| Author |
Message |
|
Mark Lewis
|
 Posted: Wed 09 Mar, 2016 6:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| T. Kew wrote: | I happened to be strolling through the Kelvingrove Museum in Glasgow on Monday, and turned a corner to find this rather lovely piece:
It's a rather nice example of a late Kastenbrust - apparently the rear fauld is not original, but the rest of the cuirass is (it wasn't clear whether that also applies to the spaulders). |
Thanks for sharing! I am curious about this piece... my understanding is that its authenticity was once in doubt, but is now thought to be genuine. What I find most suspicious are the identical armourer's marks which appear on both the breast- and back-plates, and on full sets of arm and leg armour (though I think not the spaulders). All these pieces originate from the Wilczek collection.
 
The marks seem to to be Italian in style to me: letters/initials underneath an abbreviation mark. However, every single mark seems quite blurry and misshapen in comparison to undoubtedly genuine marks. If the limb armour is no longer on display, it makes we wonder if they are not originally associated with the breastplate, and if the marks themselves are fraudulent modern additions aimed at creating a complete "homogeneous" suit of armour.
|
|
   |
 |
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Mar, 2016 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| T. Kew wrote: | I happened to be strolling through the Kelvingrove Museum in Glasgow on Monday, and turned a corner to find this rather lovely piece:
A.1981.40.a
I've popped the rest of my photos into this Dropbox album, which should hopefully be viewable - let me know if not.
It's a rather nice example of a late Kastenbrust - apparently the rear fauld is not original, but the rest of the cuirass is (it wasn't clear whether that also applies to the spaulders). |
Thanks for sharing this  and yes it is lovely!
This plate is by the way quite close to the images of Christian I and Saint Olav from Roskilde Cathedral (page 1 in this thread).
NB: When I click on your drop box link, nothing happens (it open a new window but nothing loads).
Mark: So you think that what is most likely authentic is the breast plate itself, while the other pieces are possibly later "add on's" for completeness or sale (with marks on the accessories copying the marks on the breast-plate)?
At least for a Kastenbrust discussion that is the most important (again we can discuss whether the "fluted type" should even be called "Kastenbrust", or whether the name should be reserve exclusively for the box-like kind)
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Kew
Location: London, UK Joined: 21 Apr 2012
Posts: 256
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Mar, 2016 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for letting me know - a few extra characters had snuck in and were causing the issue. I've edited it, and it should now work fine.
The information provided by the Kelvingrove claims that the rear fauld specifically is a later replacement, but the rest is original.
My interpretation of Mark's thoughts is that the entire set of armourer's marks may have been added later, to associate the cuirass with other pieces of armour.
HEMA fencer and coach, New Cross Historical Fencing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Sat 12 Mar, 2016 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| T. Kew wrote: | | My interpretation of Mark's thoughts is that the entire set of armourer's marks may have been added later, to associate the cuirass with other pieces of armour. |
Yes, that's what I had in mind. 
The second mark I posted is the one on the breastplate itself (better seen in the Dropbox photos)... maybe one could argue that it is of better quality compared to the other marks, and is original, while the rest are imitations. But personally, I am more inclined to think all the marks were faked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pieter B.
|
| Posted: Fri 18 Mar, 2016 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
No idea where it's from sadly, though I have seen more of these wooden figures in museums around here.
EDIT:
Does anyone actually know what these wooden figures are called? I've seen some cast bronze and marble ones being referred to as Pleurants but this one and the ones like it I saw do not resemble them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Fri 18 Mar, 2016 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pieter B. wrote: | No idea where it's from sadly, though I have seen more of these wooden figures in museums around here.
EDIT:
Does anyone actually know what these wooden figures are called? I've seen some cast bronze and marble ones being referred to as Pleurants but this one and the ones like it I saw do not resemble them. |
Great find - good example of a Kastenbrust.
As far as a know they are just called træfigurer (= wood figurines) or træskulpturer (= wood sculptures) in Danish (and likewise in Norwegian "Trefigurer" or Swedish "Träfigurer"), but it might be the case that certain European languages have a specific term for them?!
Latin term: "ligneolis hominum figuris" (= wooden human figures) occurs in the Latin translation "De Mundo" of the Greek "Peri Kosmos", probably by Apuleius already in the 2nd century AD.
Have not stumbled over any technical terms yet
Also the polychromatic painting of wood carved figurines seems to be a Late Gothic phenomenon.
So carvings didn't need to be super detailed compared to unpainted ones.
After the carving was finished you covered the figurines with a chalk coating and afterwards painted them in bright colours and finally gilded them.
Source: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15698b.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic