is it possible for blood/flesh to remain on a blade for over a century.... - Page 2

Atlantia · 23rd July 2008, 03:31 AM

The hilt is a nice one, but its difficult to see how the blade will look good again without major restoration.
The price seems quite strong to me.

kronckew · 23rd July 2008, 07:23 AM

if there is sticky brown stuff on it, and not rust as it appears, it could be cosmoline grease, courtesy of the US Army bringer-backer.

p.s. -for atlantia, there were eight excalibur swords for sale on epray this a.m., you might get lucky

if the romans had discovered cosmoline, we'd be awash in old roman weapons in as-issued condition but covered in the most persistant substance known to man.

p.p.s - on dating the lances, there was a show on TV here in the UK about the hapsburg lance, i believe they did not date the lance itself, but some organic material on it (wood in the socket?) as metal doesn't date well with c14 tests. also about half the lance's metal was later additions, the viking wings, the waisted section below the gold foil wrap etc. were confirmed by xray to be later additions, the basic leaf shaped roman style blade was untouched as the present guardians would not let them sample that part. likewise the nail wired to the central incision, i think they did sample a bit of the wire. even if those bits are 700ad, that doesn't mean the rest is. it'd be like saying the mona lisa is a fake because it's in a 19c frame.

when you repair, reconstruct, embellish an old blade when does it stop being the original?

Nonoy Tan · 25th July 2008, 01:26 PM

Jim, the information you provided is interesting.

Indeed, advances in science has the power to bring forth new information (never thought possible to obtain) and destroys old paradigms and limitations.

My primary reason for collecting is to preserve objects for future generations. This is why I try to as much as possible do minimal "treatment" (if any at all) of these weapons. My thinking is that I might destroy any important materials on the specimen, which can be important in the future. I prefer to preserve the object with everything on it, while balancing this with the goal of arresting any destructive element (e.g. rust). I personally dislike weapons that have obviously been heavily polished and cleaned. I feel that such processes destroy something about the object for future use, and primarily serves the interest and aesthetic/display objectives of its present owner. It is interesting that one can be provided a clue (though unverified) as to the owner's priorities and objectives for collecing, by observing how they keep their collection. IMHO only.

Jim McDougall · 25th July 2008, 11:54 PM

Thank you so much for acknowledging my post Nonoy Tan, it is very much appreciated. I enjoyed doing the research and relocating old notes and was hoping that the information might be interesting to someone since the topic is quite intriguing.

All very best regards,
Jim

Atlantia · 26th July 2008, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kronckew

if there is sticky brown stuff on it, and not rust as it appears, it could be cosmoline grease, courtesy of the US Army bringer-backer.

p.s. -for atlantia, there were eight excalibur swords for sale on epray this a.m., you might get lucky

if the romans had discovered cosmoline, we'd be awash in old roman weapons in as-issued condition but covered in the most persistant substance known to man.

p.p.s - on dating the lances, there was a show on TV here in the UK about the hapsburg lance, i believe they did not date the lance itself, but some organic material on it (wood in the socket?) as metal doesn't date well with c14 tests. also about half the lance's metal was later additions, the viking wings, the waisted section below the gold foil wrap etc. were confirmed by xray to be later additions, the basic leaf shaped roman style blade was untouched as the present guardians would not let them sample that part. likewise the nail wired to the central incision, i think they did sample a bit of the wire. even if those bits are 700ad, that doesn't mean the rest is. it'd be like saying the mona lisa is a fake because it's in a 19c frame.

when you repair, reconstruct, embellish an old blade when does it stop being the original?

LOL, 8 Excaliburs!

I'm sure Excaliburs magic would prevent rust without the need for grease ;-)

Strange that the English have such a momentus Magic sword in our 'history' but no great tradition of them.

As for the lance! I'd love any Roman or Byzantine weapon (even snapped!)
The nail seems an illogical inclusion.
Is there any reason why that was supposed to have happened?
Even by religious relic standards it seems ludicrous.

As for (seriously) restoration of weapons.
I'm completely for it.
I think that these things will outlive us all and good traditional method restoration is appropriate and part of their history and journey.

23rd July 2008, 07:23 AM	#32
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,184	if there is sticky brown stuff on it, and not rust as it appears, it could be cosmoline grease, courtesy of the US Army bringer-backer. p.s. -for atlantia, there were eight excalibur swords for sale on epray this a.m., you might get lucky if the romans had discovered cosmoline, we'd be awash in old roman weapons in as-issued condition but covered in the most persistant substance known to man. p.p.s - on dating the lances, there was a show on TV here in the UK about the hapsburg lance, i believe they did not date the lance itself, but some organic material on it (wood in the socket?) as metal doesn't date well with c14 tests. also about half the lance's metal was later additions, the viking wings, the waisted section below the gold foil wrap etc. were confirmed by xray to be later additions, the basic leaf shaped roman style blade was untouched as the present guardians would not let them sample that part. likewise the nail wired to the central incision, i think they did sample a bit of the wire. even if those bits are 700ad, that doesn't mean the rest is. it'd be like saying the mona lisa is a fake because it's in a 19c frame. when you repair, reconstruct, embellish an old blade when does it stop being the original? Last edited by kronckew; 23rd July 2008 at 07:51 AM.

23rd July 2008, 03:31 AM	#31
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	The hilt is a nice one, but its difficult to see how the blade will look good again without major restoration. The price seems quite strong to me.

25th July 2008, 01:26 PM	#33
Nonoy Tan Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 293	Jim, the information you provided is interesting. Indeed, advances in science has the power to bring forth new information (never thought possible to obtain) and destroys old paradigms and limitations. My primary reason for collecting is to preserve objects for future generations. This is why I try to as much as possible do minimal "treatment" (if any at all) of these weapons. My thinking is that I might destroy any important materials on the specimen, which can be important in the future. I prefer to preserve the object with everything on it, while balancing this with the goal of arresting any destructive element (e.g. rust). I personally dislike weapons that have obviously been heavily polished and cleaned. I feel that such processes destroy something about the object for future use, and primarily serves the interest and aesthetic/display objectives of its present owner. It is interesting that one can be provided a clue (though unverified) as to the owner's priorities and objectives for collecing, by observing how they keep their collection. IMHO only.

25th July 2008, 11:54 PM	#34
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,952	Thank you so much for acknowledging my post Nonoy Tan, it is very much appreciated. I enjoyed doing the research and relocating old notes and was hoping that the information might be interesting to someone since the topic is quite intriguing. All very best regards, Jim