Trajan\'s Column V Adamklissi

[tlclark]

Just thought about this and I wanted to ask a question.

Art historians obviously look at these things as art, and I realize that gives me a set of assumptions.

Art is made by artist's/specialized labor, so that means they are not likely to be made by soldiers.

Art has form, composition, intent and style. Since I understand the limits of style, that means I would naturally defend attacks on the TC's accuracy based on style, and likewise, I am skeptical of reconstructions based on the Adamklissi monument again, because of its style.

Internally I'm pretty consistent, but I could be consistently wrong.:wink:

I think all of these assumptions are defensible, but they are assumptions.

Now I have a pretty good idea about what I think are the assumptions/viewpoints of military historians might, but far be it for me to put words in their mouths.

Someone speaking from the other side, what do you think are the limitations/assumptions from a military historian's point of view?

Travis