's. Then, the later versions, such as your new (glorious) smallsword converged towards the "slim" smallsword we know, since rapiers were completely obsolete in the second half of the 18th century and the smallsword had established itself as a duelling weapon. Your new smallsword is pretty fascinating to me, as it appeares to be some kind of smallsword with a battlefield character.
On an unrelated topic, you have mentioned the F.S. Fighting Knife in a few recent videos and I was hoping you could talk about them a little bit. I have wanted one for ages and would like to know a bit more about them. I have recently found a Military Antiques/Surplus store in my country who have them, so I don't have to jump through hoops to import one.
Perhaps the wide bit of the Colichemarde blade was there as a general purpose sharp blade? Never know what you'd need to cut when you're out and about.
You mentioned the rate of survival of cut and thrusts of the time, and I was curious to know the odds of surviving loss of hands/feet/limbs as well. Obviously it would depend on how much limb was lost, but I remember reading about historical figures who survived, specifically Götz von Berlichingen who lost an arm and had some really cool custom prosthetic iron hands made, and I was wondering how common or rare it was to survive traumatic amputation at the time.
No sources just observation. The small sword size leaves you much closer to your opponent and this means that any bind will be closer to your opponent and various parts their body so having some cutting ability to get at hands, forearms, neck etc. makes some sense if you don't fatally compromise the design. You mention that the wider base of the blade is sharp edged so if fully sharpened it could add some extra capability for close quarters. Also transfers center of gravity closer to the hand which might facilitate certain moves or styles.
My first assumption when seeing the thick, flared base of the sword was that it might be intended to slow or stop penetration at a slightly more comfortable distance.
I wondered that too, but Matt said the colichemarde section has a fine edge, so I don't think it would slow penetration sufficiently to be of any use in that regard...
As an American, I've got to say it's awesome that you can get some military relic in really good condition that's centuries old and be able to say with high confidence that it's an officer's weapon. For us, old things are maybe a hundred, a hundred-fifty years old? REALLY old things are two hundred years? lol
Smallswords and Colichemarde were the pocket pistol of it's day, the stuff you carry at the office. George Washington carried a Colichemarde during the war and the wide and sharp base was use bash the face in fighting at close quarters.
Just a guess. But the Colichemarde's 'beefed up' blade could be for durability. Swords can bend or take sets after extended use and in the heat of battle I could see it happening easily to a smallsword. So a thicker blade that is less prone to snapping at the hilt or bending at all would be a practical investment in my eyes.
I thought that wider section in the strong is to stiffen the blade further, but then saw that there's a gap between it and the disc guard, which seems to go against that. That's a bit weird. Would still change the weight distribution; Maybe it is just another expression of the principles that lead to sword tapering in general.
As far as I am aware the Colichemarde flair is an anti grab device. There is little you can do if someone grabs a traditional small sword blade but with the flair you thrust into the grabbing hand and slice it open.
The only example I have personally handled had a good edge at the flared portion of the blade and this nugget came from it's owner though I defer to your experience that this is the exception not the norm. I think your theory of deflection may be valid, though perhaps also a more active aggressive deflection when you yourself are thrusting you can possibly knock the opponents blade out of line. Perhaps I should acquire my own example before speculating.
Hi Matt, any chance of discussing 17th Century arms and armour? Interested in evolution of swords and armour in this age of large professional, mercenary armies on the continent and of course the English Civil War. Keep up the good work.
Excellent commentary Matt, although I might add that I have not heard of the colichemarde being particularly a military weapon but more a civilian duelling weapon plus it was commercially very available for many years, hence we have so many examples on the market, so it must have had some appeal. But the last example you showed was most interesting of the military iron hilt epee, is it for sale ..?
I hate that we have degraded to this level where if a person says something complimentary about a smallsword, or merely corrects a few misunderstandings, then somehow that person is a smallsword lover or prefers smallswords. I can almost hear someone say, "Oh, then why don't you pick up a smallsword and duel to the death with it, Matt?"
I would guess that a hevier blade would be harder to deflect. Other than that perhaps the colichemarde if for utility, as an ordinary smallsword is not able to be used as a knife in a pinch. that would also fit with millitary use, where a weapon with some tool use would be helpfull.
whenever this guy holds up a sword does anyone else get the distinct impression that he's holding up a long stiff dead blade,reed of swamp grass or something like that? like it seems fairly normal when hes not holding the sword but when he picks it up it somehow seems like its suddenly some sort of dead piece of plant thats light as a feather.
