Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
linothorax and other white cuirases
Haha! I like the coconut fibre! :lol: Confusedilly:

And: Yup, that´s what I´ve been trying to say.
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Casius
There are some basics in logic and science.

"Cherry peaking" is very diferent from exposing a phenomenon. If I´m talking about the existance of sleeves in muscular armours, I will logically not need to show lace lingerie. Cherry peaking will be hiding some other images or information contradicting the existance of sleeves in some muscular armour, something that I´m not doing.

I allready provide data, and some remains. this is my "Burden of proof".

Probably you know what is an Hypothesis:
Is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. Experimental research show if hypothesis may be considered as a plausible explanation or not.

There are diferent things that you can claim on an hypothesis.

1st .- Denay the existance of the phenomenon.

If this is your point, you don´t need to use other logical aproach. The sculptures showing sleeves don´t exist.

2nd If your aproach is that they exist, you can provide alternative explanations to the phenomenon that suits better it.

You have already provide an alternative explanation, your approach is discrediting the original source:

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.

After showing you an image with actually Roman equipment that can be traced through archeological data, you said:

"then were "spiced up" with Roman items

This contradicts your previous statement. So you have already tried to provide a nagative burden of proof

But as long as this proved to be false, you will have to provide another one.

All hypothesis opens a debate. Next step is to produce a working model.
After understanding how it can work we have better chances to find remains that can match the phenomenon. This is the base for science work.

Very different is to propose an hypotesis than to make an statement.
An statement have to be 100 % demostrable.

You are making an statement on the hypotesis, this is that can be true. You have to demonstrate it.
Xavi B, you might want to read more carefully. You are mixing my statements. My first statement is general, my second concerns a specific object. The general statement is not so specific that it says "all" but "loads", thus leaving room for exception / and/or debate.

((One example, if you wish, would be Corinthian helmets and Greek swords which constantly appear in Roman art despite the fact that they are absent in contemporary archaeological record. Some such items can also be seen on the "Domitius ara", e.g. the helmet Mars is wearing, and possibly some other equipment of the soldiers depending on which date of production you want to accept for the relief (which ranges from early 2nd century BCE to mid-1st century BCE). The armour / helmets you see there are at that time not "typically Roman" any longer, as the Hellenistic armies, e.g. in Egypt, were using Roman-style equipment since at least the second Punic war. So we might still see a Hellenistic picture. Several military grave reliefs from Egypt might certify this. I am well aware of the specific "Roman" style of display that is/was supposed to counter hellenistic taste. ( P. Zanker, http://books.google.de/books/about/The_P...edir_esc=y 1st chapter covers this in detail,) This mostly refers to portraits, however.))

So, I dare say, the rest of what you suggest is a
Quote:non sequitur
.
Now you might save your time in replying to me, as I have said it all, and have nothing more to contribute here.
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
As the contributors have ignored my previous advice, the thread is locked.

If you feel aggrieved, please PM me but AFTER you have read the Forum Rules, a link for which is at the foot of this post.
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!


Forum Jump: