Here's my question, on various modern sharps I see a 2nd bevel edge and not so much an edge that tapers the same as the blade, like that of Japanese swords? (presumed that they don't have a 2nd bevel as I have only seen pictures).

Now for the likes of originals were they a mix of beveled edges and sharp edges that went with the profile of the sword?

Like, I look at my Sempach, having a hexagonal blade and wonder - Does or should the edge be 2nd beveled or go with the shape of the blade profile within originals?

Sorry if my question isn't fully explained as I don't yet know the various terms for describing such!

Some close original examples would be handy if anyone can point me in the right direction, I haven't found many as of yet.

cheers.

"Should" is a tricky word.

IN most cases there is not so much or no visible secondary bevel at the honing of the edge on originals. However, depending on cross section, thickness and perhaps the taste of the owner, there may be more or less of a rolled eye visible at the honing.
Very rarely there is a sharp secondary bevel like the norm is on modern knives.

For thick diamond or hexagonal sectioned blades the rule is that there should be very little difference in the angle of the honing and the main bevel of the edge. This means there should be very little or no trace of a secondary bevel in the sharpening. On very thin blades it might be different: they may be designed to have a thin main body and the chisel like sharpness of the edge to impart resiliency on the otherwise thin cross section.

Some big and study war swords have blunter edge than lighter swords....

And on and on it goes....

The Sempach from Albion should have very little in the way of discernible secondary bevel at the sharpening of the edge. The cross section is designed to have just about flat main edge bevels going straight into the sharpness of the edge. The final honing is so light that it will not create a visible secondary bevel.

Cool Thanks Peter, very handy information.