- Identification and Creation
- Object Number
- Replica of the Praeneste Fibula
- Work Type
- pin, fibula
- Creation Place: Unidentified Region
- Persistent Link
- Physical Descriptions
- Copper alloy, gilded
- 11 cm (4 5/16 in.)
- Technical Details
Technical Observations: The fibula appears is a modern fabrication of a known artifact, and as such, there is little evidence indicating antiquity.
- Acquisition and Rights
- Credit Line
- Harvard Art Museums/Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Transfer from the Department of the Classics, Harvard University, Purchased in Rome
- Accession Year
- Object Number
- Asian and Mediterranean Art
- The Harvard Art Museums encourage the use of images found on this website for personal, noncommercial use, including educational and scholarly purposes. To request a higher resolution file of this image, please submit an online request.
Published Catalogue Text: Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Bronzes at the Harvard Art Museums
This object is a replica of the Praeneste fibula, which bears one of the earliest Latin inscriptions: “MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOI” (Manius made me for Numerius). The inscription on the original was incised, while on this replica it appears to be part of the casting; the letterforms differ slightly, and the replica does not copy the original inscription exactly. This replica is missing the pin; it is also, like the original, missing one of the cylindrical elements on the bow.
The original Praeneste fibula is now in the Museo Preistorico Etnografico Luigi Pigorini, Rome, inv. no. 2819. Although the authenticity of the inscription on that piece has been extensively debated (1), recent technical analysis with a scanning electron microscope has indicated that the inscription is authentic (2).
1. See A. E. Gordon, The Inscribed Fibula Praenestina: Problems of Authenticity, University of California Publications: Classical Studies 16 (Berkeley, 1975); D. Ridgway, “Manios Faked?” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 24 (1977): 17-30; E. P. Hamp, “Is the Fibula a Fake?” American Journal of Philology 102.2 (1981): 151-53.
2. See D. F. Maras, “Scientists Declare the Fibula Praenestina and Its Inscription to be Genuine ‘Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt,’” Etruscan News 14 (2012). It would be interesting to compare the condition of the surfaces of the original fibula with this replica, which is thought to be gilt.
Lisa M. Anderson
- Exhibition History
32Q: 2700 Impressionism, Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, 09/27/2018 - 02/07/2019
- Subjects and Contexts
This record has been reviewed by the curatorial staff but may be incomplete. Our records are frequently revised and enhanced. For more information please contact the Division of Asian and Mediterranean Art at email@example.com