09-12-2005, 11:51 AM
I got it from Foyles bookshop a fortnight ago.
I have a view that when reconstructing something from iconography that if it looks right it probably is right.
There are some figures which look decidedly odd to me, the one with the chest armour in leather. I would like to see a better representation of the origin image it came from in colour ( a bit too much to expect in an Osprey I accept price wise etc ) .
I dont doubt the validity of the reconstruction, after all the Papal Guard look bloody daft to my eyes, its just that I got the impression that it was taken from one image and mentions in texts and just wonder if one ancient artists interpretation is helpful to us?
I just loved the Hun, teh fancy tunics and the long sleeved coat both of which reinforced by preference for late stuff !
I have a view that when reconstructing something from iconography that if it looks right it probably is right.
There are some figures which look decidedly odd to me, the one with the chest armour in leather. I would like to see a better representation of the origin image it came from in colour ( a bit too much to expect in an Osprey I accept price wise etc ) .
I dont doubt the validity of the reconstruction, after all the Papal Guard look bloody daft to my eyes, its just that I got the impression that it was taken from one image and mentions in texts and just wonder if one ancient artists interpretation is helpful to us?
I just loved the Hun, teh fancy tunics and the long sleeved coat both of which reinforced by preference for late stuff !
Conal Moran
Do or do not, there is no try!
Yoda
Do or do not, there is no try!
Yoda
