Praeneste fibula

Last updated
The brooch of Palestrina
Latin: Fibula Praenestina
Fibula Praenestina Terme Inv Museo Pigorini 2819.jpg
Material Gold
Size10.7 cm (4.2 in) long
Writing Old Latin: ꟿANIOS ꟿED FHEFHAKED NVꟿASIOI
Created7th century BC
Discovered1870s–1880s
Location disputed, alleged to be the Bernardini tomb, Palestrina, Italy
Discovered byUnknown, announced by Wolfgang Helbig in 1887
Present location Pigorini National Museum of Prehistory and Ethnography, Rome, Italy
Culture Etruscan civilization, orientalizing period

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, repeatedly rejected [1] [2] and affirmed, with one assertion of antiquity dating to the first half of the seventh century BC. [3]

Contents

Discovery

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, [4] although others [5] 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

The inscription on the Praeneste Fibula. The writing runs from right to left. Fibula Praenestina.svg
The inscription on the Praeneste Fibula. The writing runs from right to left.

The fibula was thought to originate from the seventh century BC. [6] It is inscribed with a text that appears to be written in Old Latin or even Proto-Latino-Faliscan (shown by MED/me:d/ as an accusative instead of ablative), here transcribed to Roman letters:

Fibula Praenestina.svg
MANIOS MED FHE FHAKED NVMASIOI [6]

The reconstructed Proto-Italic ancestor would have been:

*(PN) mēd fefaked (PN)

In Classical Latin the inscription reads:

*Manius me fecit Numerio,

"Manius made me for Numerius." [6]

Authenticity

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. [7] 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. [4]

Thomas Hoving tells the story in a way that necessitates the item's falseness. His personal detective work involved becoming convinced it had been written in mirror image rather than an originally reversed hand. Putting it to a mirror, he saw "a near-English word, fhaked," but thought anyone who'd seen faked in it--a forger's admission--put it out of their minds that anyone "could be so bold." In addition to the boldness, there was evidence in court by expert testimony. [8]

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. [3]

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. [9]

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. [3]

Replicas

Replicas of the fibula are held by the National Roman Museum's Museum of Epigraphy at the Baths of Diocletian in Rome, [10] and also by the Arthur M. Sackler Museum at Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts. [11]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Etruscan language</span> Extinct language of ancient Italy

Etruscan was the language of the Etruscan civilization in the ancient region of Etruria, in Etruria Padana and Etruria Campana in what is now Italy. Etruscan influenced Latin but was eventually completely superseded by it. The Etruscans left around 13,000 inscriptions that have been found so far, only a small minority of which are of significant length; some bilingual inscriptions with texts also in Latin, Greek, or Phoenician; and a few dozen purported loanwords. Attested from 700 BC to AD 50, the relation of Etruscan to other languages has been a source of long-running speculation and study, with it mostly being referred to as one of the Tyrsenian languages, at times as an isolate, and a number of other less well-known hypotheses.

The praenomen was a first name chosen by the parents of a Roman child. It was first bestowed on the dies lustricus, the eighth day after the birth of a girl, or the ninth day after the birth of a boy. The praenomen would then be formally conferred a second time when girls married, or when boys assumed the toga virilis upon reaching manhood. Although it was the oldest of the tria nomina commonly used in Roman naming conventions, by the late republic, most praenomina were so common that most people were called by their praenomina only by family or close friends. For this reason, although they continued to be used, praenomina gradually disappeared from public records during imperial times. Although both men and women received praenomina, women's praenomina were frequently ignored, and they were gradually abandoned by many Roman families, though they continued to be used in some families and in the countryside.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Old Latin</span> Latin language in the period before 75 BC

Old Latin, also known as Early, Archaic or Priscan Latin, was the Latin language in the period roughly before 75 BC, i.e. before the age of Classical Latin. A member of the Italic languages, it descends from a common Proto-Italic language; Latino-Faliscan is likely a separate branch from Osco-Umbrian. All these languages may be relatively closely related to Venetic and possibly further to Celtic; compare the Italo-Celtic hypothesis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Palestrina</span> Comune in Lazio, Italy

Palestrina is a modern Italian city and comune (municipality) with a population of about 22,000, in Lazio, about 35 kilometres east of Rome. It is connected to the latter by the Via Prenestina. It is built upon the ruins of the ancient city of Praeneste.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roman art</span> Art made in Ancient Rome and the territories it ruled

The art of Ancient Rome, and the territories of its Republic and later Empire, includes architecture, painting, sculpture and mosaic work. Luxury objects in metal-work, gem engraving, ivory carvings, and glass are sometimes considered to be minor forms of Roman art, although they were not considered as such at the time. Sculpture was perhaps considered as the highest form of art by Romans, but figure painting was also highly regarded. A very large body of sculpture has survived from about the 1st century BC onward, though very little from before, but very little painting remains, and probably nothing that a contemporary would have considered to be of the highest quality.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Porta Maggiore</span> Gate of the Aurelian walls, a landmark of Rome, Italy

The Porta Maggiore, or Porta Prenestina, is one of the eastern gates in the ancient but well-preserved 3rd-century Aurelian Walls of Rome. Through the gate ran two ancient roads: the Via Praenestina and the Via Labicana. The Via Prenestina was the eastern road to the ancient town of Praeneste. The Via Labicana heads southeast from the city.

