06-20-2014, 09:37 PM
Brian and Phil,
Those were not done with repousse....have a look at the Valkenburg or the sword from Lugdunum. I have HIGH resolution photos of both swords you mention and the decoration is too crisp in its lines to be something worked in the method you suggest. Having said that, even though you punch put the decoration with a stamp of sorts.....you still have to work the decoration from the front into pitch to clean it up. This is also true for belt plates that are punched. They were not just punched and left as is. However, they were not worked the way Brian suggests. Aside from the so called Sword of Tiberius, the Fulham, Valkenburg, Strasbourg and other swords with similar decoration have the same motifs if not similar. That sort of continuity even in the shape and design does not suggest unique work which is what repousee would have been. Look at phalerae......the two medusas on the Lauresfort are not the same BECAUSE they were not punched out.
You should also have a look at the VIndonissa scabbard. That was also punched out and it is similar in certain respects to the Sword of Tiberius. I do not ascribe to this using paper thin sheet metal wrapping it around thicker brass sheet. I see no evidence of this or any logic behind it UNLESS the metals is precious like silver as in the Pompeii belts plates.
I know someone who has a copy of the Sword of Tiberius made from punched thicker metal and it looks EXACTLY like the original. Of course this is not evidence for how things were necessarily done BUT it does show that you do not have to use paper thin metal to achieve the same result.
Brow bands on helmets were not repousse nor were rosettes.....the list is really long as to how things with raised decoration were made. You cannot say that hundreds of contemporary items were made with punching and that these two swords were the exception in the same time period
Those were not done with repousse....have a look at the Valkenburg or the sword from Lugdunum. I have HIGH resolution photos of both swords you mention and the decoration is too crisp in its lines to be something worked in the method you suggest. Having said that, even though you punch put the decoration with a stamp of sorts.....you still have to work the decoration from the front into pitch to clean it up. This is also true for belt plates that are punched. They were not just punched and left as is. However, they were not worked the way Brian suggests. Aside from the so called Sword of Tiberius, the Fulham, Valkenburg, Strasbourg and other swords with similar decoration have the same motifs if not similar. That sort of continuity even in the shape and design does not suggest unique work which is what repousee would have been. Look at phalerae......the two medusas on the Lauresfort are not the same BECAUSE they were not punched out.
You should also have a look at the VIndonissa scabbard. That was also punched out and it is similar in certain respects to the Sword of Tiberius. I do not ascribe to this using paper thin sheet metal wrapping it around thicker brass sheet. I see no evidence of this or any logic behind it UNLESS the metals is precious like silver as in the Pompeii belts plates.
I know someone who has a copy of the Sword of Tiberius made from punched thicker metal and it looks EXACTLY like the original. Of course this is not evidence for how things were necessarily done BUT it does show that you do not have to use paper thin metal to achieve the same result.
Brow bands on helmets were not repousse nor were rosettes.....the list is really long as to how things with raised decoration were made. You cannot say that hundreds of contemporary items were made with punching and that these two swords were the exception in the same time period
"You have to laugh at life or else what are you going to laugh at?" (Joseph Rosen)
Paolo
Paolo
