Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Miscellania
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 17th January 2018, 04:32 PM   #1
Athanase
Member
 
Athanase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Paris (France)
Posts: 417
Default

I find that the stone has a strange look. Would it be possible to have close-ups of the areas where the stone is broken?
Athanase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2018, 04:44 PM   #2
Cerjak
Member
 
Cerjak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 1,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Athanase
I find that the stone has a strange look. Would it be possible to have close-ups of the areas where the stone is broken?
this area ?
Attached Images
  
Cerjak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2018, 01:26 PM   #3
kai
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,255
Question

I was also wondering about those little dots... (On the surface only?)

The close-up does not show enough detail to reveal the inner stone(?) structure. Any chance that this is a cast replica, Jean-Luc?

Regards,
Kai
kai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2018, 01:29 PM   #4
Cerjak
Member
 
Cerjak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 1,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kai
I was also wondering about those little dots... (On the surface only?)

The close-up does not show enough detail to reveal the inner stone(?) structure. Any chance that this is a cast replica, Jean-Luc?

Regards,
Kai
Not a cast for sure !
Best

Jean-Luc
Cerjak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2018, 01:35 PM   #5
kai
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,255
Default

Phew, that's a relief!

The paint seems to sit on top of the dots while the stone base seems to have a different structure. Is there some plaster or something in between?

Regards,
Kai
kai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2018, 08:21 PM   #6
A. G. Maisey
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,991
Default

My guess is that the stone was almost certainly covered with a layer of plaster. I believe careful inspection will reveal small areas of plaster still in place.

Something that is not generally realised is that in ancient times all those beautiful old, weathered stone buildings and statues were painted in bright colours --- well, maybe not "all", but most certainly most of them were.

The candis of Jawa were brightly painted and could be seen for miles. The same applied with Classical Greek sculpture --- as Euripides makes clear in his "Helen".

This stone statue would have been plastered and painted when it was new.
A. G. Maisey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2018, 07:48 PM   #7
Cerjak
Member
 
Cerjak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 1,065
Default

Dear Alan and Kei Thank you all for your help.
I spent a lot of time reviewing this statue again.
First of all the exact weight is 66.5 kg
Dimensions: the base 38*28 cm
Height 66 cm
For sure not a cast . the dots could be removed easily
My guess is that a water runoff caused a limestone accumulation this could explain the small dots on the surface.
This statue is made of a black stone.
Anyway the best would be to show it to a specialist but with this weight it is not easy to transport !
Best

Cerjak
Attached Images
    
Cerjak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.