fbpx
Wikipedia

Praeneste fibula

The Praeneste fibula (the "brooch of Palestrina") is a golden fibula or brooch, today housed in the Pigorini National Museum of Prehistory and Ethnography in Rome. The fibula bears an inscription in Old Latin, claiming craftsmanship by one Manios and ownership by one Numazios. At the time of its discovery in the late nineteenth century, it was accepted as the earliest known specimen of the Latin language. The authenticity of the inscription has since been disputed.[1] However a new analysis performed in 2011 declared it to be genuine "beyond any reasonable doubt" and to date from the Orientalizing period, in the first half of the seventh century BC.[2]

The brooch of Palestrina
Latin: Fibula Praenestina
MaterialGold
Size10.7 cm (4.2 in) long
WritingOld Latin: MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOI
Created7th century BC
Discovered1870s-1880s
Location disputed, alleged to be the Bernardini tomb, Palestrina, Italy
Discovered byUnknown, announced by Wolfgang Helbig in 1887
Present locationPigorini National Museum of Prehistory and Ethnography, Rome, Italy
CultureEtruscan civilization, orientalizing period

Discovery Edit

The fibula was presented to the public in 1887 by Wolfgang Helbig, an archaeologist. According to some sources, Helbig did not explain how he had come to acquire the artifact at the time,[3] although others[4] state that the fibula "was first made known to the public in three short articles in the Römische Mitteilungen for 1887 where it is said to have been purchased in Palestrina by a friend of Helbig in the year 1871, or five years before the discovery of the tomb" – the tomb in question being the Bernardini Tomb whose treasure the fibula was later claimed to be a part of.

Date and inscription Edit

 
The inscription on the Praeneste Fibula. The writing runs from right to left.[5]

The fibula was thought to originate from the 7th century BC.[5] It is inscribed with a text that appears to be written in Old Latin or Proto-Latino-Faliscan (shown by MED /med/ as an accusative instead of ablative), here transcribed to Roman letters:

MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOI[5]

The reconstructed Proto-Italic ancestor would have been:

*(PN) med fefaked (PN)

The equivalent Classical Latin sentence obtained by applying the appropriate differences between Old Latin and Classical Latin would probably have been:

*Manius me fecit Numerio[citation needed]

translated as:

Manius made me for Numasius[5]

Hoax hypothesis Edit

In 1980 Margherita Guarducci, a leading epigraphist, published a book arguing that the inscription had been forged by Francesco Martinetti, an art dealer, and Helbig, who were known to have collaborated in shady dealings. Guarducci argued that the fibula's presentation in 1887 was a hoax perpetrated to advance the careers of both men.[6] This was the most formal but not the first accusation of its kind: Georg Karo had said that Helbig told him that the fibula had been stolen from Palestrina's Tomba Bernardini.[3]

Subsequent arguments for authenticity Edit

Evidence in favor of the genuineness of the text came from a new Etruscan inscription of the Orientalizing period published by Massimo Poetto and Giulio Facchetti in 1999. The inscription scratched on the body of an Etrusco-Corinthian aryballos shows a gentilicium, Numasiana, which provides confirmation of the genuineness of the name Numasioi on the Fibula Prenestina, often regarded as suspicious by the supporters of the theory that it was a forgery.[2]

In 2005, based on epigraphic and other arguments, linguist Markus Hartmann concluded that it is justified to assume the authenticity of the inscription as long as there is no compelling evidence for a forgery, and dated it with confidence to the seventh century BC.[citation needed]

In 2011, new scientific evidence was presented by the research team of Edilberto Formigli and Daniela Ferro, whose optical, physical and chemical analyses allowed them to take into consideration smaller scrapes on the surface of the object than was possible in the 1980s. Observation by means of scanning electron microscope (SEM) and detailed physical and chemical analyses on the surface of small areas within the track of the incision showed the existence of micro-crystallization of the gold surface: a natural phenomenon that could have taken place only in the course of centuries after the fusion. The study reported that a 19th-century forger could not have realized such a forgery.[2]

However, the micro-crystallization discovery alone seems to still leave open the possibility that C. Densmore Curtis' impression, expressed in 1919, that "based on its stiff lines and awkward transitions, ... it did not come from the Bernardini Tomb, but is of a somewhat later date",[7] could be correct.

Replicas Edit

Replicas of the fibula are held by the National Roman Museum's Museum of Epigraphy at the Baths of Diocletian in Rome,[8] and also by the Arthur M. Sackler Museum at Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts.[9]

See also Edit

References Edit

  1. ^ Conway, Robert Seymour (1897). The Italic Dialects: edited with a grammar and glossary. Vol. I. Cambridge (England): University Press. pp. 311–2.
  2. ^ a b c Maras, Daniele F. (Winter 2012). "Scientists declare the Fibula Praenestina and its inscription to be genuine 'beyond any reasonable doubt'". Etruscan News. 14.
  3. ^ a b Momigliano, A. (1989). "The Origin of Rome: III Settlement, Society and Culture in Latium and at Rome". In Edwards, I. E. S. (ed.). The Cambridge Ancient History. VII. Vol. Part 2: The Rise of Rome to 220 B.C. (2 ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 73–4. ISBN 9780521234467. One, the gold fibula (Fig. 23) inscribed 'Manios me vhevhaked Numasioi' ('Manios (Manius) made me (or 'had me made'?) for Numasios (Numerius)') – perhaps the most famous inscribed object from the whole of Latium – raises two doubts, one about its origin and the other about its authenticity. It was published in 1887 by an eminent archaeologist, W. Helbig, without indication of its origin. Later Georg Karo declared that he had been told by Helbig that the fibula, being of gold and obviously valuable, had been stolen from the Tomba Bernardini
  4. ^ Curtis, C. Densmore (1919). "The Bernardini Tomb". Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. 3: 22. doi:10.2307/4238513. ISSN 0065-6801. JSTOR 4238513.
  5. ^ a b c d Halsey, William D. (1965). Collier's encyclopedia, with Bibliography and Index. US: The Crowell-Collier Publishing Company. p. 595.
  6. ^ Gordon, Arthur E. (October–November 1982). "Review: 'La cosiddetta Fibula Prenestina. Antiquari, eruditi e falsari nella Roma dell' Ottocento by Margherita Guarducci". Classical Journal. The Classical Association of the Middle West and South. 78 (1): 64–70. JSTOR 3297269.
  7. ^ Curtis (1919), pp. 21–22.
  8. ^ Westin Tikkanen, Karin (26 Jul 2012). "The Consequences of Truth". Bulletin of the History of Archaeology. 22: 19. doi:10.5334/bha.22113.
  9. ^ "Replica of the Praeneste Fibula". Harvard Art Museums.

Further reading Edit

Authors who argue that the Fibula is a forgery:

  • Hamp, Eric P. (1981). "Is the Fibula a Fake?". American Journal of Philology. 102 (2): 151–3. doi:10.2307/294308. JSTOR 294308.
  • Gordon, Arthur E. (1983). Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London. ISBN 0520038983.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  • Bonfante, Larissa (1986). Etruscan Life and Afterlife: A Handbook of Etruscan Studies. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

Authors who argue that the Fibula is authentic:

  • Lehmann, Winfred P. (1993). Historical Linguistics (3rd ed.). Routledge.
  • Wachter, R. (1987). Altlateinische Inschriften. Sprachliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Dokumenten bis 150 v. Chr. Bern etc.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  • Formigli, E. (1992). "Indagini archeometriche sull'autenticità della Fibula Praenestina". Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Römische Abteilung. 99: 329–43, Taf. 88–96.
  • Hartmann, Markus (2005). Die frühlateinischen Inschriften und ihre Datierung: Eine linguistisch-archäologisch-paläographische Untersuchung (in German). Bremen: Hempen. ISBN 978-3-934106-47-5.
  • "La Fibula Prenestina". Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana (in Italian). 99. 2014.

External links Edit

  • Harsch, Ulrich (1996). "Fibula Praenestina". Bibliotheca Augustana.

praeneste, fibula, brooch, palestrina, golden, fibula, brooch, today, housed, pigorini, national, museum, prehistory, ethnography, rome, fibula, bears, inscription, latin, claiming, craftsmanship, manios, ownership, numazios, time, discovery, late, nineteenth,. The Praeneste fibula the brooch of Palestrina is a golden fibula or brooch today housed in the Pigorini National Museum of Prehistory and Ethnography in Rome The fibula bears an inscription in Old Latin claiming craftsmanship by one Manios and ownership by one Numazios At the time of its discovery in the late nineteenth century it was accepted as the earliest known specimen of the Latin language The authenticity of the inscription has since been disputed 1 However a new analysis performed in 2011 declared it to be genuine beyond any reasonable doubt and to date from the Orientalizing period in the first half of the seventh century BC 2 The brooch of PalestrinaLatin Fibula PraenestinaMaterialGoldSize10 7 cm 4 2 in longWritingOld Latin MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOICreated7th century BCDiscovered1870s 1880sLocation disputed alleged to be the Bernardini tomb Palestrina ItalyDiscovered byUnknown announced by Wolfgang Helbig in 1887Present locationPigorini National Museum of Prehistory and Ethnography Rome ItalyCultureEtruscan civilization orientalizing period Contents 1 Discovery 2 Date and inscription 3 Hoax hypothesis 4 Subsequent arguments for authenticity 5 Replicas 6 See also 7 References 8 Further reading 9 External linksDiscovery EditThe fibula was presented to the public in 1887 by Wolfgang Helbig an archaeologist According to some sources Helbig did not explain how he had come to acquire the artifact at the time 3 although others 4 state that the fibula was first made known to the public in three short articles in the Romische Mitteilungen for 1887 where it is said to have been purchased in Palestrina by a friend of Helbig in the year 1871 or five years before the discovery of the tomb the tomb in question being the Bernardini Tomb whose treasure the fibula was later claimed to be a part of Date and inscription Edit nbsp The inscription on the Praeneste Fibula The writing runs from right to left 5 The fibula was thought to originate from the 7th century BC 5 It is inscribed with a text that appears to be written in Old Latin or Proto Latino Faliscan shown by MED med as an accusative instead of ablative here transcribed to Roman letters MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOI 5 The reconstructed Proto Italic ancestor would have been PN med fefaked PN The equivalent Classical Latin sentence obtained by applying the appropriate differences between Old Latin and Classical Latin would probably have been Manius me fecit Numerio citation needed translated as Manius made me for Numasius 5 Hoax hypothesis EditIn 1980 Margherita Guarducci a leading epigraphist published a book arguing that the inscription had been forged by Francesco Martinetti an art dealer and Helbig who were known to have collaborated in shady dealings Guarducci argued that the fibula s presentation in 1887 was a hoax perpetrated to advance the careers of both men 6 This was the most formal but not the first accusation of its kind Georg Karo had said that Helbig told him that the fibula had been stolen from Palestrina s Tomba Bernardini 3 Subsequent arguments for authenticity EditEvidence in favor of the genuineness of the text came from a new Etruscan inscription of the Orientalizing period published by Massimo Poetto and Giulio Facchetti in 1999 The inscription scratched on the body of an Etrusco Corinthian aryballos shows a gentilicium Numasiana which provides confirmation of the genuineness of the name Numasioi on the Fibula Prenestina often regarded as suspicious by the supporters of the theory that it was a forgery 2 In 2005 based on epigraphic and other arguments linguist Markus Hartmann concluded that it is justified to assume the authenticity of the inscription as long as there is no compelling evidence for a forgery and dated it with confidence to the seventh century BC citation needed In 2011 new scientific evidence was presented by the research team of Edilberto Formigli and Daniela Ferro whose optical physical and chemical analyses allowed them to take into consideration smaller scrapes on the surface of the object than was possible in the 1980s Observation by means of scanning electron microscope SEM and detailed physical and chemical analyses on the surface of small areas within the track of the incision showed the existence of micro crystallization of the gold surface a natural phenomenon that could have taken place only in the course of centuries after the fusion The study reported that a 19th century forger could not have realized such a forgery 2 However the micro crystallization discovery alone seems to still leave open the possibility that C Densmore Curtis impression expressed in 1919 that based on its stiff lines and awkward transitions it did not come from the Bernardini Tomb but is of a somewhat later date 7 could be correct Replicas EditReplicas of the fibula are held by the National Roman Museum s Museum of Epigraphy at the Baths of Diocletian in Rome 8 and also by the Arthur M Sackler Museum at Harvard in Cambridge Massachusetts 9 See also EditDuenos inscription Lapis NigerReferences Edit Conway Robert Seymour 1897 The Italic Dialects edited with a grammar and glossary Vol I Cambridge England University Press pp 311 2 a b c Maras Daniele F Winter 2012 Scientists declare the Fibula Praenestina and its inscription to be genuine beyond any reasonable doubt Etruscan News 14 a b Momigliano A 1989 The Origin of Rome III Settlement Society and Culture in Latium and at Rome In Edwards I E S ed The Cambridge Ancient History VII Vol Part 2 The Rise of Rome to 220 B C 2 ed Cambridge University Press pp 73 4 ISBN 9780521234467 One the gold fibula Fig 23 inscribed Manios me vhevhaked Numasioi Manios Manius made me or had me made for Numasios Numerius perhaps the most famous inscribed object from the whole of Latium raises two doubts one about its origin and the other about its authenticity It was published in 1887 by an eminent archaeologist W Helbig without indication of its origin Later Georg Karo declared that he had been told by Helbig that the fibula being of gold and obviously valuable had been stolen from the Tomba Bernardini Curtis C Densmore 1919 The Bernardini Tomb Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 3 22 doi 10 2307 4238513 ISSN 0065 6801 JSTOR 4238513 a b c d Halsey William D 1965 Collier s encyclopedia with Bibliography and Index US The Crowell Collier Publishing Company p 595 Gordon Arthur E October November 1982 Review La cosiddetta Fibula Prenestina Antiquari eruditi e falsari nella Roma dell Ottocento by Margherita Guarducci Classical Journal The Classical Association of the Middle West and South 78 1 64 70 JSTOR 3297269 Curtis 1919 pp 21 22 Westin Tikkanen Karin 26 Jul 2012 The Consequences of Truth Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 22 19 doi 10 5334 bha 22113 Replica of the Praeneste Fibula Harvard Art Museums Further reading EditAuthors who argue that the Fibula is a forgery Hamp Eric P 1981 Is the Fibula a Fake American Journal of Philology 102 2 151 3 doi 10 2307 294308 JSTOR 294308 Gordon Arthur E 1983 Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy Berkeley Los Angeles London ISBN 0520038983 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint location missing publisher link Bonfante Larissa 1986 Etruscan Life and Afterlife A Handbook of Etruscan Studies Detroit Wayne State University Press Authors who argue that the Fibula is authentic Lehmann Winfred P 1993 Historical Linguistics 3rd ed Routledge Wachter R 1987 Altlateinische Inschriften Sprachliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Dokumenten bis 150 v Chr Bern etc a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint location missing publisher link Formigli E 1992 Indagini archeometriche sull autenticita della Fibula Praenestina Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts Romische Abteilung 99 329 43 Taf 88 96 Hartmann Markus 2005 Die fruhlateinischen Inschriften und ihre Datierung Eine linguistisch archaologisch palaographische Untersuchung in German Bremen Hempen ISBN 978 3 934106 47 5 La Fibula Prenestina Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana in Italian 99 2014 External links Edit nbsp Wikimedia Commons has media related to Praeneste fibula Harsch Ulrich 1996 Fibula Praenestina Bibliotheca Augustana Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Praeneste fibula amp oldid 1180441056, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.