Weapons used for individual combat in period, metal or non-metal, including swords, knives spears, polearms, pikes, axes, maces, quarterstaves, longbows and arrows, crossbows and bolts, slings, etc. SCA combat weaponry is not acceptable. No firearms, mines or bombs. No siege engines, earthworks, or similar troop offensive/defensive constructions. NOTE: Use of period mercury-gilding or similarly hazardous period techniques will disqualify an entry. Substitution of equivalent modern processes with appropriate safeguards, noted as such in the documentation. shall not be penalized in scoring.

DOCUMENTATION (0-4 points) Must have at least a 3X5 card. More is acceptable. Give one point for each of the following that is present:

• Identification/Description of the entry.
• Approximate date and place/nationality in history that the entry is modeled upon.
• Includes materials/tools list OR states method used to complete entry.
• Cites at least one reference, either illustrative (pictures) or descriptive relating to either A) period use of such item OR B) period method of constructing such item OR C) both A & B.

• 0:Blatantly modern in materials, design, construction, or embellishment.
• 1:Generally period, with some obviously modern elements (e.g. stainless steel, not-quite-period decorative motifs, questionable blade shape, etc.) OR obvious mix of elements from different cultures or periods (e.g. an epee decorated with early Norse motifs).
• 2:Overall period style and execution, with minor inconsistencies (e.g. some obviously purchased hardware, modern shortcuts in process that don't quite approximate period results, etc.).
• 3:Period design and execution with no inconsistencies; period materials or reasonable equivalents; processes used produce results equivalent to those produced in period.
• 4:Special effort to achieve a completely period product in design, materials, decoration, techniques, etc. e.g.: Hand-forged blade, handmade hardware, handmade bowstring and hand-fletched arrows, etc. Entrant provides accessory items as appropriate (scabbard, quiver, blade cover, etc.).

• degree of original work in design (0 for kit" knives, etc.)
• variety and difficulty of materials used
• variety and difficulty of construction techniques attempted (forging, welding, finishing, woodwork, fittings, fletching, etc.)
• variety and difficulty of embellishment and decorative techniques attempted (blade engraving, etching, inlaying, carving, jeweling, etc.)
• scope of endeavor: consider number of pieces, size of work relative to amount of detail.

• Mastery of period style and technique. Note: an entrant who has made modifications or substitutions for economic or safety reasons can still demonstrate an understanding of period practice by his choice of alternate processes and materials.
• Material use. Consider choice, preparation, and handling. Are materials proper strength and quality? Are they appropriate to each other and to the project?
• Construction techniques. Do parts fit properly, were processes applied correctly with proper results, are blade edges and ridges even, etc.
• Finishing and decorative techniques. Are edges smoothed, blades sharpened, surfaces finished, embellishment well-placed and well-done?
• Function. Is weapon strong enough for intended combat use? Are swords, knives, etc. balanced? Will arrows fly? Does the weapon fit comfortably and securely in the hand?

• 1:Used a kit or existing pattern with no modification.
• 2:Close duplicate of someone else's project.
• 3:Logical combination of a few copied elements.
• 4:Evidence of original work logical to period context, in design or execution; worked on standardized project, but added personal variations to either basic pattern or ornamentation
• 5:Creative interpolation in combination of elements; modified basic pattern and ornamentation OR piece is an exact replica of a period piece.
• 6:Much innovation logical to period context (e.g. development of an original method to replicate a period style); work is almost entirely original application of period designs and methods

QUALITY (1-6 points) Evaluate the work as a whole.

NOTE: This category is subjective; however, the judge should take into account prior category scores, aesthetic appeal, presentation, intuitive response, and other such items not previously addressed.

DOCUMENTATION (0-4 points)Must have at least 1 page, 2-3 pages preferable. More is acceptable. Give score based on the following:

• Identification/Description of the entry plus the approximate date and place/nationality in history that the entry is modeled upon.
• Statement or listing of materials used in entry's construction and use(s) of the entry.
• Describes method(s) used to create entry (may include reasons for why a certain process or material was used).
• Cites at least two references, either illustrative (pictures) or descriptive relating to either A) period use of such item OR B) period method of constructing such item OR C) both A & B.

• 0:Blatantly modern in materials, design, construction, or embellishment.
• 1:Generally period, with some obviously modern elements (e.g. stainless steel, not-quite-period decorative motifs, questionable blade shape, etc.) OR obvious mix of elements from different cultures or periods (e.g. an epee decorated with early Norse motifs).
• 2:Overall period style and execution, with minor inconsistencies (e.g. some obviously purchased hardware, modern shortcuts in process that don't quite approximate period results, etc.).
• 3:Period design and execution with no inconsistencies; period materials or reasonable equivalents; processes used produce results equivalent to those produced in period.
• 4:Special effort to achieve a completely period product in design, materials, decoration, techniques, etc. e.g.: Hand-forged blade, handmade hardware, handmade bowstring and hand-fletched arrows, etc. Entrant provides accessory items as appropriate (scabbard, quiver, blade cover, etc.).

