gems, glyptic, antique gems, engraved gems, rings, agate, shell, cameo, intaglio, amulet, jewelry

It was not without reason that, in concluding the description of the amulet, which I then had some grounds for attributing to Julius Caesar (Revue, vol. III, p. 152), I invoked the grave authority of M. Letronne. Something caused me to doubt the antiquity of this piece, and I was persuaded in advance that, while providing the explanation of the signs before which my inexperience recoiled, the learned and judicious archaeologist to whom I ventured to appeal would know how to discern the true or false character of the gem in question. Today I congratulate myself on that decision. We have all gained by it: I, a reasoned conviction regarding this stone, whose authenticity I admitted only with some difficulty; and the public, an excellent article which will henceforth serve as a criterion for archaeologists. To excuse my error, I shall not invoke the certificate of authenticity somewhat lightly granted to the supposed seal of Sepullius Macer by one of our most prolific scholars, by a man of the profession, in a word. What would I gain by sheltering my inexperience behind a name respectable in the eyes of many people? All the pornographers in the world would today fail if they wished to rehabilitate the seal of Doctor Sichel and the gem of Doctor Long, objects which M. Letronne has just, in a most evident manner, reduced, it seems to me, to their proper value. I shall permit myself a few brief observations.