Phalera constructions

[Renatus]

. . . you mention that Maxfield would think the Trimontium pieces might have been riveted to the harness but I don't think I would be inclined to agree with her, for when we look at these back plates we find that there are bell caps that may well have fixed the rings to the plates.

You may have the advantage of me in that you may have had the opportunity of examining the Newstead phalerae close-to. All I can say is that both Maxfield and the excavator, Curle, speak of bronze rivets with washers. I suppose that it would help if we could see the other side to see how the rivets or whatever they are appear there.

Then there is the other mention she makes of the Lauersfort pieces having the name Medamii as a second owner, that I would also disagree with for exactly like the Trimontium as with the name Domiiti Attici these names were on the inside of the phalerae plates and would not have been seen for they are simply the names of the makers of these pieces.

This is not quite correct. Maxfield states that all the Lauersfort phalerae are inscribed Medami but one has the name T Flavi Festi punched on the face. Logic suggests that Medamus would be the first owner and Titus Flavius Festus the second. It is unlikely that Dometius Atticus or Medamus were the makers of the phalerae. These names are inscribed in the genitive case, indicating ownership: Domiiti Attici = (the property of) Dometius Atticus; Medami = (the property of) Medamus. If they were the makers, one would expect their names to be in the nominative: Domiitius Atticus (fecit) = Dometius Atticus (made (this)); Medamus (fecit) = Medamus (made (this)).

Incidentally, I was wrong about our respective ages. You beat me by about ten years!