Roman Brooches From the Antiquities_Science group
While the initial focus is on whether an inscription on a brooch is modern or ancient, this covers lots of ground regarding tools and brooch design and even a list of books that deal with brooches.

======================

Dear List

This argument might be a little off the scientific topic, but I do think the first visual observation of an artefact to be very important.
A recent discussion on another forum gave me some input in putting together this post, trying to point out how some simple observations and research can give some important clues in determining the authenticity of an artefact.

The main discussion was focused on this Roman crossbow fibula with inscription.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=1
A file with a study and parallels of 55 Crossbow brooches from Upper Moesia can be found in the Antiquities_Science-Annex File section named.
Viminacium Upper Moesia 55 Crossbow Brooches


The Crossbow fibula was an enduring fibula and its primary success was due to the fact that it wasn’t only a “dress accessory” but gave status and was a characteristic of a distinctive social position. This particular brooch, a typical male dress accessory was first introduced around 200AD as clasps for the heavy military cloaks. But very quickly became an official symbol of military and political rank.

The inscriptions on crossbow brooches are usually not signatures of makers but “Imperial Inscriptions” or important meanings and are very rare.

I would like to differ between these rarer inscriptions and the Aucissa type brooches that have been named by the markers signature moulded across the head of the bow. Many of the Aucissa have no signature.
The main and most common signature is AVCISSA with some variants like IIAVCISSA, IIIAVCISSA, IAVCIS.A, AVCIS.., AVCISS., AVCISSA (with reverse SS) can be found.

An intersesting variant is AVCISSAF – Aucissa f(ecit) “Aucissa made (this)”.

The Aucissa type brooches may carry some other names like AVVIMPI, ATGVIOS, ATCIVIO. , TARRA, QCOM and AVVIMPI.
Some markers signatures have been also found on some Langton, Colchester and Hod Hill types brooches.

A very nice list of Aucissa type brooches with markers signature of the Illyrian area can be found in the Antiquities_Science-Annex file section named.
Inscribed Brooches found in Croatia
From some literature, I have found crossbow brooches with inscriptions to be made of precious metal such as gold and silver, usually highly decorated with geometric patterns and niello inlays.

Some examples of these Imperial Inscriptions are;
A gold crossbow brooch of the Museum of Turin which reads CONSTANTINE CAES VIVAS ( May Constantine Caesar live).
From the Munich Museum a gold with niello inlay decorations the “Imperial Inscription” on the bow reads on one side ROMULE VIVAS and on the other MAXENTI VINCAS. These inscriptions have been interpreted as the name of Maxentius and his infant son Romulus. Vincas/Vivas could mean someone struggling for power as Vincas for the Augustus and Vivas for the Ceasar. The MAXENTI VINCAS could be the acknowledgment of a loyal supporter in winning the Tetrarchy.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=2&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=3&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=4&m=s&o=0

Bronze crossbow brooches can be found with geometric patterns and decorations, the evidence is well published.
Just a few examples.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=5&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=6&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=7&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=8&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=9&m=s&o=0

A few photos on how some highly developed crossbow brooches can be assembled

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=10&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=11&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=12&m=s&o=0


Some simple research can give us quite a lot of information, what is missing is the lack of reference and published bronze crossbow brooches with inscriptions on the bow.

We are certain that VTERE FELIX (Good Luck to the user) is correct, parallels of this meaning is documented on brooches and I have managed to find at least one parallel of FELIX inscribed on a bronze crossbow brooch.
N° 235

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=13&m=f&o=0
But what style of writing can be seen from documented examples.
What style can be often seen on funeral inscriptions.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=14&m=f&o=0

Very often on authentic inscriptions the letters are square, cubic, more even and neat like “punched”.
Comparing a few “imperial inscriptions” and the makers signatures moulded on the AUCISSA type brooches, I think all these inscriptions were engraved by means of chisels.

Bow drills were known in antiquity evidence of metal bits are documented and they can be seen reconstructed in some museum displays.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=15&m=s&o=0

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=16&m=s&o=0

some authentic inscriptions do seem to have been engraved by a bow drill

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=17&m=f&o=0

But with this example we have a very uniform patina also seen in the engraved groves, with some magnification also pitting is seen in the grooves. Many inscriptions have a harmonious symmetry.


