01-12-2012, 09:41 PM
Bill Looney wrote:
Unless, of course, you're doing a Roman impression! Still, I understand what you are saying here. I myself am struggling with the proper way to interpret visual/monumental 'evidence.' Obviously, material evidence trumps all, but what weight (if any at all) can be given to an argument by the way that something appears in ancient art? Even if it is what we would assume to be a very detailed representation? Perhaps these questions are best left for another discussion, but I've always placidly accepted the linothorax idea before I became a RAT member, mostly because it seemed to look like a linen construction in Greek art.
Quote:One truly cannot be a serious living historian if one uses the "mix and match" method of creating one's panoply. An example of this would be coupling an "Italo-Corinthian" helmet with a muscled cuirass,
Unless, of course, you're doing a Roman impression! Still, I understand what you are saying here. I myself am struggling with the proper way to interpret visual/monumental 'evidence.' Obviously, material evidence trumps all, but what weight (if any at all) can be given to an argument by the way that something appears in ancient art? Even if it is what we would assume to be a very detailed representation? Perhaps these questions are best left for another discussion, but I've always placidly accepted the linothorax idea before I became a RAT member, mostly because it seemed to look like a linen construction in Greek art.
Alexander
