.53fi 



REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1890. 



llio s;uno .neiieral motliod witli a sinootli interior surface and exterior 

 bands, all of wliicli were soldered together. There were ouly live exte- 

 rior bands in the fragment. The weight was, nevertheless, 7 pounds 

 5^ ounces— lo ounces more than the first one, although that was com- 

 plete. The ornaments 

 Jl (fig. 177) were, like 

 that of the first, some 

 cast and soldered on, 

 whileothers were made 

 with punch marks — 

 pointille. 



The designs upon the 

 two horns, respective- 

 ly, are from their form, 

 manner of making, and 

 mechanical work gen- 

 erally, evidence that 

 they both belonged 

 practi(;ally to the same 

 epoch. The ornaments 

 (fig. 177) upon the horn 

 (fig. 175) (1734) were 

 artistically inferior to 

 the other. There have 

 been, of course, many 

 attempts on the part 

 of antiiiuarians to de- 

 cipher or translate 

 these figures and dis- 

 cover the date of the 

 making of the horns. 

 These efforts have re- 

 sulted in many theo- 

 ries, with none of which 

 we are particularly in- 

 terested. They were 

 supposed to be calen- 

 dars of antiquity, to 

 represent the signs of 

 the zodiac, to be a map 

 of the heavens and so 

 deal with astronomy,to 

 have related to the worship, first of the sun and then all within the range 

 of Scandinavian mythology, as well as other my thologies. The antiquari- 

 ans who made the most i)rofound studiesof these horns, and whose descrip- 

 tion and opinions are best entitled to consideration, were (1) Mr. E. P. 



Fig. 176. 

 details of first golden horn (fig. 174) : seven bands molded 

 and crimped, with some ornaments molded and soldered 

 on, others punched. 