This style does seem a little different, the patina in the grooves don’t seem all that correct and the engraving is superficial and a little sloppy.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=18&m=f&o=0

So I came to the following conclusions, the bronze crossbow brooch seems correct and authentic only the inscriptions have been recently added with the aid of modern power tools and engraving bits.
In my opinion, well 90% sure it’s the rounded edges of the beginning of the letter that gives it away, were the bit starts the engraving you have that half circular entrance in forming the engraving groove. A slight entrance at the beginning and the end, deeper in the middle. The engraving groove itself is concave and superficial and in a few points I am pretty sure the bit “slipped”. The tip of the 0,8mm engraving bits are spherical and this machinery can be clearly seen.
If you have worked a little with a Dremmel 0,8 – 1mm engraving bit it might be easier to understand what I meant. This photo with captions might help.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=19&m=f&o=0

I have added another photo of an artefact that in my opinion has also be manipulated with modern tooling Actually in my opinion this item is modern, has been first engraved and then the tarnish and patina has been chemically produced.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=21&m=f&o=0

Now to be 100% sure my only means would be a careful microscope inspections, but a good 90% of reasons to doubt an artefact can be achieved with some good photos and research.

If some new members take interest in brooches in the achieves they can find a few more posts on the argument.
Cleaning Brooches with the aid of a microscope.
Message: 2749
http://tinyurl.com/259hb9

Enamel on Brooches
Message : 3002
http://tinyurl.com/2zgcbq

Regards
Roger

To see the article mentioned in Roger's post :

"Inscribed Brooches found in Croatia" (Viminacium Upper Moesia 55 Crossbow
Brooches.pdf ) subscribe to the Antiquities_Science-Annex by going to:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science-Annex/

Many thanks.

All the best,
Jim
 

Dear Roger/Jim/List

First, thanks a lot to Roger for the very complete post. I would like to be so constant as him!

Second: I agree with him that the inscription looks modern with a posterior patina added.

If such fibulae are so important, and more with inscriptions, the inscription we are talking about is carelessly done, and that does not agree with the rest of item.
Also, patina, unless a trick of the photo in the recesses, looks completely different than the rest.

Fibula could be legitimate. Inscription to be sure is modern, in my opinion

Reasons
-No care done, when the crossbow fibula is an important object. No artisan would do this...
-the patina inside is different from the rest of the fibula. I would like to see it in hand, but seems the product of an instant patina product

I hope that I could post the sanzhu fakes.
There you could see a very convincing patina (fake.... :-(

With best wishes

Lluís

These thoughts are very sound and I would agree with them. It is very
possible that the inscription is a modern one.
I was surprised to see the historic inscriptions that were apparently
produced with a drill bit! I am trying to imagine using the hand
drill shown as a model, to make an inscription in a bronze surface.
This seems difficult, to say the least.
Of course, I have never had the chance to use a hand drill like the
one pictured, so I can only try to imagine it. To my mind, a task
like that would be very, very difficult, if not impossible.
I would expect that the value of an artifact would increase through
an interesting inscription. This would be a good reason to fake one.
But, if it is possible, I would appreciate seeing some microscopic
images of the bronze surface inside and outside of the inscription
for comparison.

magpetermahler

 

Dear Peter: Thanks for your post.

As to your query about Dremmel hand tools

I am trying to imagine using the hand
> drill shown as a model, to make an inscription in a bronze surface.
> This seems difficult, to say the least.
> Of course, I have never had the chance to use a hand drill like the
> one pictured, so I can only try to imagine it. To my mind, a task
> like that would be very, very difficult, if not impossible.

These Dremmels come in various forms but most are straight cylindrical
instruments not much wider than a fat cigar and come with a multitude
of interchangeable heads of various forms (many of these heads are
conical sanding heads that come to a point).

With a little practice a Dremmel is no more difficult to use than a
ball-point pen.

Incidentally a Dremmel is quite handy for other issues and tasks we
deal with.
Two in particular that come to mind are preparing a surface for
metallography and in many different conservation issues.

I will see if I can find an Internet catalogue that not only shows the
body of the instrument but also the variety of the interchangeable
heads (which can go from fine drill bits, balls, cones, sandpaper,
tiny wire wheels and even buffers)

I know Roger is busy working on another project but hopefully he has
seen your post and will be posting some more photos soon.

Many thanks.

All the best,
Jim

Dear James,
thanks for the very iteresting discription! It is much appreciates. What an amazing thing!
Of course I have heard of simular things used to work on wood and even to produce fire. But to work on bronze? Never.
The picture in my mind is of having to use the bow in one hand and the drill in another. How else could one use it?
I could imagine hooking a drill to a wheel and using it with the feet - like an ancient potter would, when he produces pottery on the wheel. I have heard that there might have been something like that in ancient China, used to work on jade.

