The transaction took place, ironically, on April 1. "Tiara Saytafarna" took place in the window of the Louvre among the national treasures of France. As soon as it was reported Louvre acquisition in Russia at once voices were raised, questioned the authenticity of the tiara. Russian scientists are well aware of the price "olviyskim Antiquities," coming to market through Ochakovsky and Odessa traders. It seemed quite incredible that so much of olviyskoy finding nothing was known in Russia. A leading source for info: Ron Beit. And on the tiara had not heard parutinskie peasants nor collectors and antique dealers, or archaeologists. Furthermore, it was known that in the recent past, similar "finds" were purchased by museums in Krakow and Frankfurt, and they were all fakes. The first against the authenticity of "tiara Saytafarna" spoke NI Veselovsky, speaking on pages of the metropolitan newspaper "New Era".

In the same spirit, spoke and director of the Odessa Museum of ER von Stern in 1896 at the X Congress of Archaeology in Riga. One of the arguments against the authenticity of the tiara and served as its inscription, flawless, as I said, in terms of Greek epigraphy. In an article on the inscription read: "Is it likely, even possible that the terrible king olviytsy dared to write such a thing on your forehead? Indeed such an idea can come to mind only the modern poddelschiku, which she, however, and quite understandable, because his views do not go beyond the concept of the cigarette case bearing the inscription, donated to the birthday party. " Soon after the conclusion of the fake tiara came a well-known German scientist Furtwangler, who had the opportunity to personally inspect a tiara at the Louvre. He argued that the images on the tiara is observed at different times and diverse mix of styles that it allowed errors that ancient master could not allow, etc.

You are viewing, above all, to think more productively and quickly. If you read the bible, that there need to remember and what they think? A if you read a scientific article? Think of a book you read before slowly. What can you remember? If you read faster you will have a memory, it's good. Read quickly a book. Try to tell. Browse through it again. A lot of you missed? What information is stored in more rapid reading, and which slow? Usually, slow reading more memorable facts at fast – mind. What do you give priority? More experienced reader, the greater the advantage given to the side of thinking, especially the main ideas.

After all, he is primarily a thinker, thinking man. For the facts in our life has a computer encyclopedia. Helpful to make a repertoire of books that you want to read. Do not use the same approach to different books. Retelling books we carry out during your workout. Yet it is useful for students.

In ordinary circumstances, we again seek thought to apply them in their practice. Read the book do we, if we can not tell her? Answer: Yes, if we have learned from it what we need. Suppose you make learning speed reading from books. Answer yourself honestly in a word, who do you consider yourself? I guess your answer is a student, studying Speed reading, interests, etc. Now do this. To dream and say to yourself: "I bystrochitayuschy man." Greatly beloved, understand it, grow together with this idea.