12-20-2009, 05:07 PM
I've been messing about again on yet another muscle cuirass, this time in heavy copper alloy; the iron piece was tough to make because sheet steel isn't so easy to work cold and work hot is problematic (can't use wood forms, cools quickly, etc.), but I really wanted to see just how heavy copper alloy would be. The data I was provided by a couple of fellow RATers showed that an appropriate starting thickness would be 1.6mm (0.064"), since quite a number of artifacts are listed as being between 1.5 and 1.7mm thick, with some areas as thin as 1mm, and that's very thick metal. Copper alloys can be softened significantly by annealing of course, but on this scale I wondered really how it'd be- luckily it was just fine 
Easier on the arm than steel of 75% the thickness in fact and it can be entirely worked cold, a benefit to be sure. The downside is that it work hardens rather quickly, unlike steel seems to, and requires frequent annealing to be sure to avoid cracking (and to make the work actually productive since the hardened metal doesn't move much compared to the annealed).
It's quite heavy at around 3300g, although that'll come down some when I finish the surface. One whole cuirass in the BM is listed at around 3.3kg- both front and back together- so that one must be somewhat thinner but it is certainly rather smaller, which really the majority of artifacts are; mine's around 56cm high whereas on artifact listed at ranging from 1-1.5mm thickness is just about 42cm high. It's still certainly a managable weight and really rather light compared to mail, for example- and it's a damn sight prettier :wink:
This fellow's made of brass because I had it on hand (been meaning to try a muscle cuirass for years), and it's a whole lot cheaper than bronze- and of course there's the aforementioned difficulty in actually obtaining sheet bronze of the necessary size; neither makes a first try in anything but brass such a great idea LOL This much brass is still damned expensive, so thanks much to commodities speculators :evil: Still, I'm very pleased with the results thus far- the musculature is, I think, a reasonable version of the average muscle cuirass (or is thorax a better term?), certainly at leat since it has the proper smooth transitions and not the sharp deliniations between muscles that some reconstructions have (despite no original I know of looking that way). It's made to fit me- one could expect all the originals were made to fit the owner- so since I'm not exactly Schwarzeneggerish, the sides of the upper chest aren't as far out as some originals, but otherwise the shaping is consistent with most real, non-cavalry (since their belly sections were very angled out) pieces. I still haven't decided on the nipples- maybe silver, maybe bronze or even copper for some nice contrast.
I'm also still studying the way the neck, arm hole, and belly hems were done- clearly there are two major methods: 1) simple flare where the edges are just bent out, and 2) rolled in, where a tunnel is created making a round, protruding but very soft edge is formed. The rolled edge is no problem, but the nature of the flare type I'm looking into; the best images I have are of pieces from the ex-Guttmann collection and unfortunately many are heavily restored so it's not easy to be sure just how possibly thinner, more subject to degradation and damage- such as the edges- looked originally. I'm also looking at which is most appropriate for the style I'm looking at.
I also have the basic impression that there are two styles of closure patterns: 1) a long hinge on one side and two short ones on the other, both covered with a wide decorative strip bearing a 'wave' pattern on one edge, and 2) 4 simple hinges, two on each side- I want to reconstruct my cuirass with the former because it's rather more ornate and I like the look. I am curious if there's a temporal or stylistic association between the hinges and the edges: all of those with the 'wave' strips seem to have flared edges, and while most of those with just 4 small hinges have rolled edges, a few have just flared edges as well. The rolled edge is certainly superior for comfort and protection, so I'd wonder if it were a progression in design- it could just be a cost issue, but really rolling the edges isn't SO much more work when considered in the context of what must have been very expensive armour in the first place. The same goes for the ornate hinge vs. the simple ones, only the reverse- I would wonder if the ornate 'wave' strip were an earlier feature, discarded in favour of the simpler 4 small hinges for a functional or visual difference (the sides aren't hidden by the big strips) as opposed to a cost one. Does anyone know if there's any support for the latter idea at least? Could the 'wave' strips be an earlier feature? Or does anyone know of an artifact that has the 'wave' strips and rolled edges?