Hathi Digital Trust has a book titled 'Schools and masters of fence, from the Middle Ages to the eighteenth century. With a complete bibliography. Illustrated with reproductions of old engravings and representations of typical swords.' by Egerton Castle. On page 336 of this book you find this: The characteristic of the Colichemarde blade is the very great breadth of the fort, as compared with that of the foible. The change is very abrupt; the blade, which is stiff and broad in the portion nearer the hilt, suddenly becoming excessively slender about the region of the half weak. This pronounced difference facilitated the rapid management of the point to an extraordinary extent, without weakening the sword at the fort, with which all parries are made; so that practically the blade remained as strong as ever. This form of blade was eminently favourable to methodical fencing, and this is one of the rare instances in which the form of the weapon was not the result of the development of the theory, but one in which the invention of a new shape ultimately altered the whole system. Soon after its coming into general use we begin to hear of the free use of the "cut over the point," of multiple feints, and of what especially constituted the essence of small-sword or French fencing (in contradistinction to rapier-play) namely, circular parries in the four lines. (link to the page: hdl.handle.net/2027/hvd.hwr7nr?urlappend=%3Bseq=414 ) Its initial popularity might have something to do with the banning of dueling in France in that general period, where two people would have a public beef and one would then say "Well this annoyed me so much I will have to take a walk in such and such a park tomorrow!" and lo and behold they are both alone in the park, out of view, and when one was dead the living one could just claim he was attacked and defended himself with this short, fast personal defense weapon instead of making it seem obvious because they were both strolling around with rapiers.
maybe the broad base was made like this so you could easily sharpen it enough to replace a general purpose knife, basically your two-in-one everyday carry item. with most pure thrusting sidearms you would be forced to also carry a knife as a tool while traveling.
This is what I thought at first, but knives are so easy to carry, and people who carried cutting-centric swords usually also carried knives if they feel they would need a "cutting tool."
But why double edged? And it would be a very clumsy knife. A pocket knife wouldn't have to weigh more or cost more than the colichemarde adaptation, and would be more versatile. If it's a military sword, then a large knife or dagger would be both a more useful utility knife and also a second weapon.
Can you make a video of swords blunting in scabbards, I seem to run into this problem with my shamshir and recently I tried sharpen my beauty but slightly damage the thin Cross guard while realizing I never had to sharpen my shashka which has the same cross section as a katana thinking after tests that my my shashka got sharper than when I got it without even needing to sharpen it
Hmm... I know that for sport shooting more mass is advantageous, as it increases inertia and thus stability and precision. Maybe on a smallsword it equally helps with keeping this light weapon more stable, when it comes to align the tip with the target (especially when moving it quickly)?
Would the Colichemarde’s extra blade mass towards the hilt not reinforce the stiffness for thrusting? I mean just from an aestheic perspective, a wider base does just look more rigid than a needle thin blade, idk.
Could the colichemarde be meant to increase surfive area and thus friction when running someone through? With the lenght of the colichemarde portion you would still have enough penetration to run someone through completely, but it might stop the penetration at a distance where you could easily apply your limbs to push against your opponents body, which would make it easier to extract the blade. So, if you expected to potentially fight more than one opponent (e.g. in military service) having a colichemarde would have made more sense?
Maybe if they were called murder spikes instead of small swords they would get more respect?
i think so
Yes.
Matt Easton, what is best in life?
"Shooting, LEGO, fencing."
That is good, that is good.
Also three things that can really hurt you, Guns, Swords, Stepping on LEGO bricks.
CONAN's music in background.
anti depressives
Shooting the Lego men ?
Yes !!! One other thing too.
I believe I mentioned this theory on a previous one of your videos on colichemarde smallswords, but as a mechanical engineer my opinion is that the main purpose of such a feature would be to further stiffen the beam for penetrating more resistive targets. Beam deflection is inversely proportional to the second moment of area (a function of how much mass is placed how far from the bending axis in the cross-section), so the wider base there would take significantly more force to bend the same amount, and doing so at the base can give the same benefit as reinforcing the entire blade that way with a smaller effect on the center of mass. I'd imagine some would pick a colichemarde because they expected to fight more heavily-clothed opponents, didn't want to "take any chances" that it wouldn't penetrate, or had less confidence in the penetrative power of a smallsword thrust in general, where others would see it as overkill and pick the sufficiently stiff blade of a "normal" smallsword for it's nicer movement in hand. Of course, I have no historical evidence for this, so this could simply have been a side effect of a feature added for some other purpose, but it's a side effect that ought to be noticeable, so I would think it would have been one influencing factor in the decision, even if not the main one.
IONATVS. you're SO overthinking this. lol
Matt's assumption was the correct one. fence with one and you'll notice it...