• degree of original work in design (0 for kit" knives, etc.)
• variety and difficulty of materials used
• variety and difficulty of construction techniques attempted (forging, welding, finishing, woodwork, fittings, fletching, etc.)
• variety and difficulty of embellishment and decorative techniques attempted (blade engraving, etching, inlaying, carving, jeweling, etc.) --scope of endeavor: consider number of pieces, size of work relative to amount of detail.

• Mastery of period style and technique. Note: an entrant who has made modifications or substitutions for economic or safety reasons can still demonstrate an understanding of period practice by his choice of alternate processes and materials.
• Material use. Consider choice, preparation, and handling. Are materials proper strength and quality? Are they appropriate to each other and to the project?
• Construction techniques. Do parts fit properly, were processes applied correctly with proper results, are blade edges and ridges even, etc.
• Finishing and decorative techniques. Are edges smoothed, blades sharpened, surfaces finished, embellishment well-placed and well-done?
• Function. Is weapon strong enough for intended combat use? Are swords, knives, etc. balanced? Will arrows fly? Does the weapon fit comfortably and securely in the hand?

• 1:Piece is illogical in context of period.
• 2:Logical combination of a few copied elements.
• 3:Evidence of original work logical to period context, in design or execution.
• 4:Creative interpolation in combination of elements; much innovation logical to period context (e.g. development of an original method to replicate a period style).

QUALITY (1-8 points) Evaluate the work as a whole

NOTE: This category is subjective; however, the judge should take into account prior category scores, aesthetic appeal, presentation, intuitive response, and other such items not previously addressed.

DOCUMENTATION (0-4 points)Must have at least 3 pages of discussion (NOT including visuals and bibliography). More is acceptable. Give score based on the following:

• 0:No documentation or very inaccurate documentation.
• 1:Minimum information (time, place, type of weapon).
• 2:Same as #1 with visual reference (Photocopies, pictures, postcards, etc.) to period examples of weapon form, but little or no discussion of period use or construction techniques; OR same as #1 plus discussion of period practice, but no visual references.
• 3:Same as #1 plus visual references with discussion of period practice.
• 4:#3 but very complete examples and discussion, including rationale for all construction techniques, design, and materials used, and their appropriateness to each other, to intended combat use, and to the specified period. Explains original research or experiment. Explain any deviations or variations from period norm.

• 0:Blatantly modern in materials, design, construction, or embellishment.
• 1:Generally period, with some obviously modern elements (e.g. stainless steel, not-quite-period decorative motifs, questionable blade shape, etc.) OR obvious mix of elements from different cultures or periods (e.g. an epee decorated with early Norse motifs).
• 2:Overall period style and execution, with minor inconsistencies (e.g. some obviously purchased hardware, modern shortcuts in process that don't quite approximate period results, etc.).
• 3:Period design and execution with no inconsistencies; period materials or reasonable equivalents; processes used produce results equivalent to those produced in period.
• 4:Special effort to achieve a completely period product in design, materials, decoration, techniques, etc. e.g.: Hand-forged blade, handmade hardware, handmade bowstring and hand-fletched arrows, etc. Entrant provides accessory items as appropriate (scabbard, quiver, blade cover, etc.).

• degree of original work in design (0 for kit" knives, etc.)
• variety and difficulty of materials used
• variety and difficulty of construction techniques attempted (forging, welding, finishing, woodwork, fittings, fletching, etc.)
• variety and difficulty of embellishment and decorative techniques attempted (blade engraving, etching, inlaying, carving, jeweling, etc.) --scope of endeavor: consider number of pieces, size of work relative to amount of detail.

• mastery of period style and technique. Note: an entrant who has made modifications or substitutions for economic or safety reasons can still demonstrate an understanding of period practice by his choice of alternate processes and materials.
• Material use. Consider choice, preparation, and handling. Are materials proper strength and quality? Are they appropriate to each other and to the project?
• Construction techniques. Do parts fit properly, were processes applied correctly with proper results, are blade edges and ridges even, etc.
• Finishing and decorative techniques. Are edges smoothed, blades sharpened, surfaces finished, embellishment well-placed and well-done?
• Function. Is weapon strong enough for intended combat use? Are swords, knives, etc. balanced? Will arrows fly? Does the weapon fit comfortably and securely in the hand?

• 0:Piece is illogical in context of period.
• 1:Logical combination of a few copied elements.
• 2:Evidence of original work logical to period context, in design or execution.
• 3:Creative interpolation in combination of elements; much innovation logical to period context (e.g. development of an original method to replicate a period style).
• 4:Original, innovative combination of period materials, techniques, and designs, as might have been done by a creative period artisan. Special consideration such as personalized decoration, etc.

NOTE: This category is subjective; however, the judge should take into account prior category scores, aesthetic appeal, presentation, intuitive response, and other such items not previously addressed.