Anyway, the photos show a quick progression for interest sake (since the basic steps were outlined previously)- hammering out the pectorales majors initially (quite large since the later hammering of the upper abdominals and rib cage area will raise these and thus inherently reduce the 'projection' of the pectorals); then the basic shapes in place, with the sides curved- this is where most reconstructions seem to stop, leaving the 'cuirass' rather barrel-like and not at all as the real thing is; then the piece as it is now, with all the waisting and rebating of the abdominals done, and of course refinement of the whole thing (no small amount of hammerwork!)
Easier on the arm than steel of 75% the thickness in fact and it can be entirely worked cold, a benefit to be sure. The downside is that it work hardens rather quickly, unlike steel seems to, and requires frequent annealing to be sure to avoid cracking (and to make the work actually productive since the hardened metal doesn't move much compared to the annealed). It's quite heavy at around 3300g, although that'll come down some when I finish the surface. One whole cuirass in the BM is listed at around 3.3kg- both front and back together- so that one must be somewhat thinner but it is certainly rather smaller, which really the majority of artifacts are; mine's around 56cm high whereas on artifact listed at ranging from 1-1.5mm thickness is just about 42cm high. It's still certainly a managable weight and really rather light compared to mail, for example- and it's a damn sight prettier :wink:
This fellow's made of brass because I had it on hand (been meaning to try a muscle cuirass for years), and it's a whole lot cheaper than bronze- and of course there's the aforementioned difficulty in actually obtaining sheet bronze of the necessary size; neither makes a first try in anything but brass such a great idea LOL This much brass is still damned expensive, so thanks much to commodities speculators :evil: Still, I'm very pleased with the results thus far- the musculature is, I think, a reasonable version of the average muscle cuirass (or is thorax a better term?), certainly at leat since it has the proper smooth transitions and not the sharp deliniations between muscles that some reconstructions have (despite no original I know of looking that way). It's made to fit me- one could expect all the originals were made to fit the owner- so since I'm not exactly Schwarzeneggerish, the sides of the upper chest aren't as far out as some originals, but otherwise the shaping is consistent with most real, non-cavalry (since their belly sections were very angled out) pieces. I still haven't decided on the nipples- maybe silver, maybe bronze or even copper for some nice contrast.
I'm also still studying the way the neck, arm hole, and belly hems were done- clearly there are two major methods: 1) simple flare where the edges are just bent out, and 2) rolled in, where a tunnel is created making a round, protruding but very soft edge is formed. The rolled edge is no problem, but the nature of the flare type I'm looking into; the best images I have are of pieces from the ex-Guttmann collection and unfortunately many are heavily restored so it's not easy to be sure just how possibly thinner, more subject to degradation and damage- such as the edges- looked originally. I'm also looking at which is most appropriate for the style I'm looking at.
I also have the basic impression that there are two styles of closure patterns: 1) a long hinge on one side and two short ones on the other, both covered with a wide decorative strip bearing a 'wave' pattern on one edge, and 2) 4 simple hinges, two on each side- I want to reconstruct my cuirass with the former because it's rather more ornate and I like the look. I am curious if there's a temporal or stylistic association between the hinges and the edges: all of those with the 'wave' strips seem to have flared edges, and while most of those with just 4 small hinges have rolled edges, a few have just flared edges as well. The rolled edge is certainly superior for comfort and protection, so I'd wonder if it were a progression in design- it could just be a cost issue, but really rolling the edges isn't SO much more work when considered in the context of what must have been very expensive armour in the first place. The same goes for the ornate hinge vs. the simple ones, only the reverse- I would wonder if the ornate 'wave' strip were an earlier feature, discarded in favour of the simpler 4 small hinges for a functional or visual difference (the sides aren't hidden by the big strips) as opposed to a cost one. Does anyone know if there's any support for the latter idea at least? Could the 'wave' strips be an earlier feature? Or does anyone know of an artifact that has the 'wave' strips and rolled edges?
Anyway, the photos show a quick progression for interest sake (since the basic steps were outlined previously)- hammering out the pectorales majors initially (quite large since the later hammering of the upper abdominals and rib cage area will raise these and thus inherently reduce the 'projection' of the pectorals); then the basic shapes in place, with the sides curved- this is where most reconstructions seem to stop, leaving the 'cuirass' rather barrel-like and not at all as the real thing is; then the piece as it is now, with all the waisting and rebating of the abdominals done, and of course refinement of the whole thing (no small amount of hammerwork!)
See FABRICA ROMANORVM Recreations in the Marketplace for custom helmets, armour, swords and more!
