Epaulet van E.W. van Dam van IJsselt in 1830/32 Majoor c. 1800 - 1830

Editor: Here we have an epaulet that once belonged to E.W. van Dam van IJsselt, who was a Major in 1830. Given the materials, and Baroque and decorative style tags, I find myself wondering: what was the significance of an item like this within the military, and beyond? Curator: That's an excellent question. Epaulettes, while seemingly small decorative objects, held considerable socio-political weight. They visually communicated rank and authority within the military hierarchy, reflecting not only individual achievement but also the power structure of the state itself. Consider, for example, the revolutions during this time period; did these adornments become targets, symbols of a corrupt elite? Editor: So, more than just decoration, they acted as visible markers of power and social status? Almost like a walking uniform? Curator: Precisely! They functioned as symbols of distinction and honor but also invited commentary on ideas around identity, class and political affiliation. Note how the intricacy and expense of the materials - probably a mixed-media combination of metal thread and fabric - signaled not just rank, but the perceived importance of the individual and, by extension, the army. Now, I'd ask you: where were items like these typically made, and how accessible were they to the common citizen? Editor: Given the meticulous construction, it's probably a workshop specializing in military regalia. In terms of accessibility, highly exclusive, I imagine. It would reinforce existing class divisions. Thank you for highlighting all that context! It definitely enriches how I interpret this piece. Curator: And that’s key – thinking about how an object participates in its socio-political environment. Hopefully, you, as future art historian, will make everyone notice all that these pieces embody.