Double breasted or center fastening?

[Paullus Scipio]

This is exactly my point; the equipment looks Hellenistic and Roman and matches no Classical or Alexandrian Macedonian depictions or artefacts yet found. The Persian depictions also do not match Achaemenid styles.

This seems a very odd statement to make to me - and demonstrably wrong !....and I speak as someone who has intensively studied Greek and Roman Warfare all my life, and formally for almost 40 years. The equipment - of which very little is actually visible- 'fits' what we know of the late 4 C BC exactly, down to details which would not be generally known in the 1st C BC, nor is the Achaemenid or Macedonian equipment any different from that shown in many other late 4 C BC depictions, and dateable archaeological artifacts.

Actually there is an enormous amount of doubt about this in academic circles. I have spent a lot of time talking to Dr. Stella Miller Collett about this subject.

I very much doubt 'enormous doubt', especially if you mean among those who know about Greek and Roman equipment rather than just 'academics' who actually don't know much about the subject. Like Ruben, I would be curious to see this paper ( singular, I notice! ), if you can produce it, since as far as I know, a 4 C BC or earlier example can be found for every artifact portrayed in the mosaic, and Ruben has made an excellent start, to which one can add the Tube-and-Yoke corselets of Darius' guard, paralleled by 4 C and earlier Achaemenid depictions, the sword in the foreground, matched by finds in the 'Philip' and other Macedonian tombs, the 'knobbly' javelin paralleled by depictions in the Kazanluk tombs, the horse harness details generally, the 'leopardskin' shabraque, Darius' clothing - and that is just for starters ! In fact the artistry and accuracy of detail are quite remarkable and easily sufficient to identify individual items.

[immortal]

Please do post the citations for such articles, because I'd be very eager to read them.

Next time I speak to Dr. Miller Collett I will be sure to get the name of the author and pass it on to you asap.

Firstly, how many depictions or artefacts of Alexandrian Macedonian date to we possess? We can't expect to be able to corroborate every minute detail with an exactly contemporary example. Secondly, the Alketos monument dates to c. 320, and so is just slightly later than Alexandrian.

There are a huge amount that are unpublished in various places in Greece and Macedon. Several iron cuirass of the Vergina style have been found for example.

Just a short list (and I'm sure Paul MS can pitch in here, because he's more familiar with the mosaic than I am), and I can't comment too thoroughly on the Persian details:

A late 4th - early 3rd c. BC marble statue of a Macedonian officer from Amphipolis shows shoulder pteryges in use with a cuirass like Alexander's.

I must admit I am not familiar with this, could you post a link to an image of it please?

The decorations on Alexander's bridle is almost identical to actual decorations found in late 4th-early 3rd c. BC rich Thracian burials.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but was this style not in use over a very wide area and over a long period of time?

Alexander's cuirass has a small section around his waist reinforced with scale, which I don't think I've ever seen on Roman art, and is almost entirely absent from Hellenistic examples (I know of one depiction of a cuirass from Pergamon reinforced with scales, but there they are vertical strips on either side of the torso), but which is common in Classical examples.

The guilloche pattern shown around the rim of the fallen Argive shield is a characteristic of Classical examples, but is absent from Hellenistic and later representations.

The Chalcidian helmet shown fallen on the ground disappeared after the 4th c. BC.

The Boeotian helmet shown on a rider behind Alexander crowned with a wreath is not found after the 3rd c. BC, but is identical to others found on late 4th c. BC representations.

I would think that classical Greek/Macedonian styles would be well known. If we know of these representations, surely it is possible that those civilizations who existed closer to the time of their creation were also aware of them?

The Persian shabraques are of a particular "stepped" style which disappears after the 3rd c. BC.

The Persian chariot matches the Oxus model quite closely.

Where does this saddle cloth disappear from? Persian art.. could this be because pretty much zero Persian depictions from the 4th century until the Sassanid period exist that we know of?

The Oxus model is not definitely identified as a Persian Chariot.

Many of these details were not picked up by Classicizing artists, so I have no idea how an Italian artist of c. 100 BC would have been able to depict them together without some serious research.

Im not saying the mosaic is completely made up! Im just saying it should not be used as a primary source for the appearance of either the Macedonian army or Persian army.
It could be a copy of a copy of a copy, each getting some details right and others replacing them with details that were contemporary to the copies creation.

[PMBardunias]

My problem with the belt theory on the Etruscan painting is the fact that the red line runs right through it and the cuirass, but under the ties on the chest.

As often happens we are largely in agreement and posting past eachother. I originally noted that the red line goes through the "belt" and it cannot have been a real belt but a design on the armor. I also showed that real belts existed in the context of arming. Tying them together I propose that the "belt" motiff was something that was seen on armors because of the earlier connection between belts and warriors. Taking it further, belts then reappeared as actual belts, not simply art applied to armor, as badges of rank.

[MeinPanzer]

Next time I speak to Dr. Miller Collett I will be sure to get the name of the author and pass it on to you asap.

I would very much appreciate it!

There are a huge amount that are unpublished in various places in Greece and Macedon. Several iron cuirass of the Vergina style have been found for example.

Which other iron cuirasses of the Vergina style have been found? I know of other contemporary iron cuirass finds, but they are either too poorly preserved to be identified (Agios Athanasios) or of a different form (the muscled cuirasses from Prodromi and Prokhorovka).

Even with a lot of potentially unpublished stuff out there, I still wouldn't think there was a lot.

I must admit I am not familiar with this, could you post a link to an image of it please?

http://antiquemilitaryhistory.com/images/amphstatue.jpg

Please correct me if I am wrong, but was this style not in use over a very wide area and over a long period of time?

No, pretty much the Balkans around the 4th-3rd c. BC.

I would think that classical Greek/Macedonian styles would be well known. If we know of these representations, surely it is possible that those civilizations who existed closer to the time of their creation were also aware of them?

Sure, they may have, but if you are going to argue that this is either A) a Roman artist injecting contemporary details into a historical painting or B) an example of a classicizing arist, you are going to have to prove that these details appear in Roman works of art from c. 100 BC. We do find a number of elements of Hellenistic arms and armour in Roman art which either the Romans adopted (i.e. the muscled cuirass with belt) or which they continued to reproduce in classicizing art, but these are not some of them.

Where does this saddle cloth disappear from? Persian art.. could this be because pretty much zero Persian depictions from the 4th century until the Sassanid period exist that we know of?

We don't see such shabraques in early Parthian art, for instance, so they probably disappeared from use after the 3rd c. BC.

The Oxus model is not definitely identified as a Persian Chariot.

What else would it be? I'm curious in this case, since I can't actually think what nationality such a vehicle could be considering its provenance. And regardless of whether it is Persian or not, numerous details, which are certainly not found in Hellenistic or later art, match the Alexander mosaic example.

Im not saying the mosaic is completely made up! Im just saying it should not be used as a primary source for the appearance of either the Macedonian army or Persian army.
It could be a copy of a copy of a copy, each getting some details right and others replacing them with details that were contemporary to the copies creation.

If this is the case, then it needs to be demonstrated that there are details represented which are entirely anachronistic, but I certainly can't see any.

[PMBardunias]

Here is an even clearer belt. This one is thick enough to be leather or bronze with leather edging. Clearly it is not attached to the armor. If I find a few more, I think it begs the question of whether or not many of the "borders" we see at the waist might not be belts.

[immortal]

Thats a very clear belt! is this depitction Italian? Am I right in thinking a number of bronze belts have been found in Greece (pre-hoplite). The simularities between Anatolian styles and Greek armour development is staggering.

Back to the Alexander mosaic... I don't pretend to be an expert on it, but I am just repeating what I have been told in the latest thinking with a number of people.
Do you not find it odd that Alexander is not riding a black horse? and the horses pulling the kings chariot are not white? How come none of the Persians have facial hair?
The Oxus model is a funny one. I personally belive it is a model of a Persian chariot, But I know many Archaeologists are not sure.

I am told that 'several' iron tube and yoke cuirass have now been found in Northern Greece and Bulgaria. I dont know the full details, but next time I speak to Dr. Miller Collett I will pass any relevent information onto you all.

[Paullus Scipio]

Immortal wrote:

How come none of the Persians have facial hair?

Err..rr..rrr.....you should look more closely !! hock: Despite the fact that most Persians have their head coverings pulled over their lower faces, virtually ALL the Persians have facial hair visible, ranging from a youth's "bum fluff" on his upper lip, to Darius' obvious full moustache and beard !! D lol:

...and as to Alexander's charger, the literary sources tell us that Alexander didn't always ride Bucephalus, and that Macedonian Companion cavalry each had a string of anything up to a dozen horses.....and Persians didn't always use white horses either !!

As to "several iron Tube-and-Yoke corselets" in northern Greece and Thrace, I wonder if you mean ones covered in iron scales? I would be surprised if several like those in the "Philip" tomb had been found.... hock: hock:

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

I don't imagine you could simply cinch it like a pair of pants, but if it were ill-fitting the bottom tie might need some extra support in holding a too-tight corselet together, or if too loose, you could pull the bottom of the side-panel past where it normally fastens and hold it together at a smaller diameter. This is something that could be easily tested by Giannis, if he would be so kind.

Sure,i can test it,though i know already what the results will be: If you don't tie the usual side fittings and you want to fasten the quirass tighter with a belt between the side fittings(as we see the etruscan warrior doing and the first vase that you posted) the quirass might be secured,but it won't sit propperly. The front side won't fall down because the shoulder guards are holding it,but the side might fall,with intence moveent.
Even if the side is well secured, what simply won't sit right is the pteryges especially.
What i find more interesting idea though,is that the usual decoation around the waist and around the chest might occasionally have been belts! There HAS to be a belt around the waist,or at least it has to be fastened low near the pteryges. And of course,the next essential fastenning is under the arm as,if the other fastenning is low,the cuirass opens on the top.
I can speak so precisely before doing the actual test because i have just finished my spolas,and till the end i had to hold it on my body without fittings many a time, and check how it sits.


Italiote warior!

This explains perhaps the width of some of the Apulian bronze belts. Though fat people must have always existed!

And i also hear for the first time that "several" iron t&y have been found, if we're not speaking of iron scale!
Khairete
Giannis

[PMBardunias]

Here's another, presumably italic, that seems to have a belt:

[hoplite14gr]

Hmmm proto-Athenian if you ask me but I am not adamant on that.
The "chalkidic" with the cone decoration is interesting

Kind regards

[Paullus Scipio]

Immortal wrote:

It could be a copy of a copy of a copy, each getting some details right and others replacing them with details that were contemporary to the copies creation.

This is simply not possible. The original Hellenistic painting was painted around 300 BC, and was well known in antiquity, and elements of its composition widely copied on vase paintings etc. It is mentioned by Pliny, and was evidently still extant in his time.
Anyone who views the mosaic will have observed the 'bare' patches, and most assume this was damage during the eruption, or during its recovery. It is neither.The mosaic is displayed exactly as found, complete with several repairs, and the mortar producing the 'bare' patches, which are in fact wear in ancient times from people standing and admiring it. Obviously, being stone, it takes many, many years of such use before stone mosaic pieces become worn/displaced, and it is believed the mosaic was in situ for something of the order of 180-250 years, for the repeated repairs and eventual wearing out of those 'bare' sections. That means it was likely laid within 200 years of the original being painted, and because of Pliny's reference, we know the original also existed all that time, down to at least the first Century AD. So it cannot be a 'copy of a copy of a copy', but must be a faithful copy of the original......

[immortal]

Immortal wrote:

How come none of the Persians have facial hair?

Err..rr..rrr.....you should look more closely !! hock: Despite the fact that most Persians have their head coverings pulled over their lower faces, virtually ALL the Persians have facial hair visible, ranging from a youth's "bum fluff" on his upper lip, to Darius' obvious full moustache and beard !! D lol:

...and as to Alexander's charger, the literary sources tell us that Alexander didn't always ride Bucephalus, and that Macedonian Companion cavalry each had a string of anything up to a dozen horses.....and Persians didn't always use white horses either !!

As to "several iron Tube-and-Yoke corselets" in northern Greece and Thrace, I wonder if you mean ones covered in iron scales? I would be surprised if several like those in the "Philip" tomb had been found.... hock: hock:

Just had another look at the mosaic. The majority of Persians have no facial hair (I counted 4 with it, including the king).
If you are going to paint a heroic image of Alexander, would you not put him on his famous steed and not some reserve horse? Also, I believe it is well known that Alexander always rode Bucephalus on his final charge?

I never said that all Persians rode white horses. But it is a known that Persian Kings (and the Assyrians) used white horses to pull their chariots as they were considered sacred.

I am told that the paper makes a very strong argument that the mosaic we know is not THE mosaic that Pliny refers to. Are you saying that it is impossible that this mosaic could not be a copy of a much later Hellenistic copy of the original? Or could it not be a copy of the copy that Pliny refers to? I cannot see why you think 'This is simply not possible'.

As for the Iron T&Y corselets. I am just repeating what Dr. Miller Collett has told me. She told me it was far from unique and 'several' have now been found. As I say, next time I speak to her I will find out more for you all. Are you all aware of the clothing and feather fragments found in Vergina? And the gold embroidered purple material the bones were wrapped in?



Back to the belts, are all of these depictions of Italian origin or are they shown in Greek art?

[PMBardunias]

As for the Iron T&Y corselets. I am just repeating what Dr. Miller Collett has told me. She told me it was far from unique and 'several' have now been found.

Geez, I could have used that a few months ago when I was writing for AW on the "Linothorax"! Why do they sit on these things? Please pass on any further info you might recieve.

[MeinPanzer]

As for the Iron T&Y corselets. I am just repeating what Dr. Miller Collett has told me. She told me it was far from unique and 'several' have now been found. As I say, next time I speak to her I will find out more for you all. Are you all aware of the clothing and feather fragments found in Vergina? And the gold embroidered purple material the bones were wrapped in?

I don't mean to press, but did she say specifically that they were T&Y in form, or just iron cuirasses? Because I know of several contemporary iron cuirasses, as I wrote before, but they are either too badly preserved to discern their form, or they are muscled cuirasses.

[immortal]

Im certain that she said that they were T&Y corslets. It came up in coversation in Tehran Mehrabad airport when I was asking if she knew of any new information on the linen cuirass (T&Y). I mentioned the simularity to the one in 'Philips' tomb and she said 'well that's certainly not unique, several have now ben found'. I was as supprised as you!

Hopefully I will be taking to her soon. I may even be going to Greece to meet with her. I will certainly let you all know any information I think you would be interested in.