08-26-2016, 02:40 PM
I am on neither side on this part of the debate. I have called for years for someone to come up with a systematic examination of the conventions used in vase imagery. One good example is the side-on stance advocated by both Van wees for spear fightibg anf Schwartz for othismos. We see it on many vases, but when tried it does not work because like the Chigi, you are stabbing through your own head and every strike you make twists your body frontally anyway. Now we know that the side on pose is found in art all over Mesopotamia and Egypt for things like women offering votive gifts, so we should immediately suspect this is not a reflection of reality.
I tend to weigh the vase imagery by a couple of criteria. If something appears, its more important than when its left out. Obvoiusly its easier to leave out a detail. Second, if the level of detail in the image is high, I tust all of its details more. For example I put a lot of stock in the placement, towards the rear, of the grips we see on some spears. That image of a hoplite I posted earlier in this thread is perhaps the most detailed we have, so I trust his long, tapered, rear balanced spear.
I tend to weigh the vase imagery by a couple of criteria. If something appears, its more important than when its left out. Obvoiusly its easier to leave out a detail. Second, if the level of detail in the image is high, I tust all of its details more. For example I put a lot of stock in the placement, towards the rear, of the grips we see on some spears. That image of a hoplite I posted earlier in this thread is perhaps the most detailed we have, so I trust his long, tapered, rear balanced spear.
