<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jericho Quarry &#8211; That Legionary Banner (not)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rogueclassicism.com/2009/07/02/jericho-quarry-that-legionary-banner-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rogueclassicism.com/2009/07/02/jericho-quarry-that-legionary-banner-not/</link>
	<description>quidquid bene dictum est ab ullo, meum est</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:05:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rogueclassicist</title>
		<link>http://rogueclassicism.com/2009/07/02/jericho-quarry-that-legionary-banner-not/#comment-738</link>
		<dc:creator>rogueclassicist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:00:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rogueclassicism.com/?p=1582#comment-738</guid>
		<description>Admittedly it has the basic &#039;shape&#039; of a vexillum, but beyond that, it doesn&#039;t quite make sense ... the triangle at the top (presumably the cords which attached it to the standard) is upside down. There also is the problem of it having two &#039;tiers&#039;, which doesn&#039;t quite work. I&#039;m not sure why it would be divided into sectors either if it was a vexillum (that  was basically my own &#039;thinking out loud&#039;).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Admittedly it has the basic &#8216;shape&#8217; of a vexillum, but beyond that, it doesn&#8217;t quite make sense &#8230; the triangle at the top (presumably the cords which attached it to the standard) is upside down. There also is the problem of it having two &#8216;tiers&#8217;, which doesn&#8217;t quite work. I&#8217;m not sure why it would be divided into sectors either if it was a vexillum (that  was basically my own &#8216;thinking out loud&#8217;).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ajax</title>
		<link>http://rogueclassicism.com/2009/07/02/jericho-quarry-that-legionary-banner-not/#comment-737</link>
		<dc:creator>Ajax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:48:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rogueclassicism.com/?p=1582#comment-737</guid>
		<description>On this image — http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/oey.jpg — it looks a lot more like a &lt;i&gt;vexillum&lt;/i&gt;. But why isn&#039;t there any heraldic animal carved as well, plus the number of the legion etc.? Maybe because its form was determinative enough? Or they added heraldic paintings? (Just thinking out loud here.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On this image — <a href="http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/oey.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/oey.jpg</a> — it looks a lot more like a <i>vexillum</i>. But why isn&#8217;t there any heraldic animal carved as well, plus the number of the legion etc.? Maybe because its form was determinative enough? Or they added heraldic paintings? (Just thinking out loud here.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ajax</title>
		<link>http://rogueclassicism.com/2009/07/02/jericho-quarry-that-legionary-banner-not/#comment-729</link>
		<dc:creator>Ajax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:38:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rogueclassicism.com/?p=1582#comment-729</guid>
		<description>It could be a &lt;i&gt;vexillum&lt;/i&gt;, or it couldn&#039;t. I can&#039;t say. We would need a larger image with better resolution, which shows the complete carving, and the surrounding imagery etc. would also be helpful. But even then there would be no guarantee.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It could be a <i>vexillum</i>, or it couldn&#8217;t. I can&#8217;t say. We would need a larger image with better resolution, which shows the complete carving, and the surrounding imagery etc. would also be helpful. But even then there would be no guarantee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
