Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Matchlock · 22nd January 2012, 03:00 PM

Hi John,

There is always a certain possibility that pieces that look 'as new' are newly made and that that of your friend has been cast after a 1530 original. In order to tell one from the other a close examination would be necessary, including filing a small portion off the metal and having it spectro-analyzed in a laboratory. Original early-16th c. bronze or brass pieces contained a relatively high percentage of copper and silver, so even if overcleaned they mostly look a bit reddish.

As to the terminology of brass or bronze barrels, museum, auction houses and collectors alike tend to just label them 'bronze' as it sounds higher-value. We should, as always, go back the roots and confer the old terms. In 500 year old books and armory inventories, e.g. the Maximilianische Zeugbücher illustrated by Jörg Kölderer of Innsbruck/The Tyrol, where the Maximilian main armory was located, we never find the term bronze, just Messing (brass) or Kupfer (copper). Of course the difference between the two alloys is mostly a higher amount of copper in bronze.

Yes, I did see a few totally overcleaned pieces with even the tiniest spot of patina removed, and of course they looked 'as new'. What really bothers me about our mortar in discussion is the striking crispness of the concentric circles on the bottom and of the trunnions.

If this is a modern copy, of course it could have been cast anywhere; maybe it is even a museum replica.

Best,
Michael

22nd January 2012, 03:00 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi John, There is always a certain possibility that pieces that look 'as new' are newly made and that that of your friend has been cast after a 1530 original. In order to tell one from the other a close examination would be necessary, including filing a small portion off the metal and having it spectro-analyzed in a laboratory. Original early-16th c. bronze or brass pieces contained a relatively high percentage of copper and silver, so even if overcleaned they mostly look a bit reddish. As to the terminology of brass or bronze barrels, museum, auction houses and collectors alike tend to just label them 'bronze' as it sounds higher-value. We should, as always, go back the roots and confer the old terms. In 500 year old books and armory inventories, e.g. the Maximilianische Zeugbücher illustrated by Jörg Kölderer of Innsbruck/The Tyrol, where the Maximilian main armory was located, we never find the term bronze, just Messing (brass) or Kupfer (copper). Of course the difference between the two alloys is mostly a higher amount of copper in bronze. Yes, I did see a few totally overcleaned pieces with even the tiniest spot of patina removed, and of course they looked 'as new'. What really bothers me about our mortar in discussion is the striking crispness of the concentric circles on the bottom and of the trunnions. If this is a modern copy, of course it could have been cast anywhere; maybe it is even a museum replica. Best, Michael Last edited by Matchlock; 22nd January 2012 at 05:45 PM.