Journal - Comune di Monteleone di Spoleto

102
for much of their length — and the sequence of holes for
nonmetallic pins. The diameter of the holes is the same as
observed along one of the edges of the bronze sheathing of
the pole; the interval between them differs slightly (by a few
millimeters) and hence they are not perfectly superimposed.
The hypothesis i would like to advance runs as follows:
it is clear that the ivory was worked in numerous strips to
match the length of the pole. The perforated edges of the
strips were positioned under the proper right edge of the
bronze that revetted the pole and “sewn” with leather
threads; about 3⁄8 in. (1 cm) of the width of the ivory strip
was covered by bronze. The opposite edge of the bronze
sheathing, about ¾ in. (2 cm) away, was nailed to the wood
of the pole. The edge of the ivory opposite the holes overlapped
the nailed bronze edge without being attached to it,
so as to prevent stress, as revealed by the stain about 3⁄8 in.
(1 cm) wide left on the bronze (Figure V.64). once it was
assembled, the visible surface of the ivory measured about
1¼ in. (3 cm) wide; hence, the single ivory strips were about
1 5⁄8 in. (4 cm) wide.
23b. Fragment of decoration (from the pole?)
(Figure V.76)
elephant ivory
l. 6 5⁄8 in. (16.7 cm), W. 1 1⁄8 in. (3 cm), original thickness not
preserved
Description. The strip resembles the preceding one, but
without the ancient edge. Here, too, there is a green stain
caused by contact with bronze along the line that may have
contained the perforated edge.
Condition. The fragment has been recomposed from two
pieces. The obverse is well preserved, while the reverse is
eroded.
Technical observations. See cat. 23a.
Commentary. See cat 23a.
24a. Fragment of decoration (Figure V.76)
elephant ivory
l. 3 in. (7.5 cm), W. 1 in. (2.6 cm), thickness .2 cm
Description. The strip has two preserved ancient edges: the
longer one has a sharp oblique edge toward the inside with
crisscross incisions; the other edge is scalloped. along the
first edge are two holes for attachment; they measure 1⁄8 in.
(.2 cm) in diameter and have always been open. a tiny hole
on the shorter edge is surrounded by a green stain caused
by contact with a small bronze nail or bronze wire. The
whole reverse is crisscrossed by incisions.
Condition. The fragment is slightly concave lengthwise
toward the obverse, perhaps due to desiccation over time.
Both sides are well preserved.
Technical observations. The larger holes share the same
typology as the ones in cat. 23a, whereas the smaller one
resembles the description in cat. 22. For the crisscross lines
on the underside, see cat. 22. The piece was not examined
to determine to which animal order the ivory belongs.
Commentary. See cat. 24b.
24b. Fragment of decoration (Figure V.76)
ivory
l. ¾ in. (2 cm), W. 1 in. (2.5 cm), thickness .2 cm
Description. Part of the strip is identical to the preceding
one, in that only a short piece of scalloped edge containing
a similar tiny hole survives.
Condition. The reverse is eroded.
Commentary. it is not known whether fragments 24a and 24b
were part of a single strip or were two identical strips mirror
reversed. They originally fit on the flat surfaces of a part of the
chariot, or of the horses’ harness, that cannot be identified.
25. Fragment of inlay of an eye (Figure V.82)
ivory
l. 1 in. (2.6 cm), W. 5⁄8 in. (1.7 cm), thickness .44 cm
Description. The lens-shaped piece preserves about half of
its original edge, which is cut slightly obliquely toward the
outside. There are traces of crisscross incisions on the
reverse.
Condition. Two slivers have been superimposed to recompose
the fragment. The reverse is quite eroded.
Technical observations. The crisscross lines on the cut of the
edge of cat. 21a are missing on cat. 25 as on cat. 22. on
cat. 25, however, the incisions are present on the reverse.
The uneroded area of the reverse is reddish brown in color
as a result of contact with iron or another, perhaps organic,
material. High magnification revealed small, shining areas
where ancient adhesive may have been applied. 13 The piece
was not examined to determine to which animal order the
ivory belongs.
Commentary. The curvature and length of the fragment can
only fit the left eye of the boar protome, but with the following
reservations: The thickness of the inlay is about twice
that of the cavity prepared in the bronze, and it cannot be
established whether this is a result of a natural expansion
of the ivory due to the particular conditions of contact with
chemical and microbiological agents within the tomb. in
V.82 Fragments of ivory inlays from an eye (cat. 25) and perhaps
from an eye (cat. 26)