If I'm counting correctly, the other sundials appear to have 12 divisions,
but your example only has eleven. This would seem to argue against the
sundial explanation. 

Linda Derry 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On 
> Behalf Of Bob Skiles
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 8:55 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: please help identify this item
> 
> 
> Ron,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. I agree that this design appears to be both 
> decorative & functional. The one edge isn't 
> unfinished/broken, it's simply 
> obscured by the scrunched-up cloth on which it's sitting (the 
> original photo 
> in the left panel has been inverted 180-degrees to show the 
> "flower" & 
> "keystone" perspective). I apologize for the unclear/misleading photo.
> 
> http://skiles.net/Tyler.jpg
> 
> Bob
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report 
> the facts.  -Will 
> Rogers
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ron May" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 2:39 AM
> Subject: Re: please help identify this item
> 
> 
> > Bob,
> >
> > The stone appears ornamental and the interior design looks to have 
> > more
> > than
> > one meaning: floral and functional. I am reminded of compass type
> > illustrations used by architectural designers to calculate 
> the maximum sun 
> > angles
> > during the day in order to lay out windows and French doors 
> for lighting 
> > planning
> > in a house. However, one of the angles blends into the 
> geometric flower 
> > part.
> > I tend to see it as unfinished, given the break on one end.
> >
> > Ron May
> > Legacy 106, Inc 
> <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> 
> > AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's 
> > free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
>