You have to consider that there's plenty of bones in the human body and a flexible blade hitting a rib, sternum or clavicle (assuming a 'killing' thrust) might just stick into it and bend, where a very stiff blade might either break the bone and continue penetrating, or 'slide off' the bone and continue penetrating. I've only foil fenced, so a hard thrust to my opponent's chest saw my blade just flex, but I have to say that sometimes that was disconcerting to my opponent anyway. I wanted to fight epee or saber, so you could really whack your opponent, but had other things on my mind in those days (yes, college, sex, drugs and rock'n'roll.)
Yeah, I second what the smart guy said😂
@@yeahwhatever1359 That fact that you do not understand what he is saying does not mean he is overthinking it. Guess what! I am an engineer also. 😀
Hi Matt!
Just checked in Gallica (online ressources of the French National Library), and the "colismarde" (first occurence 1751, so definitely a period spelling, while "colichemarde" first occurence in database is from 1822, in a novel) is defined in 1822 by the colonel Hermann Cotty (also author in 1806 of a book on the manufacturing of small arms, so definitely a guy with some service in the army) as follows:
COLISMARDE.
Long and narrow sword, but widened 8 inches from the guard, to better deflect, in the parry, the opposing blade.
gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5797522n/f78.image.r=colismarde
So congratulations Matt, your assumption seems to be backed by period evidence!
Wow, cool!! Thanks for sharing this, I'll look more into it.
There's not much more to look into right now. But you might check your period sources for that "colismarde" spelling and variants.
There is another dictionary, published in 14 volumes from 1841 to 1851 by the général Bardin (who is responsible for the design of both the 1816 and 1817 "united" French officer (dress) swords), which describes colismarde as follows (very literal translation):
COLISMARDE, or COLICHEMARDE. Thrusting weapon mainly used for fencing. The etymology of this word seems to belong to the Spanish language. The Colismard differs from the CARLET in that about 20cm from the guard, the blade suddenly widens to the top, and forms a thin heel, but 25 to 30mm wide in order to increase opposition of the parries, and to deflect the ennemy's thrusts. Because of its shape, Englishmen have called it broad sword, or espadon. Trusting the Encyclopédie du dix-neuvième siècle (at the word Arme), the Colismarde was a sort of "coutille" - Some authors consider the Colismarde as a brétailleur* weapon, and confused it with the BRETTE, which is longer, older, and from another country.
gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5784365h/f76.image.r=colismarde
*brétailleur: not that easy to translate. From my research, it seems that in French, in 17th and 18th century sources (and later 19th century novelesque use), everything linked with what we nowadays uniformly call rapiers, was associated with quarrelsome behaviors, swashbucklers, lawless soldiers, braggarts, etc. Expressions such as "traîne-rapière" (rapier dragger) were common. Even in 17th century sources, rapiers are almost always described as old/obsolete. Brette seems to have been a synonym of rapière, and a "bretteur" would be a brette/rapière wielder, but "brétailleur" is even more pejorative.
The etymology of "rapière" is quite uncertain. I'm not really buying the theory that it comes from "espada ropera". The English word "rasp" comes from French "raspe"/"râpe", and "rasper"/"râper" is to rasp. Considering that rapiers are swords with long blades, almost always associated with individuals who just want to make trouble (a long blade is like a red flag saying "I'm looking for troubles", and the dragging is noisy, and gets in the way of people, which are more likely to trip on it, giving excuses to start a fight), I think the name "rapière" comes from the very fact that it's "rasping" on the ground. That was the etymologic minute.
Bardin mentions the name "carlet" (could also be spelt "carrelet"), which would probably be a period name for what is nowadays called in the English-speaking community a "regular" smallsword. But it seems quite wrong that colichemardes were actually called broad swords or espadon in England, as Bardin states.
It seems Sir William Hope confused "Konnigsberg" ad "Konigsmark". But the weird thing is that knowing how name are "frenchised", there's much distance between "colismarde" and "Konigsmark". The usual frenchisations I find are "Conigsmarc", "Conismarc", at worst "Conimarc". But to get to "colismarde" (the old form of "colichemarde"), the N has to become a L, and the C a D, which is much change to happen in a really short time, linguistically speaking, while there already was a competiting frenchisation, and that I can find to transitionnal form (like "colismarc" or "conismarde"). 19th century French authors seem to agree on a Spanish origin of the term: could it be possible that between "Konigmark" (German) and "colismarde" (French), there is a Spanish missing link that would explain that amount of alteration (unconsistent with usual ways of frenchisation and sound shifts in French, at least not in that short time period)?
Perhaps Knuckle Dragger is a related pejorative
"I'm gonna wrap up in a minute"
And then he talked for 9 more!
It must be an imperial minute...
Matt's gonna Matt.
It was a JoJo minute.
What I learned from this video: A few inches more are advantageous for penetration, but it will work without if it's stiff enough.
