I love it. Your idea that using the correct tools helps get the correct results makes great sense. Mind showing what tools you did use?
The making of "The Whitby Brooch"
- Thread starter Wayland
- Start date
I'll see if I can did out a closer picture for you, the tools are all buried in boxes and stored away at the moment.
Most of the work is done with small steel chisels and a hammer on a smooth anvil surface.
The only modem tool I used was a doming block to make the bosses but that was because I did not have the facilities to make something as they would have, ( Presumably by casting. No original block has been found but the results prove they must have used one.)
Most of the work is done with small steel chisels and a hammer on a smooth anvil surface.
The only modem tool I used was a doming block to make the bosses but that was because I did not have the facilities to make something as they would have, ( Presumably by casting. No original block has been found but the results prove they must have used one.)
Great work, you've certainly done the original justice, and I dare say improved upon it. I'm also rather gutted as I'm sat looking at the abbey at the moment(visiting parents) and would have loved to come to see your exhibit and say hello.
The brooch is a lovely, clever piece of work.
It is possible that close work for jewellery and the like was done by short-sighted people and would have provided a role for them within a community. My wife and I have no qualms about wearing glasses for our Living History displays. We may wear the clothes and do the things of a period but we do not present ourselves as of the period and have never had a query from a member of the public about wearing glasses.
Was told off by a group I did an event with though for forgetting to take them off sometimes. They were worried about mocking photos.
For personal experiences recreating a prehistoric moment for myself I sometimes take them off just to feel the wind in my face fully and to see how well I might do back then with such a handicap, after all until the age of nine I didn't know that better eyesight was possible and used a peephole effect with a hand to see more clearly if necessary, bus numbers for example.
It is possible that close work for jewellery and the like was done by short-sighted people and would have provided a role for them within a community. My wife and I have no qualms about wearing glasses for our Living History displays. We may wear the clothes and do the things of a period but we do not present ourselves as of the period and have never had a query from a member of the public about wearing glasses.
Was told off by a group I did an event with though for forgetting to take them off sometimes. They were worried about mocking photos.
For personal experiences recreating a prehistoric moment for myself I sometimes take them off just to feel the wind in my face fully and to see how well I might do back then with such a handicap, after all until the age of nine I didn't know that better eyesight was possible and used a peephole effect with a hand to see more clearly if necessary, bus numbers for example.
I have worked on sites that do allow glasses and with groups that don't.
As you say, the public accept it with little comment. It tends to be the groups that have issues and that is usually because there are always competitive groups out there waiting to point the finger and say they are not doing it right.
I've never met any of these groups that are willing to pull their teeth or fillings out to be more accurate though...
I have to admit, thinking about it from a business point of view, I try to avoid the anachronisms where I can.
As you say, the public accept it with little comment. It tends to be the groups that have issues and that is usually because there are always competitive groups out there waiting to point the finger and say they are not doing it right.
I've never met any of these groups that are willing to pull their teeth or fillings out to be more accurate though...
I have to admit, thinking about it from a business point of view, I try to avoid the anachronisms where I can.
And have their bellybutton shape changed too.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
And not even bringing up the "overbite" question.
Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
Indeed..
I am in the midst of a conversation on another forum about certain "re-enactorisms" that result from the history of re-enacting rather than evidence of any kind.
For example, black leather and leather clothing are both banned by several societies because early re-enactment in some periods grew out of biker groups looking for a legitimate reason for a scrap.
Any leatherworker however could tell tell you that black leather is easy to produce and leather clothing is also faster to produce than woven textiles.
This is a clear case where society rules override accuracy and spectacles tend to fall on another side of that rule fence.
It is quite clear that the public is willing to accept spectacles as a practicality but everyone is paranoid about photographic records posted on the internet that display any fault in the perceived authenticity of the display. It is all an illusion anyway but the illusion must be maintained at all costs.
By necessity I have to play along with these rules in order to participate in group events and also to avoid bad publicity for my business. It's just the way things are.
I am in the midst of a conversation on another forum about certain "re-enactorisms" that result from the history of re-enacting rather than evidence of any kind.
For example, black leather and leather clothing are both banned by several societies because early re-enactment in some periods grew out of biker groups looking for a legitimate reason for a scrap.
Any leatherworker however could tell tell you that black leather is easy to produce and leather clothing is also faster to produce than woven textiles.
This is a clear case where society rules override accuracy and spectacles tend to fall on another side of that rule fence.
It is quite clear that the public is willing to accept spectacles as a practicality but everyone is paranoid about photographic records posted on the internet that display any fault in the perceived authenticity of the display. It is all an illusion anyway but the illusion must be maintained at all costs.
By necessity I have to play along with these rules in order to participate in group events and also to avoid bad publicity for my business. It's just the way things are.
Weaponry rules annoy me most. Not invented in 900 AD so banned! But, it has been shown that tools and weapons of past times were used, even if infrequently, in later periods. I don't advocate a free-for-all of such things but apparent anachronisms, I think, actually add to the authentic feel of continuity in a presentation. After all distinct local styles in, for example, billhooks have existed for many years and the general shape of such tools goes back to the Iron Age. One piece shears for wool in the same pattern go back even to the Bronze Age and are still available in steel nowadays, a "life" of maybe over four thousand years.
At its simplest, if I were called up for the Fyrd would I really leave my favourite pig-sticking knife even though constant re-sharpening had reduced it to a viciously keen spike?
Bronze shears from Flag Fen
At its simplest, if I were called up for the Fyrd would I really leave my favourite pig-sticking knife even though constant re-sharpening had reduced it to a viciously keen spike?
Bronze shears from Flag Fen
I once turned up to a muster with a Boar spear and was told that the wooden crossbar had no practical use on the battlefield.
I then proceeded to demonstrate by disarming the weapon master, flipping his shield and planting the point in the centre of his chest.
They didn't argue after that.
They did look at me a bit oddly when I turned up next time with a wooden pitchfork...
I then proceeded to demonstrate by disarming the weapon master, flipping his shield and planting the point in the centre of his chest.
They didn't argue after that.
They did look at me a bit oddly when I turned up next time with a wooden pitchfork...
Nice!
It can work the other way round of course, I have had my repro Bronze Age hook-knife and Anglo-Saxon iron draw-knife criticised by modern woodworkers when explaining to them about using them to carve paddles. Not comparable with modern steels for cutting ability but we know what fine work such tools were capable of producing. Fortunately the effectiveness of bronze chisels cannot be questioned having test cut holes through thick oak with them.
It can work the other way round of course, I have had my repro Bronze Age hook-knife and Anglo-Saxon iron draw-knife criticised by modern woodworkers when explaining to them about using them to carve paddles. Not comparable with modern steels for cutting ability but we know what fine work such tools were capable of producing. Fortunately the effectiveness of bronze chisels cannot be questioned having test cut holes through thick oak with them.
Often the form of the tool is more important than the materials. A sharp blade of the right shape will function regardless of the technology that produced the blade.
The main advantage that newer materials have brought us is lower maintenance. People often forget that and are then surprised when they see a flint scraper do a job better than a steel knife.
I once needed to cut piece of cord and for some reason I didn't have a knife handy. The guy I was with was was amazed when I picked up a bit of flint from a driveway, napped an edge with a pebble and cut the cord in just a few seconds.
The main advantage that newer materials have brought us is lower maintenance. People often forget that and are then surprised when they see a flint scraper do a job better than a steel knife.
I once needed to cut piece of cord and for some reason I didn't have a knife handy. The guy I was with was was amazed when I picked up a bit of flint from a driveway, napped an edge with a pebble and cut the cord in just a few seconds.
Last edited:
Similar threads