But by hand - this seems to be the hard part - controling the direction that it goes - possible with the left hand, and at the same time moving the bow back and forth - for example with the right hand. Drilling into bronze would also take a lot of pressure at the same time, too. I am not sure if the "slipping marks" shown in the photo could come to be that way.
just a few thoughts, along with my thanks for your mail and for this great group.
best regards and greetings from Vienna,

Peter
 

Dear Peter,

This is the Dremel homepage depicting tools:
http://www.dremeleurope.com/dremelocs-uk/Category.jsp?ccat_id=469

You can see how engraving cutters for soft metal look like here:
http://www.dremeleurope.com/dremelocs-uk/Category.jsp;jsessionid=6CFEC7302E5082F584D32F5ED7C04826?&ccat_id=484

This is an image of a hard material engraving cutter:
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=1&o=2

As you can see, the soft cutters have some sort of tiny knives, the
harder ones are a grinding tool. Due to the traces I guess a soft
cutter was used for most of the modern inscriptions.

For engraving, I would fix the machine and use a flex shaft attachment
as shown on (LINK LOST) . When the piece to work on is
fixed in the proper position, it's easy to use the engraving tool like
a pen.

Just for the record - an addition on Roger's post:
Some Langton Down brooch derivatives called 'Nertomarus type' also
have a maker's signature sometimes. Unfortunately I can't find an
image. This is where it is stated: http://books.google.com/books?id=KbSIW__s2TEC&pg=RA3-PA103&lpg=RA3-PA103&ots=EspcQnoH4-&dq=nertomarus&output=html&sig=mTSkWkjiZt2ouomAim0KPHb-4OA&hl=de (in
German). The name 'Nertomarus' is Celtic, such as 'Aucissa', and both
brooch types are from the first century AD. This is how a Nertomarus
brooch looks like: http://www.aicim.be/main/fr/fiche.php?from=memb&provider=MCE&id=34180 (French page). This piece
has a marker's stamp, too ('CACCOS') with the lack of a picture.

renate

Dear Renate,
thank you for the interesting links.
I was not only thinking about modern tools as I wrote my lines, but also of ancient ones, an example is shown in the link supplied by Roger:
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=15&m=s&o=0

This would be the kind of thing used in the distant past to do inscriptions. This is also the image that caused me to think so much about the difficulties involved in doing this. Imagine trying to use one of these to do an inscription on bronze! It is - what is the word - mystifying.

best regards and greetings from Vienna,
Peter Mahler

Dear Peter
 
I think the inscriptions were mostly engraved by chiselling, not with a bow drill.
 
Taking this example
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/photos/view/be08?b=17&m=f&o=0
 

 

I wrote “some authentic inscriptions do seem to have been engraved by a bow drill”
 
Mainly pointing out that bow drilling was know and used in antiquities and the difference of craftsmanship compared to the fake modern applied inscription.
 
The use of Bow drilling is documented quite a few millennium before Roman times.
 
Will Stuart in message 2261 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Antiquities_Science/message/2261
Gave some very interesting information with some dates of Bow Drilling used on ancient lapidary art and some data on experimental bow drilling.
 
Regards
Roger

Dear Roger,
I have looked at these examples already and find them amazing.
Thank you very much for the information. I keep on trying to imagine how inscriptions were made with a bow powered drill, especially on such a small surface, and have not yet come to any conclusion at all. I might just experiment a bit in this direction one day, just to try it out. Thanks again for your thoughts,
Peter

Dear Peter Mahler,

Yes, learning on how the Romans worked is interesting, but we don't
know much about their craftspersons and how they worked. Rogers
message helps to determine modern work from ancient by analyzing tool
traces. The weekend before last I visited an antique coin market of
high reputation - more than 90% of the brooches there were faked or
repaired without mentioning. So everything that helps on recognizing
modern work on so called ancient pieces is highly appreciated.

Rogers description of a drill borer (the one you linked) reminds me on
something an archeologist I regularly meet explained when I showed him
a tiny stone age flint tip I found recently. The design of stone age
borers for working on bones and amber is in fact nearly the same. I'll
take a photo of the borer tip, if you're interested.

renate

Dear Renate,
being able to distinguish modern tool marks from age old ones is really, really important. I have been very interested in this subject for quite a while now. The sad thing is that, in my case, I have not found that much information. So I am looking for a date base of photos and information. Do you know of anything out there that I could study?
I enclose a link that you might find interesting. Well, you probably know of this already, no? After scrolling down the page a bit, you will be able to read about a neat technique for producing images of tool marks (electron scanning microscope images). Also you will find two nice photos comparing ancient with modern tool marks on stone. And a few comments about revolving tools as well.

http://www.si.edu/opa/insideresearch/printable/V9_CrystalSkulls_print.html

best regards,
Peter

Presuming that the bronze was produced by the lost wax casting method it would have been so much easier to engrave the relatively soft wax model ( with a sharp stick or stylus ?), then to cast this in bronze so that the decoration is reproduced in the cast . Doing it the other way around and engraving directly into the tough metal seems very much like doing it the hard way ! It is obviously possible but must have taken many times longer to perform , and when cutting into metal you cannot rub out mistakes and start again like you can working on wax. Best wishes

Anthony 

Hi, Anthony/list
 
The fibulae seemed worked by hand (or at least chiseled after being cast).
To add the inscription with punches is a possibility. And to chisel in the good, taking in acount that they were "status" goods, would not make any difference in the final price, but make them more desired.
Also, remember that beeswax was not as cheap as today in those times.....
 
