Brass on swords

[Cavalier]

Was it usual to polish the brass on civil war swords in that era? I have never seen a historical reference to that..

John

 

[UCVRelics]

I don't know about the North but here in the South we had other things to do beside polishing brass

 

[mrockwell]

I think that it was an intended affect though it may not be in the manuals. The reason why I believe that it was is the psychological affect it would have had on your opponent. A firearm would be a relatively fast end and a trip to the medical tent to have it taken care of even though the remedy might be rather gruesome, it still would be relatively quick and not much time to dwell on the consequences of it. However with a sword there are many different slashes that could maim a soldier and not necessarily be a quick end as far as a person might have to reckon with. To see a few hundred drawn sabers reflected in the sunlight, I would think would cause the person that the sabers were directed at, to rather quickly consider that discretion might be the better part of valor from a ways away. In fact it would be terrifying. Whereas an unpolished sword may not have that same affect psychologically.

 

[Cavalier]

The reason I ask is that modern collectors seem to find the tarnished brass desireable. I just wondered if the original owners of the swords disregarded the tarnish or polished it.

John

 

[mrockwell]

The reason I ask is that modern collectors seem to find the tarnished brass desireable. I just wondered if the original owners of the swords disregarded the tarnish or polished it.

John

That's an age old question that I don't think will ever be answered. Myself personally is that I tend not to try and "restore" any object to its original condition. Often it is hard to match finishes on two different metals because of the different rates of oxidation such as brass and steel without removing original markings. If an object such as a sword or musket has acquired a browned or tarnished condition that is a form of natural oxidation leave it alone. There is nothing wrong with that after all it is not new. To remove that will often expose pitting which tends to make an object less pleasing to the sight. People will then tend to polish or grind the surface that will obliterate or make markings on the weapon extremely faint. My advice is to leave it alone. There is nothing wrong or displeasing with natural aging in fact it may add to the objects appearance although recent rust should be removed with 0000 steel wool and a little oil, but not scrubbed. To reduce further oxidation from handling I use Johnson and Johnson's furniture paste wax on all my wood and metal as to much oil can also hurt an object. During the flood we had here many of my objects were exposed to high levels of humidity for days before we could get to them, though thankfully none were submerged in water. Because of the wax treatment none rusted.

 

[Cavalier]

@mrockwell Thanks for posting that. I understand why modern owners of antigue weapons don't remove the tarnish. But as an example, the original owner of the swords used it as a tool of his trade, it's not really an antique to him, although he may value it highly. Some of those guys were in the Army for many years. Sumner comes to mind in that regard. I would think tarnish would have developed in that time. Wouldn't they have been required to keep the hilts of their swords and the brasswork on the scabbards polished? When I was in the army, (no combat though, lucky for me), they were eager enough about polishing everything.

I ask because I've never seen an original source mention it in regards to swords.

I do have a couple of originals, (only a musket and a bayonet), and appreciate your advice on their care.

John

 

[mrockwell]

@mrockwell Thanks for posting that. I understand why modern owners of antigue weapons don't remove the tarnish. But as an example, the original owner of the swords used it as a tool of his trade, it's not really an antique to him, although he may value it highly. Some of those guys were in the Army for many years. Sumner comes to mind in that regard. I would think tarnish would have developed in that time. Wouldn't they have been required to keep the hilts of their swords and the brasswork on the scabbards polished? When I was in the army, (no combat though, lucky for me), they were eager enough about polishing everything.

I ask because I've never seen an original source mention it in regards to swords.

I do have a couple of originals, (only a musket and a bayonet), and appreciate your advice on their care.

John

A soldier in any of the armed forces I have been associated with is required to keep his weapons spotless as well as his uniforms. This would have included his swords if they were issued one. A story comes to mind of a Mexican War general, I can't remember who it was but I think that it was either Taylor or Kearny, was sitting near his tent and was polishing his sword. A younger officer, not realizing who he was talking to, ordered him to clean his sword. The general just took his sword without saying a word. The next day the general, who was in full uniform presented the officer with the sword much to the embarrassment to the lower officer. This story illustrates to me that they did polish their swords. With that in mind one has to remember that the steel had not much time to oxidize to a state where the blade would become pitted or the brass to tarnish all that bad mainly because the weapons were constantly being observed and a dirty weapon was a punishable offense. Then came the period of neglect where they were no longer used and were allowed to rust. Not all but many. The ones that were still taken care of we tend to describe as "mint"or"unissued" and so on. From there the descriptions go downhill till your faced with a decision of what to do with it.
Yes the swords were polished and honed and scrubbed to be kept clean as they were issued to a soldier. When he had to turn it back in he was required to return it as he had got it. If not he was charged as a soldier would be today.

 

[bayonet]

The reason I ask is that modern collectors seem to find the tarnished brass desireable. I just wondered if the original owners of the swords disregarded the tarnish or polished it.

John

American Collectors like to leave the patina (not the rust) on our weapon collections but British Collectors polish everything. Don't ask me why that is. Maybe if it's an antique then leave it looking like an antique.

 

[Cavalier]

@mrockwell Thanks very much for that great story. I have not heard that before.

And to everyone else who responded to my question, thanks also!

John

 

[hrobalabama]

When I was in the army (1950-1952), everything brass was polished. Even the brass radiator on the Jeeps has to be bright and shining.

 

[bayonet]

When I was in the army (1950-1952), everything brass was polished. Even the brass radiator on the Jeeps has to be bright and shining.

"1950-1952"! and here I thought I was old

 

[Greshamian]

This hilt has not been polished for at least 50 years. It is not bright but it is scarcely tarnished. The sword hangs on the wall so it is not handled often. I rescued it from a workshop where it was used for chopping kindling.

 

[hrobalabama]

Brass is not a pure metal. It has copper, tin, and other base metals. Bronze is also used in place of brass, which is just another composition. Those with more copper tend to dull and have a patina a little sooner. Then the humidity and weather has a play in this as well.

 

[Greshamian]

Brass is copper/zinc and bronze is cppper/tin.

 

[Cavalier]

@hrobalabama I wasn't sure about humidity effecting the brass. Thank you.

John