From a materials science point of view, a straight, relatively flexible blade running into a rigid hilt will have a significant stress riser right at the upper end of the hilt. The increased stress at that point will tend to significantly increase metal fatigue there as well. OTOH, the tapered blade of the Colichemarde will tend to spread that stress and concomitant metal fatigue over a much larger area.
Additionally, the relatively rigid base of the Colichemarde blade will significantly increase the overall rigidity of the blade (since the flexible part is shorter), which, as you emphasized, is a significant advantage in the thrust.
Against these two advantages, is the disadvantage of reduced nimbleness and length of the wider blade for a given mass.
Shockingly, it would seem there might be a tradeoff. 8-) The existence of both blade styles would seem to indicate that there wasn't/isn't a dominant choice.
The longer small sword here is really a sexy blade. A swift killer indeed.
It's that Matt says things like "At this juncture.." that makes me love this channel so much. His choice of vocabulary is often as archaic as his interests, which is a very fine thing indeed.
I'm starting to appreciate small swords. They are like the subcompact 9mm of bladed weapons. Also, they are elegant and in fact pretty mean with that triangular section spike.
I'm digging how frequently these videos are coming out.
The colichemarde is for cutting notches into Kukri blades.
It's been 6 years, why isn't this top comment
I like the design of the slim one so much when made a hilt (knucklebow, finger rings, single round plate guard) for my hema smallsword (based on short epee blade) I copied it as best I could...
Not exactly as I used bar stock and hand tools but the overall theme of a small round domed guard and a knuckle bow... what's funny is for years I always thought double shell guards were where it's at...
Thanks for showing this one!
I think that is a super-deadly weapon. One of my favorites.
4:07 astonishing performance Matt
damn, this small sword (the last one) looks absolutely great.
Something that occured to me with this and lindybeige's video on the five finger dagger is that a wider base and shorter length makes it comparitively easier to draw in a hurry and more resilient to impacts even if the extra mass at the base isnt for parrying itself, the sturdyness it lends to the blade might still be helpful
my idea as a smallsword student is, that it is all about angles. Most smallswords were intended to be used against other smallswords. Now if you have a thrust only combat, every millimeter, every millisecond counts, and the colichemard design gives you a slight advantage in deflecting or parrying a thrust (as in the cone of light we are talking about when thinking about bucklers for example). You can keep your parrying movements smaller and still be able to lead the opponent's tip away from your body. So the wider section of the blade gives you the opportunity to have smaller parrying movements, therefore giving you a small timing advantage over the user of a narrow blade whose hands have to cover more distance to reach the same effect.
I was wondering, could you please make a video about prussian cavalry sabres? I've always wondered if the shape on those lion head sabres from the german and prussian armies have any function.
Hello ! OMG the last sword you shown is fabulous !
- what shirt is that? I want one.
- 4:22 *ding* :)
- 6:37 "I want to wrap up by saying..." lol we know you better than that
"Im gonna wrap up in a minute"
Still 10 minutes of video ahead...
That military short sword looks really cool.
Bartolomeo Bertolini states that smallswords (dueling swords) with broad blades (he doesn't mention the colichemarde, though) are better in defence (from other smallswords), by way of making a better opposition. My impression is that this "better opposition" works well also against cuts, once you're in the bind and what I mean by that is: it's more difficult for the boad sword man to counter cut you in opposition. So, in conclusion, I think the broad section is there to help you preventing a double once your point's in.
Colichemarde? More like colicheMERDE!
David Johnson shit you beat me to it
shit you beat me to it
David Johnson ColicheMARDE works as well in Canada
Or even better, CÂLISSE MARDE
I am pretty sure it comes from the same word. "Coliche/colique" (English : Colic), Marde = Shit
The shape could be a clue.... Shit from diarrhoea....
BTW I really like Matt's videos, thanks for all the work!
Excellent, as always.
The same way cut vs. thrust was a debate in the 19th century, so was single-action-only vs. double-action-only.
The wide and finely edged forte of the that blade could be, I think, used in grappling distance to "saw" on an opponent. I've learned that technique for knives and machetes when you're too close to strike. Just but the blade on him and saw rapidly. Works for unarmored people, anyways. Thanks, ColdSteel.
Wide part reinforces the stiffness of the trust even further. The fulcrum of bending is pushed further away and made stiffer.
I like the proposed re-branding from "small sword" (which is inherently cute sounding) to "murder spike".
"Not gonna waffle on for too long..." *Proceeds to talk for another ten minutes*
I love these videos lol
Speculation: the broad base of the sword might have been for weight distribution.
