This last week, my wife picked me up an Albion Mercenary in the Marketplace here (with the help of Nathan and Brian). I really love the sword, but it needed a little more character. The grip is a light brown that shows alot of varying detail in the leather, but the pommel and guard were polished to a fairly high near chrome sheen. I had to do something to make it match a little better. So, I decided on a medium antique effect with the details highlighted a bit.

As most everyone here knows, I hate the stock finish on most new swords. They always look too new, where as I prefer a little more age / wear and tear. Rather than do something to make it rust prematurely or pit the finish, I like to add a light antique grey to dark grey finish. I use a mild chemical blue which will easily come off with 000 steel wool and gun oil, so it's not really a permanant change, but it adds alot of character to the weapon. The good thing is that no harm comes to the original finish of the sword - any light scratches or wear is on the outer layer of blue rather than actually damaging the metal.

My wife and I agree that the new finish matches the original grip character much better. I am happy with how it turn out!

Thanks in advance for your comments!

Your taste and mine run along the same lines. I like my swords to have that "used, but well cared for" look. You really achieved that well with this sword. The finish on the hilt really compliments the color of the grip and makes some of the color variations in the leather seem more natural.

I particularly like the worn highlights on the edges of the cross and the facets of the pommel. Well done!

Chris

I like the look you've achieved, but have to disagree on the philosophy. All swords (and daggers, knives, armour) were new once. And probably fairly shiny. :)

I think antiqued stuff can look great; I just prefer the piece to gain the look honestly through actual use and patination. Artificially aging something is just that: artificial. The real aging of an item (like for a person) carries stories and experiences, joys, and pains, etc. Artificially aging an item is kind of like a fake back-story. I suppose adding artificial aging isn't as bad as trying to remove evidence of real aging, but it's just not my thing. :)

I love the look and creativity, but it kind of rings hollow to me. I have nothing against people who like to do this stuff at all, though, I just have a different point of view on the subject. :) I do love seeing how people create the various looks, though.

I think the darkened finish looks good, and personally do not think of this as "antiquing" so much as adding a protective finish which happens to have the added effect that mild wear/polishing highlights the corners and high spots, and gives a slightly worn effect.
Period armor and weapons/fittings were blackened, painted, plated, gilded, etched, and even covered in fabric, so I don't think this is necessarily ahistorical, either. Inducing wear by polishing with steel wool is the only part of this that I would call artificial.

Jonathon - nicely done! if you don't mind, what specific "part" did you use, & brief hint of "how" details?

Chad - I intellectually / theoretically agree, but in practice in the real world now, fwiw I disagree. Swords are no longer practical objects or tools. We cannot carry them daily to work on our horse, have the odd skirmish every week or so scaring away bandits :-), etc., or do all that much with them to "honestly age". For most, swords now are collector's objects, of which I'd think a substantial percentage of enjoyment is visual - stirring of the imagination.

As a collector (new, so fwiw), I find Kirk Lee Spencer's redone gladius immensely more visually interesting than my (still, so far) pristine Albion Allectus. (Of course I haven't handled, so not saying I'd trade :-)

To each his own. Not arguing, just trying to lend a bit of moral support to the other "character" folks. Takes some guts to ruin a perfectly good sword :-)

I agree with you in principle, Chad. I would prefer that my swords be as "natural" as possible, but in some cases I'm not prepared to be that patient. The idea of natural aging on modern replias is also compromised somewhat by the fact that modern steel alloys do not age the same as simple period steels and wrought iron. Given this I think some judicious artificial aging or induced wear is acceptable, depending on one's taste. Those who use their swords for cutting or wear them about at events and such can probably achieve a worn look much more naturally, but not all collectors fit these categories. This is of course all a matter of preference, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, just offering an opinion.

I guess I was mostly responding to your comment that all swords, daggers and armor(s) were fairly shiny when new. Some had/have darkened finishes or other coatings when new, although I guess it is arguable that they were probably shiny before these finshes were applied.

Yeah, this is all just our different personal preferences. :)

I think if I were to age a sword, I'd want to age it past gently used to faux-relic status. I'd bang it up, notch the edge a few times and bury it in dirt and light corrosives for a few months or longer. Then I'd stabilize it and clean it up and have something that looked several hundred years old.

For what it's worth, I keep my stuff oiled so it never really patinates much. I want to believe that if I were a knight, I'd be a rich one who could afford a couple of squires to care for my stuff. :)

Nicely done Jonathan. I did something similar to this Albion Senlac.
[ Linked Image ]

I applied cold bluing and then rubbed the furniture with an oily rag to achieve a darkened appearance. I tend to share Chads opinion on artificially aging swords so that wasn't my intention, but rather to give the sword a bit of detail and contrast.

Thanks for the input.

I do something to nearly every sword I own, because to be honest, I don't carry any of them enough to actually wear on a patina. I take good care of them, and would prefer not to let any of them get enough dirt/grime on them to actually put on a permanant patina. I avoid rust/pitting at all costs, so the blue works for me. It looks good and its easier to take care of. However, I don't like the blue to be so dark that it's black, because that looks somewhat unnatural to me. Alot of the older Del Tin stuff has a finish just as dark as what I put on my Merc when they came new, and as an influence, I just learned to love that tone of grey metal over the highly polished pieces. If I can see my reflection in it, it does not really work for me. Once again, this is personal preference. Some like shiny, some like dull - neither is the correct way.

Perhaps if I were a collector, I'd keep my items in pristine shape. However, I use or wear my most of items out and about and they are never going to stay in pristine shape anyway. I just get a jump on the process. :D

Like I said with my Merc, the worn details and stains in the light brown grip just did not seem to pop with a highly polished finish. I am happy with the contrast I achieved without overdoing it.

BTW, nice Senlac above there! I love it! :D

I tried looking for mention of this in the reference section but perhaps I missed it or it hasn't been covered. How frequently were bluing or other metal treatments used on European swords? Has it been found on originals from certain eras or across a range of time periods? Was it applied primarily for aesthetics to nobles' weapons or was it more a commonly used practical rust preventative? I'd appreciate your learned input, I'm trying to decide on a treatment for a Type XVIIIe.

Any forged weapon will be technically blued after heat treatment. The blue/discolorations are removed during the polishing phase - which was (and is) a pretty time consuming process. So, in reality, I would speculate (if anyone can correct this assumption, please do) that more weapons had more of a blued/matte grey finish than a highly polished luster, especially if weapons were made and distributed quickly and there was not time to polish them properly.

I would assume that weapons made to a lesser standard were often more darker/blued in finish than those bought by nobility, who had the luxury of purchasing weapons finished to a higher standard.

Since I am assuming the historical context here, perhaps someone could chime in with some historical precedent here. I'd personally like to know a little more about it myself.

There is still a good bit of grinding after heat treatment. Blades are not ground to sharp before the heat treatment. There are occasions where makers/smiths will leave a good amount of darkness and even scale but the norm is bright. Gus used to leave some fullers black as an option. That saved having to grind/polish them bright. To get an edge though, one needs to remove a good bit of metal after heat treating. Some blades do patina darker over time. Even the castings and forged fittings tend to get a good amount of work before a finish product. In the case of the fittings, there is no need other than crispness of lines. What we don't see of preserved swords is a great many that looked like they were not polished bright and that includes swords and blades across a great range of cultures.

Cheers

GC