This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. The following WikiProjects or Portals may be able to help recruit one: • WikiProject Italy· Italy Portal • WikiProject Archaeology· Archaeology Portal • WikiProject Rational Skepticism If another appropriate WikiProject or portal exists, please adjust this template accordingly.(February 2009)

The inscription on the Praeneste Fibula. Writing is from right to left.

The Praeneste fibula (the "brooch of Palestrina") is a golden brooch bearing an inscription that was accepted nearly without question since its presentation to the public in 1887 by Wolfgang Helbig, an archaeologist, as the the earliest surviving specimen of the Latin language.^[1] The origin of the fibula was not stated in the presentation.^[2] Eventually it found its way to the Museo Preistorico Etnografico Luigi Pigorini in Rome. For many years it was kept on display but after it acquired notoriety when its authenticity was questioned more formally was removed from display.

[edit] Date and inscription

The fibula was thought to originate from the 7th century BCE. It is inscribed with a text that appears to be written in Old Latin, here transcribed to English letters:

MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOI

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

*MANIVS ME FECIT NVMERIO

translated as:

Manius fashioned me for Numerius

[edit] Possible hoax

In 1980 Margherita Guarducci, a leading epigraphist, published a book claiming that the inscription had been forged by Francesco Martinetti, an art dealer, and Helbig, who were known to have collaborated in shady dealings. Its presentation in 1887, she claimed, was in fact a hoax perpetrated to advance the careers of both men.^[3] This was the most formal but not the first accusation of its kind: Georg Karo had said that Martinetti told him he had stolen the fibula unengraved from the Tomba Bernadini.^[2] This is, however, hearsay, and the evidence presented by Guarducci is circumstantial. She accuses Helbig of having forged the inscription himself, without direct evidence of the forging.

[edit] References

[edit] Further reading

For an explanation of why the fibula is likely a 19th‑century forgery, see:

• Eric P. Hamp, Is the Fibula a Fake?, American Journal of Philology 102, 1981, 151-153.
• Arthur E. Gordon, Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London 1983, ISBN 0-520-03898-3
• Larissa Bonfante, Etruscan Life and Afterlife: A Handbook of Etruscan Studies, Wayne State University Press, Detroit, 1986

For those who continue to hold the view that the fibula is authentic, see:

• Winfred P. Lehmann, Historical Linguistics, Routledge; 3rd edition, January, 1993
• R. Wachter, Altlateinische Inschriften. Sprachliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Dokumenten bis 150 v. Chr., Bern etc. 1987.
• E. Formigli, "Indagini archeometriche sull'autenticità della Fibula Praenestina". MDAI(R) 99 (1992) 329-343, Taf. 88-96.

[edit] External links

• Harsch, Ulrich (1996). "Fibula Praenestina" (html). Bibliotheca Augustana. http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lsante07/Fibula/fib_insc.html. Retrieved 2009-02-09.