The colichmarde in the Historic Deerfield collection has a silver hilt and was made in Boston, MA by Jacob Hurd for a clergyman. The article on this sword in " The American Society of Arms Collectors 4/27 to 5/1 1994" does state that the colichmarde blade was favored by military officers, and apparently at least one minister. We also have a small sword with a blade as long as the entire colichmarde used by a local officer in the War of Independence with a steel hilt hilt we call an epee.
wasnt washingtons small sword also fit with a silver hilt and made in boston?
I have a comment about this subject too but I'll talk about it in a future video.
The innuendo... Deep penentration, pimps and a small"sword" measuring contest! :D
The Kawaiiser approves. *Pins Iron Cross to chest*
Ja, and don´t let ze fact that I ended up getting him killed distract you from ze fact that we were *very* close... I also liked George V Wincest, as he´s now called :3 #BBF #HeikaYaoi #IncestIsWincest
I need one of those Georgian military smallswords. So. Nice.
Hmmm, I can't help but wonder if the wider and sharper portion of the blade was to discourage opponents from grabbing the blade near the hilt with their free hand and trying to control it?
I think that would give them a better grip than a really thin blade
You're right it would if both the narrow and wide blades were the same sharpness. I was thinking that maybe the wider portion at the base, being flatter, provided a better surface to make a really sharp cutting edge that you wouldn't want to grab... but that's not taking into account whether the opponent is wearing gloves, or any number of other factors. Interesting little mystery anyhow.
I was wondering the same.
Based on my extensive inexperience, I like that idea. Especially with their shorter blades. If it's a civilian sword, meant for dueling and self-defense, you wouldn't expect to face an opponent with armored gloves. Maybe the military versions didn't bother with the colichemarde since they did expect gloved opponents .
I also wonder if it doesn't give some leverage or mechanical advantage in the bind. Rotating a straight smallsword blade would do nothing, but rotating a colichemarde against an opponent's blade would displace one or the other blade by a couple of centimeters. Idk if that matters in fencing, but it seems like a mechanical difference between the two blade types. (FWIW I like your idea better.)
The extra thickness of the blade is when you get upset, reach for the sword and pull it out a bit to express your anger, the blade will look thicker, and your opponents gets a bit more scared than when pulling out a spaghetti type of blade
that i assume at least. This and a cheap way to make the blade as you said, sturdier so it bends less
"Having a few inches longer than your competitor... is an advantage."
- Matt Easton, teaching about natural selection
Natural Selection Etiquette by Matt Easton.
Very similar to Baldassar Castiglione book called The Book of the Courtier, but instead his book extolls the virtue of penetrating the soul with steel. Steeled Soul.
The colichmarde's ridge reminds me of a Jambiya dagger and I assume it's boosting the rigidity of the sword further.
Hey Matt - I am not as knowledgeable about historical weapons as you, but I do have some experience making knives and small swords. My intuition is that the base of the sword is designed to control how the blade is likely to flex when it's thrust into something that offers resistance, or lands off center. The vanes help control how/where the blade is going to behave/bend when stressed and they give you a lot of ability to direct the stresses away from points where the blade is likely to fail.
8:11 it's obviously for cutting, and yes the cutting bit being that far down does work, when the opponite gets past the point, you use that part to whack them, if that part of the blade was the same width as the top, then the injury wont cut much at all, so basically it's an cut and thrust sword boiled down to the essentials.
Matt Easton, Just wondering, about the flared region of the blade and its purpose. Is the small sword with the flare any easier to pull from the scabbard than the small sword without the flare? You have mentioned, many times, about how important ease of accessibility is for a weapon, and how they must be worn in such a way that they can be drawn quickly. Could having the corresponding flare on the scabbard, let the sword be drawn in a grater range of angles than one without the flare, or allow for a more natural movement when drawing the sword. you could try drawing both from their scabbards to see if there is any difference. What do you think? then again maybe it's there to make it easier to sheath.
You need to do a penetration test. That might tell you why the colic blade exists.
With really deep penetration?
oh here we go again ...
I don´t think Miss Easton would approve...
Some test thrusts might be nice, but at the same time, I doubt he'd want to use a historical sword for that and probably doesn't own a modern smallsword. On a bit of a tangent, I'd like to see demonstrations of cutting with a rapier (the highly evolved thrust-centric variety that we tend to think of as the 'true' rapier, not the earlier side-swords which can obviously cut). I've seen varying comments on cutting with rapiers. Although part of that might be because of different definitions of rapier.
possible explanation why Colichemarde blades were used may very much be that right there, at the base, these swords were highly decorated. and the wider that section was, the more room for engraving there was.
P.S. i'm making a 3d model of a small sword and one one of your videos helped me to understand the geometry of the blade. There is no really good info about that on the internet, that i could find.
