After pondering all this for a great length of time and adding in the clues given up by studying the piece and then studying the slides made while working on the piece, we now believe that a likeness of the bat was carved roughly six times actual size as we see it now, probably in wood, with great verisimilitude and a touch of artistic license. This, then, became the substrate over which the gold sheet was to be worked.

Photograph 13

A number of clues called to your attention earlier in this account support this. To begin, the gold would have been laid against the nose leaf area (photograph 7), chased, tucked and clenched against the substrate. Moving outward/upward and clown from the nose, the gold was worked out over the wood causing most of the gathering and puckering mentioned.(If the face had been 'raised' in the manner of the gold cups famous from this area, none of these strange phenomenon would have showed because the metal in those instances is stretched and worked from both sides.) This shaping of the gold over the wood substrate was continued using small hammers and chasing and cutting tools. This gathering, tucking, clenching, cutting all indicate that there was a solid, very solid object behind the gold (photograph 3/ 7/ 12). These marks were made by the chasing tool being hammer driven into the gold firmly, which in turn presumes something to drive it against. The | purpose of the sharp blows was to set and get the gold to hold in the position wanted. The side of the forehead on both sides of the face show distinct chasing tool marks of this type (photograph 3, 6, 12), a stroke made to clench the gather (the tool itself, based on my measurements was 4.01 mm wide X 1 rnm thick; and the effective tool impact area was 5.3 mm wide X 2.00 mm). The sensitive chasing of the nose and eyebrow arch are such a delight and; given the open backed rather tentative nature of the mask also presumes a very solid substrate to work against, otherwise this thin metal would have been nearly impossible to deal with.

Remember we mentioned there were no evident tool marks on the back of the face to indicate that repousse was done before chasing on the front (photograph 11). This, of course, is another confirming argurnent for a substrate. There are often places in goldsmithing where chasing is done without the concomitant use of repousse from the back side first and the technique as it shows here is one of those instances. If this is not convincing, observe the way the gold was folded back into the mouth, curved and tucked and gathered in the roof of the mouth (photograph 7)¡ making fairly clear to this observer that something was beneath the gold as it was worked, hence, the wood substrate. We feel the lower jaw was carved separately and the gold for it fitted separately. When finished the two halves were put together by the strap and slot method. Note: there was also a plate fitted inside the jaw area simulating the under chin, this added strength to an otherwise rather flimsy part.

Though the argument might be made that they likely used a stake as a modern silversmith would today, we must keep in mind that there has been no evidence whatsoever of any specialized stakes with arches and saddles or even a common "T" stake; or any other stake such as we use today, ever having been found with other tools. Aside from that, most techniques can be justified within the parameters of the tools that have been found or of those possibly made from organic materials such as wood, horn and bone which have not survived.

Photograph 14                                                  Photograph 15

We must be mindful that since this was such a singular piece, the goldsmith would probably work from known parallels whilst still branching out with his creativity. There were parallels of this technique in their sheathing of ceramic vessels, and spear throwers which were sheathed over wood; also, there was sheathing on the wooden litter from this burial. It would seem likely to us that this familiarity with using wood as the substrate for gold sheathing, could well have led to this solution for manufacturing such a complex and unique shape. In fact, it is quite a brilliant solution! The apparent tentativeness of the execution comes from the complexity of the face ...a spear thrower 18, after all, just a rod of wood, and the litter basically a larger version of that!

Photograph 16

All of this piece was done with an expertise that passes mastery, but still in raking light one can see how this master wielded his chasing tool and hammer to drive the gold against the substrate thereby achieving the sculptural effect he was after. Particular attention should be given to the magnificent modeling around the eye sockets; (one can almost imagine the eyelid ready to slam shut after a night of hunting!). Then there are the bulges on either side of the upper lip to allow the lips to cover the fangs inside, this is not the work of an apprentice or first-timer.

When all of the modeling was complete; the substrate could be easily removed to be saved for another use someday or thrown into the fire, if this was to be a one of a kind piece, as it most certainly seems to have been. Though it would appear that the west tomb we excavated in 1995 had a low karat gold head ornament of a sculptural animal much like the bat head, it was quite simple and the eyes contained no amber or turquoise.

There are a number of depictions of bats on ceramics, and there are also bat depictions on textiles, most are more nearly the size of a life-size bat and none seem to have had lavished on them the detail, creativeness and craftsmanship brought to bear by this master goldsmith of the Sican Culture.