Phalera constructions - Printable Version

Phalera constructions - Printable Version

+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Reenactment (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Roman Re-Enactment & Reconstruction (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: Phalera constructions (/showthread.php?tid=24599)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Phalera constructions - Renatus - 01-17-2015

Quote:With my overlap of the pictures compared to the one you mention on the original Lauersfort is neither here nor there for it is just one of those things but if you understand anything about this fold over all that metal does not hold down against the plate it is only the area near the edge that is doing the holding . . . no two phalera are exactly the same and such adjustment of plate size has to be considered, where there is more overlap on the original one of the Lauersfort you mention it is where the maker has simply not trimmed down the flange of the picture that is always there while the phalera is being made but his plate had to fit the width of his picture he would not be concerned about that amount of overlap as I would also not be.

I clearly misunderstood the point that you were making. I thought that you were saying that the reason why the maker of the backplates and of the facings had to be the same was because he had to get his measurements exactly right, so that the parts would fit with minimal overlapping. If you say that the amount of overlap is immaterial and that you have simply trimmed yours for the sake of neatness, then there is a margin of error and, in my view, the case for the makers being the same is weakened.

Quote:with the Newstead . . . those bell caps in my opinion are on the inside of the back plate along with the name therefore the view you are getting is where your looking at a phalera where its picture is now missing had there been a one the overlap would be around the other side of that plate.

I see what you mean. I had overlooked that. Nevertheless, I still think that it would be helpful to know what the other side looks like.

Quote:The plates as well as the pictures would be made by the same man for any knowledge or experience of making these things shows that no two phalera are exactly the same and such adjustment of plate size has to be considered

If this were so, it would completely demolish the case for the name inscribed on the backplates being the name of the maker. Why would he bother to inscribe his own name on a surface that was immediately due to be hidden from view?

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-18-2015

Renatus.
I would like you explain what you mean about the trimming of these phalerae being a margin of error and your view being that it makes the case of the makers of these plates being weakened, I don't follow what your trying to say here for where I have mentioned pictures and back plates I am pointing out that it is the size and width of these things that dictate the plates.
Then as far as the Newstead it would indeed be good to be able to see the other side of these plates, then where you say that the point about plates or phalera size can demolish the situation about the name on them then here I don't follow you, in fact with all your obsession about this name being on the inside then you tell me why it was put there for I would also like to know.
Then again with many things that are examined and looked at just a little bit better even such as the sword of Tiberius for instance we find that its scabbard has in fact a name on it and the sword blade also has a possible inlay in it.

Phalera constructions - Renatus - 01-18-2015

Quote:I would like you explain what you mean about the trimming of these phalerae being a margin of error and your view being that it makes the case of the makers of these plates being weakened, I don't follow what your trying to say here for where I have mentioned pictures and back plates I am pointing out that it is the size and width of these things that dictate the plates.

Let me explain. You, as I understand it, make both the backplates and the facings, and you make the facings first and then the backplates to fit. This obviously works for you but I am suggesting that there may be an alternative, that the backplates and facings were made by different craftsmen in either the same workshop or a separate one. If they were working simultaneously, I would expect them to be using identical working drawings or templates but, if the backplates were made first, they would serve as the templates for the maker of the facings. When I speak of a margin of error, I mean that the maker of the facing had allowed for the possibility of his having made the relief slightly too small which could be compensated for by a generous amount of overlap. If he made the relief slightly too big, he would have another problem which could be tackled by either cutting down the backplate or by losing some of the relief in the overlap. This latter seems to be the case in some of the Lauersfort phalerae, although I would not want to make too much of this as it might be due to the state of preservation of the pieces. In any event, these possibilities militate against the maker of the backplates and the facings being the same man as, in that case, I might expect him to get his measurements more precise, as I am sure you do.

Quote:where you say that the point about plates or phalera size can demolish the situation about the name on them then here I don't follow you, in fact with all your obsession about this name being on the inside then you tell me why it was put there for I would also like to know.

The purpose of the names must be, one assumes, to identify them in some way, either in relation to the ownership of the {i]phalerae[/i], as I believe, or in relation to the workshop that made the backplates, as Crispus suggests. As I see it, as the names are on the inside, the only person to whom they would be of any use would be the maker of the facings. As to the significance of this, let us consider the alternatives:

1. The same man made the backplates and the facings. There would be no point in his putting his own name or that of his workshop on the backplates: he knew who he was and where he worked. On the other hand, if he were making more than one set of phalerae at the same time, he might wish to differentiate between them by scratching the names of the owners on the backplates. This would not be necessary, if he was completing one set of backplates and facings before starting on the next.

2. Different craftsmen in the same workshop made the backplates and the facings. If the man making the backplates already had the facings to hand to make his work fit exactly, he would not need to inscribe any names. He would simply hand back the facings and backplates together. If he were working from a template, he could either hand back the template and plates unmarked or, if there were more than one set, he could mark the plates with the owner's name. It would not be necessary to identify the workshop.