I would argue that the main reason for that aprt to be present is to increase the stiffness of the blade related to the handle. Another possible reason is in case of complete run-through, the sharp widening could inflict a less focused cutting wound which could end off the person if the point wasn't able to.
That's a beautiful sword.
I have read that the colichemarde was a popular dueling weapon among the Creoles of 18th and 19th century Louisiana. As I understand it, the man challenged to a duel chose the weapons so each man would be using the same sword/pistol/whatever. You might not have the advantage of choosing a weapon with greater reach. When Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr fought they used pistols from a matched set owned by Hamilton's brother in law.
I have read copies of newspaper accounts online of some of these duels which took place "under the Oaks" at City Park. They read like modern day newspaper descriptions of sporting events. I think there must exist many interesting descriptions as to how different types of swords were actually used. I do know they sometimes used broadswords, and I have read one account of sabers on horseback with both men shirtless. Interestingly, in that event the smaller man apparently parried his opponent's cutting blow and drove home a fatal thrust.
As an aside, there is an account of Confederate cavalry general Nathan Bedford Forrest describing how he was slashed by a Union saber. He said, and I paraphrase: ...if he had known enough to give me the point of his blade rather than the edge I would not be here to tell you about it.
It would be a fascinating book project to pull together these newspaper accounts as well as other eyewitness accounts to the duels in Louisiana. I say Louisiana because more duels were fought there relative to the rest of the US, and they were much more likely to involve swords. It is said that on one Sunday in the 1830's ten duels were fought in the city of New Orleans.
Sorry for the long post. I enjoyed your video.
Mr Easton it would be great to hear your thoughts about how pattern and regulation swords and sabres started, who did start that and why, and why soldiers back then couldn't just pick the weapon they liked most for war.
Also the evolution of sabres confuses me greatly... can you make a video about this in the future? How they evolved throughout the centuries; did they jumped from backswords to regulation swords just like that?
Thanks! Great channel btw
The added mass in the blade helps with parrying heavier weapons.
I must have that smallsword. That's the coolest one I've ever seen. I hope it goes up on your website soon Matt!
I don't suppose it has its scabbard still
you should do a google search for george washingtons small sword, recently saw an almost identical specimen for sale on an auction house website.
Sir William's comment, as already mentioned below, does appear to me to suggest that the colichemarde was generally thought to be better at parrying blows. One possible reason may relate to Mr. Easton's mention of the greater feeling of weight in the blade. When fencing with smallswords against rapiers, backswords and the like I have found that the modern Leon Paul épée blades, whilst good for salle use, are very poor at stopping blows due to being a bit too flexible. Stiff blades such as the Triplette double-wide are a lot more effective, but can still be overpowered. The heavier colichemarde would certainly help.
One member of my salle has such a blade and it is somewhat slower to handle, particularly when fencing using the common method. Presumably that is why not everyone liked them, even for military purposes.
7:52 Its for engraving nice things on the sword, and thus bigger the better
Wider near the hilt.
So you would need a big wide scabbard. So it would look as if you were walking around with some sort of cleaver strapped to your side. And then, when you draw, the cleaver becomes a nimble fencing tool.
Just an idea...
I think they may have had that blade form so that they could have a nice flat bit of metal to engrave on.
Instinctually, before you’d even said anything I thought that the extra heft might allow a person to better deal with bigger blades. Whether that’s true or not I think the added heft may also help the blade to be more ridged. Whereas a blade that is of a similar width all the way to the hilt, this blade with its wide base would provide a greater deal of rigidity.
About the Colichemarde's blade shape. I felt like there must be a reason for the edge to be fine at that particular spot, and I came up with a reason that satisfies me. I think from looking at your example weapon, that it would cut into the opponent if you ran them through to the hilt, and open up a wider wound. I think this is the case for a few reasons. The sword is designed to deliver the most deadly thrust possible. This wide section is very sharp, which it is reasonable to assume means it is for cutting something somehow. Finally, the section's length appears suspiciously similar to the depth of a human torso. This all leads me to believe that this section was for widening the wound after the point enters.
Could the the Colichmarde just be to make it easier to draw/sheathe? Like a sort of guiderail?
Well i'll be damned, a smallsword that actualy looks good....didn'nt know they existed.
Really, really interesting. Thanks. And a three genuine funnies. Better than all the comedy on UK television tonight. Matt should be (but isn't) getting 40,000 groats per episode.
Apologies. It's only 22:52 here in Sussex, so there may well be some cracking comedy on later; just don't hold your breath. Spaced was 1999. Green Wing was 2007. Oh, good grief.
Hello Matt, great video.
I could be wrong obviously but I believed that the colichemardes were the early versions of the smallswords so I would say very roughly 1670-1720 ?
