To Tumble or Not to Tumble?

[Valley Ranger]

I posted this same question on the preservation forum but wanted to get some feedback from you CW buffs. I have 2 Civil War sword parts I've dug and, other than knocking the dirt off and some gentle toothbrush work, I have done nothing else to them. Though they mean a lot to me, they hold no great monetary value and I was considering tumbling them to clean them up and restore the brass luster. I know that's anathema to the purists and I get that, but on items like these, what are some of your thoughts? Yea or Nay? The CSA Saber pommel is shown below. I have parts of a sword guard in similar condition.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tpmetal]

I try and preserve the patina on everything if I can. But I guess in the end its up to you. I'll cringe every time I think about it though. haha

 

[relic nut]

You need to do what makes you happy. I probably wouldn't, but do not judge others for what they do. I like most of my finds in near dug condition so the patina speaks to the age.
Good luck in what ever you decide, just remember that there is no going back.

HH, RN

 

[relic nut]

Just wanted to add to my previous post.
When I first started we were hunting a site that had many egale I and general service buttons that were coming out of the ground in great shape. Not knowing better I over cleaned or improperly cleaned several of them and every time I look at them know I wish I'd have not done it but you can't go back.

HH, RN

 

[Valley Ranger]

Thanks everyone. Yes, I'm torn on this. I love patina as well, but on some items, I think the brass luster would add a wow factor, especially the ones with low value. I know a lot of fellas that find damaged plates, for example, send them off to have them professionally restored. And I just read an article in Western and Eastern Treasures Magazine showing some old brass pieces (not military) that were tumbled and they really turned out nice.

 

[Davers]

Guess it depends on the medium.
Something of a low hardness imo.

I would think electrolysis may work.

Maybe a-lot of scrubbing with Brass -O.

Me (Tho I would not clean it ) would try electrolysis .
GL & Show yr results.

BTW restored pieces are nice ,I have never had one done.
I'd just want to know a restoration was done.

 

[Spats]

I like the "it's been in the ground for 150 years" look. You can still buy swords and sword parts from reenactor companies that look just like yours will if you clean it up. The patina proves the age and the fact that it was buried for a long- long time. Just my opinion. The exception to the cleaning rule is iron artifacts that continue to deteriorate if the rust process is not stopped.

 

[Underwonder]

It will be interesting to read points of view.

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

Spats mentioned what I was going to say. Cleaning dug metal relics to shiny-ness makes them look INDISTINGUISHABLE from modern reproductions. Most of us don't want our dug relics to look like something we bought for $10 at a civil war re-enactment equipment seller's table.

Also, removing the patina greatly hurts their dollar-value. But let me add, speaking for those of us who don't care much about dollar-value, we like our exacvated relics to look their age... not shiny-new. Just by seeing the patina, you know the relic "went to war," instead of sitting in a warehouse, staying shiny (or nearly shiny) ever since the end of the war.

Clean all the dirt off the relic, leave the 150 years of patina on it.