3. If the backplates were made in a different workshop from the facings, the man making the plates would presumably be working from a template. He would need to identify them when passing them to the maker of the facings and he could do that by marking them with either the name of the owner or that of his workshop, depending upon the arrangement that he had with the other workshop. I would consider the owner's name to be the more likely but the name of his workshop remains a possibility.

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-18-2015

Renatus
It becomes apparent to me that you clearly do not have understanding of what I'm trying to get through to you about phalerae these things would have been made by artistic craftsmen who I don't think would have allowed anyone else to make any part of them, and where you do not understand by saying that back plates would make templates for the maker of the facings is also where you fail to understand that the picture size determines the size of these back plates therefore when the maker finished his picture he then made the back plate required for that particular phalera.
Then where you mention that where the maker made a picture too small it would be compensated for by more overlap is indeed not not the case, these things have boarders with edges and those edges of the pictures determine the diameter of each back plate.
Then where you get the idea that some of the Lauersfort plates may have had to be cut down or loosing some of the relief shows clearly shows you do not understand phalerae or indeed their construction. Then as far as the names these are simply scratched on and for some reason we will maybe never know the names just have finisdhed up on the inside, in fact where we look at the back plates of the Lauersfort with their fixing rings there is no name there at all so the name had to be on the inside but is not the name of any owner at all.
I find you are confusing yourself about different people at one point making back plates and an artistic craftsman making pictures then trying to get them to fit his work to them not so he makes the phalera picture then he makes his back plate that fits perfect regardless of how much overlap there might be it can be more it can be less that is neither here nor there.

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-18-2015

[attachment=11596]minad_2015-01-18.jpg[/attachment]
Renatus.
Here is a phalera that might explain things better with its worked edge that has to go over a back plate and the boarders of the phalerae are the first part of it to be made, so you can see that now a back plate has to be made that fits this specific piece, therefore the creator of the picture would be the one who would make such a plate to fit this piece remembering that it has to be filled to stop crushing then wrapped over the back plate and the artist would be the one who would do just that no one else involved what ever.

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-18-2015

Renatus
Here is a picture that might help you undersdtasnd it is of a phalera that has to be fitted to a back plate and as you can see the worked edge of the piece has to take an exact flush fit with such a plate, remembering that the figure needs to be filled to prevent crushing then its overlap bent around at the back, the craftsman who would make this piece would also make such a plate with no one else involved.
The worked edge and boarders of these pictures are in fact the first part to made on any phalera and cannot be altered therefore as you can see phalera first then plate, and no artist craftsman would allow anyone else to make any part of it.
[attachment=11597]Picture042.jpg[/attachment]

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-18-2015

Renatus .
Here is a picture that might explain it better for you it is of a phalera waiting for its back plate and as you can see the worked edge with its boarder is the first part of any phalera to be made therefore the size of what the back plate has to be is determined at the very start of any the work by the artist craftsman, he would when reaching this stage make his plate to fit it no one else making plates only the craftsman doing it no templates what ever for the phalera now has to be put onto sheet metal and marked out to get the size exact.
We also have to remember that it has to be filled to prevent crushing then wrapped onto its plate and no way would any artist allow others to mess his work about for tyhese are indeed delicate objects of high quality.
[attachment=11598]minad_2015-01-18-2.jpg[/attachment]

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-18-2015

Renatus.
Here is a picture that might help you understand better about phalerae this is a one that is finished and waiting for a back plate and as you can see the worked edge with its boarder is the first thing established with any phalera therefore the back plate size has been determined at the very start, so no templates other workers just the artist craftsman who at this stage would then make his plate and fit it.
Remembering that this piece must be filled to prevent crushing and its edge wrapped over the plate done only by the creator of the picture no one else involved at all, and as far as the name MEDAMI inside or out that is the artist who created all the Lauersfort pieces.
[attachment=11599]minad_2015-01-18-3.jpg[/attachment]

Phalera constructions - Renatus - 01-18-2015

Brian,
I understand precisely what you are trying to convey. Give me credit for having some intelligence. What I am trying to put forward is an alternative that may have some merit. I will concede now that one of my comments does not assist my cause. I suggested that, if the maker of the facing had made his image too large, he could compensate by cutting down the backplate. This is obviously nonsense; it could only make the situation worse. Where such a remedy could apply would be if he had made his image too small. The only mitigation I can offer is that I prepared my post under some pressure and did not read it through carefully enough.