Margherita Guarducci, also spelled Guarduci, was an Italian archaeologist, classical scholar, and epigrapher. She was a major figure in several crucial moments of the 20th-century academic community. A student of Federico Halbherr, she edited his works after his death. She was the first woman to lead archaeological excavations at the Vatican, succeeding Ludwig Kaas, and completed the excavations on Saint Peter's tomb, identifying finds as relics of Saint Peter. She has also engaged in discussions on the authenticity of the Praeneste fibula, arguing that its inscription is a forgery.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Latial culture</span> Early Iron Age culture in the Italian peninsula

The Latial culture ranged approximately over ancient Old Latium. The Iron Age Latial culture coincided with the arrival in the region of a people who spoke Old Latin. The culture was likely therefore to identify a phase of the socio-political self-consciousness of the Latin tribe, during the period of the kings of Alba Longa and the foundation of the Roman Kingdom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Numerius (praenomen)</span> Latin personal name

Numerius, feminine Numeria, is a Latin praenomen, or personal name, usually abbreviated N. The name was never especially common, but was used throughout the period of the Roman Republic, and into imperial times. The praenomen also gave rise to the patronymic gens Numeria.

The gens Alliena or Aliena was a minor plebeian family of the Roman Republic. The first member of the gens to achieve prominence was Lucius Alienus, plebeian aedile in 454 BC. However, the family then slipped into obscurity for several centuries, emerging once more in the first century BC.

The gens Obellia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome, known almost entirely from inscriptions.

The gens Belliena or Billiena was a minor plebeian family at ancient Rome. Bellienus is the form that occurs in writers, while Billienus is more common in inscriptions. Members of this gens are first mentioned toward the end of the Republic. Lucius Bellienus obtained the praetorship in 107 BC, but was prevented from obtaining the consulship. The Bellieni occur in history down to the time of Caesar, after which the family faded into obscurity; but others are known from inscriptions.

The gens Carrinatia was a plebeian family at ancient Rome. Members of this gens rose to prominence during the final century of the Republic, attaining the consulship in 43 BC.

The gens Servia was a minor plebeian family at ancient Rome. Few members of this gens are mentioned in ancient writers, but a number are known from inscriptions.

The gens Balonia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. No members of this gens are mentioned in ancient writers, but a number are known from inscriptions.

The gens Stenia or Stennia, occasionally spelled Sthenia, was a minor plebeian family at ancient Rome. Hardly any members of this gens are mentioned in ancient writers, but a large number are known from inscriptions.

The gens Tampia was a minor plebeian family at ancient Rome. Members of this gens are first mentioned in history during the time of Nero, but few achieved any distinction in the Roman state. The nomen Tampius is easily confused with that of Ampius. The most illustrious of the Tampii was Lucius Tampius Flavianus, who held the consulship twice during the latter half of the first century.

The Castellani were a family of goldsmiths, collectors, antique dealers and potters who created a business "empire" active in Rome during the 18th and 19th centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Phoenician metal bowls</span> 7th–8th century BCE artifacts

Phoenician metal bowls are approximately 90 decorative bowls made in the 7th–8th centuries BCE from bronze, silver and gold, found since the mid-19th century in the Eastern Mediterranean and Iraq. They were historically attributed to the Phoenicians, but are today considered to have been made by a broader group of Levantine peoples.

The gens Tutia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. Only a few members of this gens are mentioned by Roman writers, but a number of others are known from inscriptions.

References

  1. ↑ Conway, Robert Seymour (1897). The Italic Dialects: edited with a grammar and glossary. Vol. I. Cambridge (England): University Press. pp. 311–2.
  2. ↑ Hoving, Thomas (1996). False Impressions. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. p. 278. ISBN   978-0-684-81134-5.
  3. 1 2 3 Maras, Daniele F. (Winter 2012). "Scientists declare the Fibula Praenestina and its inscription to be genuine 'beyond any reasonable doubt'". Etruscan News. 14.
  4. 1 2 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
  5. ↑ 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.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Halsey, William D. (1965). Collier's encyclopedia, with Bibliography and Index . US: The Crowell-Collier Publishing Company. p. 595.
  7. ↑ Gordon, Arthur E. (October–November 1982). "Review: 'La cosiddetta Fibula Prenestina. Antiquari, eruditi e falsari nella Roma dell' Ottocento by Margherita Guarducci". Classical Journal . 78 (1). The Classical Association of the Middle West and South: 64–70. JSTOR   3297269.
  8. ↑ Hoving, Thomas (1996). False Impressions. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. p. 277. ISBN   978-0-684-81134-5.
  9. ↑ Hartmann, Markus (2005). Die frühlateinischen Inschriften und ihre Datierung: Eine linguistisch-archäologisch-paläographische Untersuchung (in German). Bremen: Hempen. ISBN   978-3-934106-47-5.
  10. ↑ Westin Tikkanen, Karin (26 Jul 2012). "The Consequences of Truth". Bulletin of the History of Archaeology. 22: 19. doi: 10.5334/bha.22113 .
  11. ↑ "Replica of the Praeneste Fibula". Harvard Art Museums.

Further reading

Authors who argue that the Fibula is a forgery:

Authors who argue that the Fibula is authentic:

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.