Anyway, the rounded inscription look fake to my eyes. perhaps wrong, but that is what I see.
 
With best wishes
 
Lluís

Dear Renate:

Thank you for your post and the link to pages to the book "Fibel and
Fibeltract" which I highly recommend.

On the subject of fibulas I also recommend the "UPA" series as well as
certain volumes of the Prahistorische Bronzefunde series.

I do want to mention Internet bookseller Andreas Bohrman/AntikMakler
is a great resource for purchasing hard to find books on artifacts.

(Go to either
http://www.antikmakler.de/
or
http://www.foldingbox.de/ )

A recent search of their site turned up 239 books on fibulas (in
German 'fibel') including books on their conservation and restoration.

Many thanks.

All the best,
Jim

Dear Jim,

Thanks for recommending the Antikmakler Shop. I'm a customer. The book
descriptions are very detailed, so you'll find books that mention
brooches on a few pages only, and books all on brooches at the same
time. Following the search for 'fibel' only, I found two books that
might be helpful on this topic. Thery're about cruciform brooches, I'm
not sure if they provide information about inscriptions on them:

- Reichstein, Joachim: Die kreuzförmige Fibel. (108,- EUR)
- Schulze, Mechthild: Die spätkaiserzeitlichen Armbrustfibeln mit
festem Nadelhalter (Gruppe Almgren VI,2). (47,05 EUR)

What's the "UPA" series, please?

renate

Dear Renate:

UPA is an abbreviation for "Universitatsforschungen zur
Prahistorischen Archaologie" (please forgive my lack of use of
umlauts, I no longer have my German language keyboard).

The text in these books is quite good and they are well illustrated.

All the best,
Jim

Dear Renate, Jim & List
 
The PBF (Prähistorische Bronzefunde) series that cover  fibulae is the XIV and at the moment the complete titles are the following.
  1. F. Laux, Die Fibeln in Niedersachsen (1973).
  2. K. Kilian, Die Fibeln in Thessalien von der mykenischen bis zur archaischen Zeit (1975).
  3. P. Betzler, Die Fibeln in Süddeutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz I (Urnenfelderzeitliche Typen) (1974).
  4. E. Sapouna-Sakellarakis, Die Fibeln der griechischen Inseln (1978).
  5. P. von Eles Masi, Le fibule dell'Italia settentrionale (1986).
  6. T. Bader, Die Fibeln in Rumänien (1983).
  7. D. Gergova, Früh- und ältereisenzeitliche Fibeln in Bulgarien (1987).
  8. E. Caner, Fibeln in Anatolien I (1983).
  9. J.  Ríhovský, Die Fibeln in Mähren (1993).
  10. M. Gedl, Die Fibeln in Polen (Steiner: Stuttgart 2004).
  11. M. Novotná, Die Fibeln in der Slowakei (Steiner: Stuttgart 2001).
  12. R. Vasic, Die Fibeln im Zentralbalkan (1999).
  13. D. Glogovic, Fibeln im kroatischen Küstengebiet (Istrien, Dalmatien) (Steiner: Stuttgart 2003).
I  have reference of these titles in my library and these books mainly cover fibulae which range
between this dating 1300 – 500BC.
 
Bader, Tiberiu:
Die Fibeln in Rumänien
1983
ISBN 3-406-08714-0; Leinen
Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV N°6
German
 
Betzler, Paul:
Die Fibeln in Süddeutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz I.
Urnenfelderzeitliche Typen
1974
ISBN 3-406-00758-9; Leinen
Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV N°3
German
 
Caner, Ertugrul:
Fibeln in Anatolien I
1983
ISBN 3-406-09015-X; Leinen
Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV N°8
German
 
Laux Friedrich
Die Fibeln in Niedersachsen
1973
Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV N°1
German
 
Sapouna-Sakellarakis, Efi:
Die Fibeln der griechischen Inseln
1978 
ISBN 3-406-00773-2; Leinen
Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV N°4
German
 
A lot of German books can be found on fibulae. I don’t have Riha’s 2 books, highly referred to on many texts, but I can also recommend these books with good studies on Roman Brooches.
 
Bechert Tilmann
Römische Fibeln des 1 und 2 Jahrhundertsn. Chr.
Duisburg Rhenhausen 1973
German
 
Ettlinger, Elisabeth:
Die Römischen Fibeln in der Schweiz
(A. Francke) 1973
German
 
Jobst, Werner. 
Die Romischen Fibeln aus Lauriacum. 
Wimmer, Linz, 1975.
German
 
Regards
Roger