The colichemarde could be seen as some early transition between the rapier and the smallsword. As such the base of the blade was more robust.
If I am not mistaken, the colichemarde remained in fashion until say, the 1750's. Then, the later versions, such as your new (glorious) smallsword converged towards the "slim" smallsword we know, since rapiers were completely obsolete in the second half of the 18th century and the smallsword had established itself as a duelling weapon.
Your new smallsword is pretty fascinating to me, as it appeares to be some kind of smallsword with a battlefield character.
Your shirt shows three deadly weapons in the world.
"I'm gonna wrap up in a minute, not going to waffle on too long"
*Video goes on 10 more minutes*
LOL Matt.
Just an idea but could the colichmarde be for a snug fit in the scabbard?
The broader and sharp base of the blade may be to prevent opponents from grabbing the blade upon closing in, I guess.
On an unrelated topic, you have mentioned the F.S. Fighting Knife in a few recent videos and I was hoping you could talk about them a little bit. I have wanted one for ages and would like to know a bit more about them. I have recently found a Military Antiques/Surplus store in my country who have them, so I don't have to jump through hoops to import one.
Perhaps the wide bit of the Colichemarde blade was there as a general purpose sharp blade? Never know what you'd need to cut when you're out and about.
few inches? few inches?!? METRIIIC
basil B multiply by 2.5
which one would have a more robust blade the colichemarde? or the triangulard kinda spike smallsword.
You mentioned the rate of survival of cut and thrusts of the time, and I was curious to know the odds of surviving loss of hands/feet/limbs as well. Obviously it would depend on how much limb was lost, but I remember reading about historical figures who survived, specifically Götz von Berlichingen who lost an arm and had some really cool custom prosthetic iron hands made, and I was wondering how common or rare it was to survive traumatic amputation at the time.
could you, please, do a video on cavalry and techniques on how people delt with it? also, can you talk about how people fought on horseback?
George Washington had three smallswords...
No sources just observation. The small sword size leaves you much closer to your opponent and this means that any bind will be closer to your opponent and various parts their body so having some cutting ability to get at hands, forearms, neck etc. makes some sense if you don't fatally compromise the design. You mention that the wider base of the blade is sharp edged so if fully sharpened it could add some extra capability for close quarters. Also transfers center of gravity closer to the hand which might facilitate certain moves or styles.
My first assumption when seeing the thick, flared base of the sword was that it might be intended to slow or stop penetration at a slightly more comfortable distance.
I wondered that too, but Matt said the colichemarde section has a fine edge, so I don't think it would slow penetration sufficiently to be of any use in that regard...
As an American, I've got to say it's awesome that you can get some military relic in really good condition that's centuries old and be able to say with high confidence that it's an officer's weapon. For us, old things are maybe a hundred, a hundred-fifty years old? REALLY old things are two hundred years? lol
Smallswords and Colichemarde were the pocket pistol of it's day, the stuff you carry at the office. George Washington carried a Colichemarde during the war and the wide and sharp base was use bash the face in fighting at close quarters.
Just a guess. But the Colichemarde's 'beefed up' blade could be for durability. Swords can bend or take sets after extended use and in the heat of battle I could see it happening easily to a smallsword. So a thicker blade that is less prone to snapping at the hilt or bending at all would be a practical investment in my eyes.
I thought that wider section in the strong is to stiffen the blade further, but then saw that there's a gap between it and the disc guard, which seems to go against that. That's a bit weird.
Would still change the weight distribution; Maybe it is just another expression of the principles that lead to sword tapering in general.
I figure the wider bit moves the point of balance back a bit more.
As far as I am aware the Colichemarde flair is an anti grab device. There is little you can do if someone grabs a traditional small sword blade but with the flair you thrust into the grabbing hand and slice it open.
They are not sharp though.
The only example I have personally handled had a good edge at the flared portion of the blade and this nugget came from it's owner though I defer to your experience that this is the exception not the norm. I think your theory of deflection may be valid, though perhaps also a more active aggressive deflection when you yourself are thrusting you can possibly knock the opponents blade out of line. Perhaps I should acquire my own example before speculating.
Hi Matt, any chance of discussing 17th Century arms and armour? Interested in evolution of swords and armour in this age of large professional, mercenary armies on the continent and of course the English Civil War. Keep up the good work.
Excellent commentary Matt, although I might add that I have not heard of the colichemarde being particularly a military weapon but more a civilian duelling weapon plus it was commercially very available for many years, hence we have so many examples on the market, so it must have had some appeal. But the last example you showed was most interesting of the military iron hilt epee, is it for sale ..?
I hate that we have degraded to this level where if a person says something complimentary about a smallsword, or merely corrects a few misunderstandings, then somehow that person is a smallsword lover or prefers smallswords. I can almost hear someone say, "Oh, then why don't you pick up a smallsword and duel to the death with it, Matt?"
