07-03-2009, 02:01 PM
And I'm a dreadful typist. Sorry, folks!
I should have said that I haven't found this shield in any other publication. It may be all over the place and that's just my ignorance. If genuine, it is beautifully preserved. On the other hand, it has no markings that I can find to indicate how it was mounted and there's a few other discrepancies--it's got the only smooth shield rim, for instance, and the only multi-part face.
All told, though, it seems unlikely that it would hang in a major archaeological museum unless it was genuine...
And I agree, Paul--there may be other reasons for an off-center porpax. But the need to mount the antelabe on the shield rim doesn't seem to be one of them given the evidence. That's all I meant to say.
I should have said that I haven't found this shield in any other publication. It may be all over the place and that's just my ignorance. If genuine, it is beautifully preserved. On the other hand, it has no markings that I can find to indicate how it was mounted and there's a few other discrepancies--it's got the only smooth shield rim, for instance, and the only multi-part face.
All told, though, it seems unlikely that it would hang in a major archaeological museum unless it was genuine...
And I agree, Paul--there may be other reasons for an off-center porpax. But the need to mount the antelabe on the shield rim doesn't seem to be one of them given the evidence. That's all I meant to say.
Qui plus fait, miex vault.
