Repousse~ Scabbard Plates and Lockets

[Doc]

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

[Charlie]

Doc,
I too have very high resolution images of the both of these scabbards, in fact I recently commissioned the BM to photograph the Tiberius scabbard. It is very possible and likely that these lockets were punched, but it is equally possible to get very fine repousse' into silver sheet....have you attempted it? The metal used on both the Fulham and Tiberius lockets is very thin, not thick as you suggested punched plates were. Of course there are probably other examples of thicker gauge sheet used, but in these two examples the metal sheet is very thin. I have reproduced the Fulham lockets in repousse' and the end result was very close to the original. I will be attempting the Tiberius lockets, but time will tell how close I can get to the original as they are extremely detailed. This is where a die would be best suited for sure.

When I look at the Vindonissa scabbard, if that is punched then it was a very ordinary die set that was crafted, as the decorations to me suggest that it is pure and simple repousse' and chasing. Yes it could have been punched, but equally it could have been repousse'. It is a bold statement you make that belt and scabbard plates were not done in repousse', only punched....that is completely absurd and only your opinion.

The Herculaneum/Stabia belt plates are certainly punched, as I have extremely high resolution images of these, both front and back. There is no question about that, though they do have backing plates in which the decorative plates were attached to, and the silver sheet used is again thin.
The Mougins pugio scabbard lockets which my friend and I reproduced, again there is no doubt in my mind that the locket decorations were repousse' not punched. No I can't be 100% sure, but the same goes for you stating that they would have been punched rather than hand worked.
Look at the pressblech decoration method used on Viking and Anglo Saxon helmets etc. The sheet metal or rather foil is extremely thin. Yes they are all punched but my point is that the metal doesn't have to be a thick guage even when embossing with dies.

Brian has many years of experience with repousse' as you know, so I for one value his opinion and expertise enormously, and am grateful for the knowledge he has passed onto myself and many others on RAT.

By the way Brian and Martin those pieces you shared are truly wonderful....well done.

[PhilusEstilius]

Phil.
Thank you for the compliments and I have to agree with all that you say indeed there is a combination of both types of work with many of these scabbard decorations, in fact to say that punched work has a better and more fine or crisp finish is not the case but in fact the very opposite for from some of my experience of this.
I have to say that with finner metal and hand worked repousse' one can get the better and more crisp results, then again a decoration plate such as the main plate of the Fulham there is just too much detail and area for anyone to have wanted to make such a set for it to be punched out.
In fact if one checks out the main plate it becomes evident that the whole picture was indeed hand drawn onto a sheet of copper alloy then hand worked.

[Doc]

Phil, since we really do not know each other, I would choose my words more carefully before calling my opinion absurd. The only thing absurd with all do respect, is your statement about what I said. Try reading it again carefully. I did not say absolutely EVERYTHING was punched out nor that I am correct and everyone else is wrong. In fact, you have not provided evidence to suggest what you think either. Of course repousse was used but in my opinion not repetitive motifs such as belt plates or sword scabbards. Just as Brian mentioned and I also did in my post, things were possibly worked both ways.

Here is a piece of evidence although its OT so please excuse me: ...There was a die set found for the belt plates with the motif of animals running around in a circle (B&C2). In fact, its a rather common motif just like the Lupercale, Emperor/Cornucopia, concentric circles, which in my opinion were most likely punched. If the ornate belt plates you mention, Phil, were punched out according to you......without question.....then why would less ornate plates be made in repousse?

Anyway, back on topic since it about scabbards. No Phil, I have not tried repousse just yet BUT I do not need to try it to know what metals can be worked more easily than others. I am a chemist and know metals quite well and how they behave. I also do make certain pieces of armor myself so I am aware of what you are talking about.

With respect to the Vindonissa scabbard, the top plate with the man kneeling down and the two shields on either side, is NOT unique. There are other loose motifs exactly like that one. So punching out the decoration is not unlikely. Could it be repousse.......I guess so.....there is no reason to say impossible but to me unlikely.

For what its worth and I am not using this as evidence but Matt Lukes has done extensive studies on Roman belt plates and sword scabbards and he is of the same opinion as I am mainly that the main decoration is punched out and then worked over pitch to make it clean. Certainly, I do not believe that something was just punched and mounted onto a sword scabbard or elsewhere.

Brian, I agree that to have one single punch for an entire section of a sword scabbard is unlikely. What I do believe for instance when looking at the Fulham for instance, is that the main raised figures could have come from punches and then minor details or finer details were later added using repousse. From the Tiberius Sword, I think the figures were punched in but them some of the clothing and finer aspects were added via repousse.