To get back to the issue, it seems to me that any craftsman worth his salt could work to a pre-prepared backplate and take the necessary measurements to make his image fit. If you say, however, that this is impossible and that the facings must be made first, I must bow to your expertise and look for another explanation for the evidence that we have before us. Of course, I am not suggesting that, having created his facing, the artist handed over the completion of the phalera to someone else. I would expect him to be responsible for the filling of the relief and the fitting of the backplate. What I fail to see is why another craftsman should not have the more mundane task of making the backplates, possibly working to the measurements and maybe templates provided by the artist. This may be a dangerous assumption but I would suspect that, in making your backplates, you make them slightly oversize and then file them down for an exact fit. If the facings have to be made first, I see no reason why the Roman workman making the backplates should not also make them oversize, with the artist cutting and filing them down to fit his facings.

I have to come back to what you call (rather rudely, I thought, but I'll let that pass) my "obsession" with the names being scratched on the inside face of the backplates. This cannot just be ignored; it must mean something. My explanation, as you know, is that there are two people involved in the making of the phalerae and that the maker of the backplates marked them so that the maker of the facings could relate them to the reliefs that he had created or was about to create. This is the only explanation that makes sense to me, although I am happy to consider alternatives. While it is theoretically possible that the maker of the facings also made the backplates and marked them with the owner's name because he was working on more than one set at a time and did not want to get them mixed up, I think that this is unlikely; he should be sufficiently familiar with his own work not to get in a muddle. What seems to me virtually impossible is that he marked them with his own name. There seems to be no point to it. Again, this may be a dangerous question to ask but do you mark your name on the inner faces of your backplates before fitting the reliefs? If you do, I would really like to know why you go to the trouble.

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-19-2015

Renatus .
As I have pointed out in my picture above the size of a back plate is determined by the very first start at making a phalera where the edge and boarder is created, so all your ideas of templates or other workers being involved is not the case for when the artist finished his picture he makes his back plate fits it and that is the end of that phalera until tinned or silvered.
Then where you ask if I put names upon phalerae back plates then I must ask you to go back to an earlier stage of this topic where it is very evident that I have and it is a true Roman name I have taken from Roman history, it comes from a piece of Samiam pottery that I found many years ago where the name SEXTI - MA is stamped in the base of a pot on its inside and translated means BY THE HAND of SEXTUS or SEXTILIUS who was a potter around 150 AD in Gaul.
This potter would indeed have been a private business man with his own company producing pottery that he sent all over the Roman world and also it may well be that our artist craftsmen who made phalerae were employed in just the very same way as private workers sort out by situations when phalerae were required, then other work done by such artists could be dishes and such like the bronze silver plated dish that was awarded along with the Lauersfort Phalerae.

Phalera constructions - Renatus - 01-20-2015

Quote: you ask if I put names upon phalerae back plates then I must ask you to go back to an earlier stage of this topic where it is very evident that I have

You misunderstand me, I asked if you put your name on the inner face of the backplate behind the relief.

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-20-2015

Renatus.
I'm sorry about that missed your point about where the name had to be but as you can see my adopted name is placed on the outside and just simply in my mind says I made this.

Phalera constructions - Renatus - 01-20-2015

Absolutely, I am entirely with you on that. My point is that, with the name on the inside, it is there probably as part of the manufacturing process and I see no reason for a craftsman who made and assembled every part of the phalera himself to put it there.

Phalera constructions - PhilusEstilius - 01-20-2015

All I can say is that where Maxfield put out the illustration in here book showing the back plates we don't see the name on the outside but it being on the inside and why is any ones guess, but in my own opinion it was put there by the maker MEDAMI and is not that of a second owner.
Then in fact even the centurian was not the true owner for it is also my opinion that centurians only held and wore these things on behalf of their units or companies as an overall award to that unit and I think the Lauersfort dish says that as this looks to be the extra personal award given to the centurian .

Phalera constructions - Renatus - 01-20-2015

Quote:in my own opinion it was put there by the maker MEDAMI and is not that of a second owner.

All I can say to that is, 'Why?' but we are in danger of going over old ground here.

Quote:Then in fact even the centurian was not the true owner for it is also my opinion that centurians only held and wore these things on behalf of their units or companies as an overall award to that unit and I think the Lauersfort dish says that as this looks to be the extra personal award given to the centurian .

I think that this is highly questionable. I am not aware of any evidence that centurions wore decorations on behalf of their units but there is plenty of evidence of awards to individuals. Some units are designated as torquata and one is torquata et armillata but there are none that I know of that are described as phalerata. On the analogy of the torquatae units, it is theoretically possible that some were awarded phalerae but they may be represented by the discs displayed on the units' standards. On the question of the Lauersfort dish, Maxfield makes the point that there are occasional references to dishes being awarded during the Republic but no evidence of such awards during the Principate, although she does not rule it out. Even so, if the dish were awarded to T. Flavius Festus as a form of decoration, there is nothing that need associate it with the award of phalerae. It could be an award for an entirely seperate act of bravery and that is assuming that it is not simply a personal possession anyway, acquired during his military career or even after it.