12-28-2009, 02:19 PM
Ruben, I should like to congratulate you on your whole series of posts in this thread, and if I could, I would certainly award you a 'laus'.......but cannot. 
x
Since you have brought the 'Kinch's tomb' rider back into the discussion, I think I'll respond by setting out why I believe that what is shown in the 'missing' section is a similar 12 ft or so weapon, like the one in my previous post wielded by Alexander, rather than something shorter......
Firstly, the tomb and its discoverer ( A Danish archaeologist unsurprisingly called 'Kinch' ) are something of an enigma. I have been unable to discover much about it - its discovery has been said to have been as early as 1877, and as late as the "early 1900's", and it was apparently empty, aside from its wall-paintings. The water-colour we now have apparently accompanied Kinch's report, around 1920, and the original plasterwork is gone, apart from a vestige of the horse's tail, variously ascribed to work on the nearby railway, or simply the ravages of vandalism/exposure. Kinch apparently dated the tomb to 300-250 BC aprox, and in the absence of artifacts presumably did so on the style of architecture, and the picture itself. A comparison of the composition of this painting shows a remarkable similarity to the one in the 'Alexander Mosaic' ( see previous post), indeed this has been remarked on by several scholars e.g Olga Palagia in Bosworth's "Alexander the Great in fact and fiction". The general pose, spearing a Persian victim, the leopard-skin shabraque, the underarm thrust, the victim moving to the right, but twisting back to face his pursuer. ( look at the knees of the Kinch victim - he is facing/fleeing to the right in a similar pose to the mosaic, minus the mosaic victim's horse). Indeed, it has been suggested that the rider in the Kinch portrayal is Alexander himself, who is portrayed elsewhere in battle un-armoured, and wearing an 'oriental' long-sleeved chiton. ( see attached 'Alexander sarcophagus' - incidently note probable long spear/xyston used overhand. Connolly demonstrated that a 'xyston' could be used in this fashion overhand ) The fact that the Kinch figure seems to be wearing a helmet over a Persian 'tiara', as does Alexander in the 'Porus coins', seems to reinforce the idea that the rider is possibly Alexander.
At all events it seems the Kinch artist followed the original composition of the ' mosaic' ( Apelles?) fairly closely. That being so, it is more likely than not that the 'victim' is being skewered in similar fashion, with the 'xyston' point protruding through the victim. Significantly too, both 'butts/counterweights' are of the large 'spearhead' type. I have projected the same proportions from the 'mosaic' onto the 'Kinch' picture - and as can be seen it is quite consistent. To me, this is far more likely than a spear that ends somewhere at the shield or thereabouts, nor is it likely that the artist would show the 'victim' successfully blocking a thrust ( especially as he is clearly screaming in pain ! )
If, as I believe, this interpretation is more likely than not, then the similarities to your coin largely disappear. The Kinch Tomb rider is holding a tapered, counter-weighted 'xyston' near the end, with a 'spear-head' butt, just like the mosaic it's largely copied from.
The coin rider seems to be holding an untapered lance with a balance point much nearer its centre, with a conventional 'doru' butt, and which is clearly much shorter than the mosaic 'xyston' and probably, the Kinch's tomb rider 'xyston' - drawing also, based, as it likely is, on the same original depiction/painting.
x Since you have brought the 'Kinch's tomb' rider back into the discussion, I think I'll respond by setting out why I believe that what is shown in the 'missing' section is a similar 12 ft or so weapon, like the one in my previous post wielded by Alexander, rather than something shorter......
Firstly, the tomb and its discoverer ( A Danish archaeologist unsurprisingly called 'Kinch' ) are something of an enigma. I have been unable to discover much about it - its discovery has been said to have been as early as 1877, and as late as the "early 1900's", and it was apparently empty, aside from its wall-paintings. The water-colour we now have apparently accompanied Kinch's report, around 1920, and the original plasterwork is gone, apart from a vestige of the horse's tail, variously ascribed to work on the nearby railway, or simply the ravages of vandalism/exposure. Kinch apparently dated the tomb to 300-250 BC aprox, and in the absence of artifacts presumably did so on the style of architecture, and the picture itself. A comparison of the composition of this painting shows a remarkable similarity to the one in the 'Alexander Mosaic' ( see previous post), indeed this has been remarked on by several scholars e.g Olga Palagia in Bosworth's "Alexander the Great in fact and fiction". The general pose, spearing a Persian victim, the leopard-skin shabraque, the underarm thrust, the victim moving to the right, but twisting back to face his pursuer. ( look at the knees of the Kinch victim - he is facing/fleeing to the right in a similar pose to the mosaic, minus the mosaic victim's horse). Indeed, it has been suggested that the rider in the Kinch portrayal is Alexander himself, who is portrayed elsewhere in battle un-armoured, and wearing an 'oriental' long-sleeved chiton. ( see attached 'Alexander sarcophagus' - incidently note probable long spear/xyston used overhand. Connolly demonstrated that a 'xyston' could be used in this fashion overhand ) The fact that the Kinch figure seems to be wearing a helmet over a Persian 'tiara', as does Alexander in the 'Porus coins', seems to reinforce the idea that the rider is possibly Alexander.
At all events it seems the Kinch artist followed the original composition of the ' mosaic' ( Apelles?) fairly closely. That being so, it is more likely than not that the 'victim' is being skewered in similar fashion, with the 'xyston' point protruding through the victim. Significantly too, both 'butts/counterweights' are of the large 'spearhead' type. I have projected the same proportions from the 'mosaic' onto the 'Kinch' picture - and as can be seen it is quite consistent. To me, this is far more likely than a spear that ends somewhere at the shield or thereabouts, nor is it likely that the artist would show the 'victim' successfully blocking a thrust ( especially as he is clearly screaming in pain ! )
If, as I believe, this interpretation is more likely than not, then the similarities to your coin largely disappear. The Kinch Tomb rider is holding a tapered, counter-weighted 'xyston' near the end, with a 'spear-head' butt, just like the mosaic it's largely copied from.
The coin rider seems to be holding an untapered lance with a balance point much nearer its centre, with a conventional 'doru' butt, and which is clearly much shorter than the mosaic 'xyston' and probably, the Kinch's tomb rider 'xyston' - drawing also, based, as it likely is, on the same original depiction/painting.
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