[Charlie]

Doc, in your reply to Patrick you said....Annealing the brass as you have done and working the material will allow you to get good detail. Its a pain because you have to constantly heat. Large pieces of armor I think were done by repousse. Belt plates and scabbard parts were stamped out.
Pretty clear to me that you are implying all belt and scabbard parts were stamped/punched. Maybe you are the one who should choose your words more carefully.

The ornate belt plates I was referring to are the so called Pompeii plates...the ones in almost perfection condition. They weren't found in Pompeii, rather Stabia from what I understand. Anyway there is no question they were punched/stamped, the reverse side clearly shows this. You ask why would less ornate plates be repousse', well I would ask why not? I believe to achieve the finest detail they would have to be stamped like the Pompeii plates, in one go, not as you or Matt Lukes suggest going back over with chasing. Chasing is done in conjunction with repousse' not stamping or punching. If a good die set is made correctly then then the sheet of metal will show the exact relief/pattern perfectly. I have inquired of artisans who make die sets, and the results from a set will give you a perfect image of the pattern...no working over again in pitch. Of course pressblech dies are different again....the sheet is beaten and worked over the die.
Ok, less ornate (and detailed) pieces could have been done in repousse' because punching was not required. Like the Fulham lockets.
I personally believe that the dies used on scabbard plates like the Tiberius could have and would probably have been one piece, because if you look at pressblech dies they are one section for a locket of decoration. In fact maybe the lockets on many Roman scabbards were pressblech? Matt Bunker could possibly shed some light on this. I know that Dave Roper a member of Wulfheodenas is probably the leading expert in this craft.
I think in some areas we are all in agreement that some were punched and some were repousse'

[Charlie]

My apologies Patrick if this thread has gone off topic and hijacked from what you intended it to be. You asked if anyone cared to share their lockets they have made...here is my version of the Fulham plates I did in repousse' last year.
[attachment=10191]Fulhamreconstruction4.jpg[/attachment]

[Doc]

Hello Phil,

Yes, we can agree on certain things....no doubt. Now, with respect to going over things after they have been punched, I do not suggests redoing the scabbard or belt plate. However, just cleaning up areas that may have not come out just right.....know what I mean? Chasing and repousse do in fact go hand in hand, agreed.

Nice work on the scabbard. Credit is given when due......we are all here to learn from each other.

As you suggested, I will give repousse a go once I finish making my squamata and segmentata. I would like to make many things not necessarily Roman in metal.

Cheers

[Charlie]

Thanks Doc,
Yes going over the plates to just clean up areas would be fine, and also adding some detail like Brian has suggested.
I look forward to seeing your repousse' results after you complete your armour....time is hard to find to get all of these projects completed, I am sure you would agree.
I couldn't agree more that we are all here to learn from one another, and for me that is the best thing about RAT.

Regards.

[Pointer]

I am not crying "Hi-Jack"
I think that constructive conversation is good.

Here are my thoughts. I know that most people share the thought or idea of staying as historically accurate as possible when creating items such as we have been discussing here.

I came out of the USA Automotive industry as a Journeymen Model Maker and Plastics Specialist. Quite honestly... METAL work has NEVER BEEN my desire until now. I have a natural God-given talent that has always led me as what I might cll a "Visionary". That is... if I can "See it" in my mind's eye... I can achieve it... no matter what it is and usually with lesser means or cheaper tools, because I am not rich.

To me... If I were doing any Scabbard Plates or Belt Plates... I would much prefer stamping them out. However... I am not about to make a stamping or die set, because that is beyond my "Tools" in the shop.

Does it really matter... if I or anyone else were to replicate a plate... by either the means of stamping or repousse... or a combination of both, no matter how the Roman's achieved their finished plates? I mean... in the long run, it is the finished plate that we are trying to achieve... not the means in which we have set out to make them.

I am highly skilled in wood carving as a Master Wood carver... I can use most any hand carving tool, chisels, gouges, or knives as well as rotary tools. But the Roman's didn't have high precision rotary tools. If I were to make a scabbard and use a rotary rasp to cut the "V" groove on the inside of the Scabbard or use an Off-Set or Crank-Set Flat chisel... would it really matter? (Actually I have done both.) I prefer to use the chisels because I can more easily maintain a beautifully flat non-wavy surface. But either way... Isn't it the end result that counts?

I would actually lie to make a die set to stamp out the Cross bands for the Scabbards... I simply do not want to invest in the tools that it would take to make the die-set. I believe that a die-set or a rolling mill would be the best... cleanest and more precise way to go but may have to just hammer them out in pitch or plasticine.

OR... I would possibly be willing to "BARTER" with someone who has this ability. :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

[ROMan]

Doc,
The Herculaneum/Stabia belt plates are certainly punched, as I have extremely high resolution images of these, both front and back.

You do? Ever feel inclined to share them?