I would guess that a hevier blade would be harder to deflect. Other than that perhaps the colichemarde if for utility, as an ordinary smallsword is not able to be used as a knife in a pinch. that would also fit with millitary use, where a weapon with some tool use would be helpfull.
whenever this guy holds up a sword does anyone else get the distinct impression that he's holding up a long stiff dead blade,reed of swamp grass or something like that? like it seems fairly normal when hes not holding the sword but when he picks it up it somehow seems like its suddenly some sort of dead piece of plant thats light as a feather.
Well done video, sir! Smallsword always seems to be a tricky topic, doesn't it? It is this, it its not that, etc...
Hathi Digital Trust has a book titled 'Schools and masters of fence, from the Middle Ages to the eighteenth century. With a complete bibliography. Illustrated with reproductions of old engravings and representations of typical swords.' by Egerton Castle. On page 336 of this book you find this:
The characteristic of the Colichemarde blade is the very great breadth of the fort, as compared with that of the foible. The change is very abrupt; the blade, which is stiff and broad in the portion nearer the hilt, suddenly becoming excessively slender about the region of the half weak.
This pronounced difference facilitated the rapid management of the point to an extraordinary extent, without weakening the sword at the fort, with which all parries are made; so that practically the blade remained as strong as ever. This form of blade was eminently favourable to methodical fencing, and this is one of the rare instances in which the form of the weapon was not the result of the development of the theory, but one in which the invention of a new shape ultimately altered the whole system.
Soon after its coming into general use we begin to hear of the free use of the "cut over the point," of multiple feints, and of what especially constituted the essence of small-sword or French fencing (in contradistinction to rapier-play) namely, circular parries in the four lines. (link to the page: hdl.handle.net/2027/hvd.hwr7nr?urlappend=%3Bseq=414 )
Its initial popularity might have something to do with the banning of dueling in France in that general period, where two people would have a public beef and one would then say "Well this annoyed me so much I will have to take a walk in such and such a park tomorrow!" and lo and behold they are both alone in the park, out of view, and when one was dead the living one could just claim he was attacked and defended himself with this short, fast personal defense weapon instead of making it seem obvious because they were both strolling around with rapiers.
maybe the broad base was made like this so you could easily sharpen it enough to replace a general purpose knife, basically your two-in-one everyday carry item.
with most pure thrusting sidearms you would be forced to also carry a knife as a tool while traveling.
This is what I thought at first, but knives are so easy to carry, and people who carried cutting-centric swords usually also carried knives if they feel they would need a "cutting tool."
But why double edged? And it would be a very clumsy knife. A pocket knife wouldn't have to weigh more or cost more than the colichemarde adaptation, and would be more versatile. If it's a military sword, then a large knife or dagger would be both a more useful utility knife and also a second weapon.
Can you make a video of swords blunting in scabbards, I seem to run into this problem with my shamshir and recently I tried sharpen my beauty but slightly damage the thin Cross guard while realizing I never had to sharpen my shashka which has the same cross section as a katana thinking after tests that my my shashka got sharper than when I got it without even needing to sharpen it
Hmm... I know that for sport shooting more mass is advantageous, as it increases inertia and thus stability and precision. Maybe on a smallsword it equally helps with keeping this light weapon more stable, when it comes to align the tip with the target (especially when moving it quickly)?
Was there any good reason (other than fashion) for smallswords becoming popular? Could one possibly be the lightness and quickness of the tip?
Would the Colichemarde’s extra blade mass towards the hilt not reinforce the stiffness for thrusting? I mean just from an aestheic perspective, a wider base does just look more rigid than a needle thin blade, idk.
I have to wonder if they weren't having problems with blades snapping off at the hilt in the thrust and so they reinforced it.
Maybe broader blades are just for stiffness and durability? Are those typical narrow blades easly-breakable?
Could the colichemarde be meant to increase surfive area and thus friction when running someone through? With the lenght of the colichemarde portion you would still have enough penetration to run someone through completely, but it might stop the penetration at a distance where you could easily apply your limbs to push against your opponents body, which would make it easier to extract the blade. So, if you expected to potentially fight more than one opponent (e.g. in military service) having a colichemarde would have made more sense?
was the thicker part ever sharpened? if so perhaps it was used to counter close range grapples by cutting the opponents hands?
Every blade has something near the hilt, that we don't know the purpose of, and everyone argues about what it might be.
Would the wider section at the base lend the blade any increased structural stability or durability?
...if you sharpened the wings at the base of the blade, could you cut with them while grappling? maybe thats what theyre for?
the weather is terrible here in Northern Ireland