Libalius vs. Libatius

[kkersey_austin]

No: HPFGUIDX 125782


I'm pretty sure that's a 't' and not an 'l', and here's why:

Look at the ascender on the letter 'b' - it's actually a bit higher
than the capitals. The vertical element of the letter in question
clearly does not go anywhere near that high, and it would be a
stangely designed font that has such a discrepancy. A small 't', on
the other hand, usually is much shorter than than 'b', 'h', 'l', etc.
So, even though I can't see the crossmark, I'm sure that's a 't'.

Something that bothers me about the picture of the book - although the
book itself looks tattered and old, perhaps *very* old, the lettering
and graphics look modern, in fact, they look computer generated (as
opposed to hand lettering or mechanical type). Worse, it looks to me
like the title etc. were simply photoshopped rather than actually
applied to a real book. So all of you out there waiting for that prop
to auctioned off for charity, don't hold your breath...

Karen, who could be wrong about the photoshopping, but is pretty darn
sure about the 't'