Bord met het familiewapen Ploos van Amstel before 1732

Editor: We're looking at a metal plate crafted before 1732, referred to as "Dish with the Ploos van Amstel family coat of arms". It's interesting how such a seemingly simple object carries so much implied history, but also looks quite utilitarian. How would you interpret this work, considering its age and purpose? Curator: It is tempting to see the heraldic device as a static marker of identity, isn't it? But consider the symbolism employed. The crest itself is a microcosm of cultural memory, designed to communicate lineage, status, and values. We should ask, what does the repetition of such images do to the family and how might their actions measure up against these repeated claims to authority. Editor: So it's more than just a family marker, but something that projects status. Does that affect the symbolic use? Curator: Exactly! Think of heraldry as a language—a highly codified visual language. The chosen symbols, colors, and their arrangement are all deliberate choices, aimed at conveying specific messages about the family’s history, allegiances, and aspirations. Were the colours carefully chosen? What about the orientation of any animals it might portray? These choices are telling. It might reveal to us their perceived role within their local environment and history. Editor: It sounds like analyzing the family's history might give some clues as to why these were chosen. Curator: Precisely. A heraldic dish like this becomes a site where personal and collective memory intersect. Every meal served upon it was a constant re-affirmation of the family’s identity and its place within the social fabric. By constantly ingesting from this marker of status, what actions would the family consider important? Editor: I see; it is kind of like a family legacy being a dinner companion. Thank you for elucidating the multiple layers of identity, memory, and purpose. I'll never look at a coat-of-arms the same way again.