06-04-2009, 08:01 PM
LOL!
Seriously, friends--I can see why you look at the photo and say the porpax seems to be centered, but if you look carefully and apply photometrics (I shot it at a 30 degree angle or so), you'll see it is WAY off center. And that doesn't mean it isn't artist error--it's not a deal-clincher--but when you look at it in the museum, it's so far off center that I (who am rigorously against off-center) had to turn to Giannis (my esteemed opponent, and champion of the off center porpax) and offer to eat my hat. This isn't an offer I make lightly, and as I hate to lose an argument as much as the next guy, I must beg you all to believe me. That porpax isn't on center.
As to the design on the shield face, I recommend you all go to the Agora museum. If you look at the lowest of my first three photos, though, you should see the lattice--four dots with a connecting repousse line, repeated over and over--pretty clearly on the fragments of the shield face.
That said, I also agree with Stephanos--I don't think bronze faced shields were common. I think that like the spoils at Olympia, this is the best of 280 shields or more from Pylos, right? The very best!
Also worth adding that there were several other "miniature" shields that showed three dimensional devices--which we know existed--some fantastically complex and using human figures (which was elsewhere debated on this forum). I'll put up two for fun.
![[Image: 4214_105723956203_681611203_2679699_5374034_n.jpg]](http://photos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs015.snc1/4214_105723956203_681611203_2679699_5374034_n.jpg)
and
![[Image: 4555_106089001203_681611203_2684473_471579_n.jpg]](http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs082.snc1/4555_106089001203_681611203_2684473_471579_n.jpg)
Sorry it is blurry--I have a lot to learn--but you can see what a complex centauromachy it is (although it might by Chiron training Akilles). The date on it is 520 BC.
I will be the first to say that the metalsmith MIGHT have been using three d to represent flat paint--but if so, I'd expect him to use incised lines or even engraving, vice deep molded bas-relief. Besides, when you look at all the shield devices from Olympia--
Seriously, friends--I can see why you look at the photo and say the porpax seems to be centered, but if you look carefully and apply photometrics (I shot it at a 30 degree angle or so), you'll see it is WAY off center. And that doesn't mean it isn't artist error--it's not a deal-clincher--but when you look at it in the museum, it's so far off center that I (who am rigorously against off-center) had to turn to Giannis (my esteemed opponent, and champion of the off center porpax) and offer to eat my hat. This isn't an offer I make lightly, and as I hate to lose an argument as much as the next guy, I must beg you all to believe me. That porpax isn't on center.
As to the design on the shield face, I recommend you all go to the Agora museum. If you look at the lowest of my first three photos, though, you should see the lattice--four dots with a connecting repousse line, repeated over and over--pretty clearly on the fragments of the shield face.
That said, I also agree with Stephanos--I don't think bronze faced shields were common. I think that like the spoils at Olympia, this is the best of 280 shields or more from Pylos, right? The very best!
Also worth adding that there were several other "miniature" shields that showed three dimensional devices--which we know existed--some fantastically complex and using human figures (which was elsewhere debated on this forum). I'll put up two for fun.
and
Sorry it is blurry--I have a lot to learn--but you can see what a complex centauromachy it is (although it might by Chiron training Akilles). The date on it is 520 BC.
I will be the first to say that the metalsmith MIGHT have been using three d to represent flat paint--but if so, I'd expect him to use incised lines or even engraving, vice deep molded bas-relief. Besides, when you look at all the shield devices from Olympia--
Qui plus fait, miex vault.
