linothorax and other white cuirases

[caiusbeerquitius]

See, Xavi B, this is what I mean.

Probably I have a vague idea of art (actually I´m an art teacher and profesional sculptor)

Maybe. But:
Apparently you do not have even a vague idea of interpreting ancient art. Apparently you do not know these well established facts: Most Roman art is copied from Hellenistic art. Especially poses, but also loads of equipment. Much of Roman art recurs to older modes and types of display. Roman art is highly anachronistic. Roman art is made mostly after model books, so similar or identical pieces how up again and again with slight or no variation.
Also the fact that you are a teacher for art does not imply that you are good at what you are doing:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic or https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

also I have work in arqueological sites in my youth but I´m not here to show who has is longer...

This is ridiculous. Also: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

I´m just showing that conventional explanations don´t match with archeological remains. (May it will surprise you that sculptures are also archeological remains)

Why should it surprise me? Explain. I thought I wrote above that all sources, including pictorial evidence, need a decent amount of source criticism and hermeneutics if we want to understand them. In fact this is the major point of what I wrote above. May have slipped your attention. Also you are not saying the truth here. You are not just showing that the "conventional explanations" do not match, you also come up with fantasy explanations and loads of misinterpretations without ever properly answering questions or brining up proper arguments.

The definition you make of artwork is from a kindergarden school and demostrates that you are the one with little knowlege on that. Maybe I can tell you a little more about.

Oh. I kneel down in awe for this wonderful argument. If this is all you have to say to what I wrote above, my case is closed. You could not have better supported my statement in any way. Maybe you can tell me more, but I really, really doubt it. Also:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
Nowhere do I give a definition of art. I only talk about what factors influence the genesis of art.

The fallacy is to ignore things that don´t match our explanations.

?

Archeology is a science base on speculation, like all other science...later, facts demonstrate if speculations are true.

I wonder where you got your definition of archaeology from? Most archaeologists I know would heartily disagree. And, by that, most scientists also.