Talk:Celtic brooch

Another way to fasten a brooch that has a solid circle

A part of this speculation takes note of the fact that the ungapped circle came LATER than the gapped one. Perhaps cloth for those of status sufficient to possess such brooches became finer, or perhaps people just got tired of having multiple stab-holes in cloth and so created a way to avoid having the pin pierce cloth. But you could swing the pin out so that it is a sun-ray of the circle. Then pull a LOOP of cloth (which could be in layers, or maybe not, if the brooch's function is to bunch up rather than affix) through the ring. The length of cloth loop pulled through the ring must be about twice the length of the pin, so that the height of the loop above the ring (imagining the ring to be parallel to the ground) is about equal to the length of the pin. Then you swivel the pin, its end making an upwards arc, the end travelling through the loop of cloth. From the zenith the pin continues to swing back down, so that from the hinged end along a part of its length it lies along a diameter of the ring. Then you pull the loop out of the ring, until it is snug and tight. It can't come all of the way out of the ring, because it's now in a simple weave, under a semi-circular side of the ring, over the pin, and then back under the other semi-circular side of the ring. A test of this theory would be "On the closed-circle brooches, is the end of the pin sharp or blunt?" If it's blunt, it could confirm that this method was used and that nothing was intended to PIERCE fabric.2604:2000:C682:B600:7DD4:B431:1F69:2D81 (talk) 23:07, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

The article does say this, not quite in such detail. I suspect a lot of the outer clothing had rather loose weaves by modern standards. The pins are not really sharp by modern standards. Johnbod (talk) 02:30, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Use of terms

Why not reverse the opening sentence into "The penannular brooch, popularly called the Celtic brooch", and the title changed to likewise reflect this? I have some idea what answers I'll get but it is worth asking. Fergananim (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

You could make the argument that "penannular brooch" should be the title. However, it should go through WP:RM discussion as it's likely to be controversial.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Celtic brooch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110609042602/http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?searchText=brooch&x=10&y=7&pagesize=20&object=12457&row=15&detail=about to http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/object.asp?searchText=brooch&x=10&y=7&pagesize=20&object=12457&row=15&detail=about

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Celtic brooch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100824052905/http://www.nms.ac.uk/our_collections/collection_highlights/st_ninians_isle_treasure.aspx to http://www.nms.ac.uk/our_collections/collection_highlights/st_ninians_isle_treasure.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

working on a wikipedia project assignment and giving some feedback

hi all! i'm working on a project in a course on medieval art history at my university, and one of our assignments is to review an established wikipedia article and give some feedback on the talk page. i just wanted to come on and say that this article looks really good--i especially think the images included really add a well-structured, professional element. my one comment would be that maybe the links in the references and notes should be reassessed, as many of them are broken. not sure when the external links were last modified, but just something for continuity's sake.anyway, great work, all! SStevens97 (talk) 05:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)