Double breasted or center fastening?

[Paullus Scipio]

Immortal wrote:

How come none of the Persians have facial hair?

The majority of Persians have no facial hair (I counted 4 with it, including the king).

Well, at least this is a concession in the right direction ! :wink:
This simply tells me that you have no high resolution detailed photographs available to you ! ( there are none available on-line). Having visited the original a number of times since 1975, and taken dozens of photos, I'm afraid I have the advantage of you !

There are 11 Persians whose lower faces are clearly visible, and virtually all have facial hair, even the youths display 'downy' young beards.Perhaps you think the youths in the foreground are clean shaven? By way of example, here is a detail of the young man under Darius' horses. You can see he has a full beard and moustache. Alexander's victim, the young man holding the horse and the Persian reflected in the 'aspis' held by a Greek Hoplite are all similar....

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?

Not 'reserve' - simply one of many chargers. Furthermore, how can you tell this is not meant to be Boukephalus? ( Ox-Head). Apart from his name, almost nothing is agreed about this legendary horse. Only Arrian calls him 'black' ( Arrian V.19 ), and even then, this term was apparently used of dark-coloured horses generally. Significantly such coloured representations presumed to be Alexander mounted, that we do have, show him on a 'Bay' (brown and black) horse. There is no agreement on his fabulous worth (Plutarch: 13 Talents; Pliny 16 Talents) ;how he got his name ( a brand, a blaze on his forehead, his physically large ox-like head); how he died ( slain by Porus' son, old age - 28 or 30, even that is not agreed ! (Arrian V.14; Plutarch 61).

Indeed at Issus none of our sources claim Alexander rode Boukephalus, and at Granicus, Plutarch specifically tells us he was not riding him - who would ride an old (23 plus) horse in a major battle? Plutarch (Alexander 32 ) records the tradition that Alexander rode Boukephalus only for the charge at Gaugemala, because he was "past his prime" ( I'll say! ) . Arrian (V.14) clearly does not believe the story of Boukaphalus dying of wounds at Hydaspes. The most probable explanation is that Alexander never rode Boukephalus in any of his Asian battles! ( being around 22 or older at the outset!)

In short, the horse in the mosaic tells us nothing, and cannot be evidence of anything.....

As to Persian 'sacred' white horses, don't you think it might be a seriously bad omen if a 'sacred' horse were wounded or ( Gods forbid!) killed in battle? Why do you think 'sacred' horses were used in battle? Herodotus refers to Mardonius riding a white charger ( not sacred) at Plataea, but the 'sacred' white horses associated with Cyrus and Xerxes only appear for religious purposes...

Another piece of 'non-evidence'.....

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'.

Pliny in his Natural History does not refer to the mosaic, but rather the original painting, not a copy. There is no evidence for any 'copies' or 'copies of copies'. The mosaic dates to ( at the latest! ) c. 100 BC, and may be much older, judging by it's wear-and-tear, especially if it was originally brought to Italy as booty. Since the original painting was painted circa 310-300 BC, and since the mosaic is only 1-200 years later, and since the original painting was extant in Pliny's time, there is no room for 'copies of copies' - for which there is no evidence anyway !!

Please produce this paper before discussing this matter any further, for what you suggest goes against all the evidence I am aware of, and as can be seen, the matters you have raised are either blatantly incorrect, or not evidence of what you propose at all.

[immortal]

Okay Paullus, I will mention it no more. When I get recieve the paper I will pass it on to you asap. I don't know the ins and outs of the publication so I cannot defend it properly.

Back onto Belts:
I found this vase from the British museum. The way the cloak is tucked in behind the shield is very similar to the one Paul B posted earlier.

[Paullus Scipio]

Okay Paullus, I will mention it no more. When I get recieve the paper I will pass it on to you asap. I don't know the ins and outs of the publication so I cannot defend it properly.

My apologies, since I may have come across as irritable and a little rough ! However, I am sure you are aware that your assertions are to say the least, 'radical', and this is all the more reason for producing some solid evidence, or at least the original paper. Certainly many here, including Ruben and myself would be most interested to see it.

[immortal]

No apologies required! I understand that I was being very controversial with no hard evidence to back up my claims. Be honest, I hope that the paper is not correct... it would be one less piece of evidence I can use! I am hoping to hear from Stella soon (just to make it clear, I don’t know if she agrees with the paper or if she has read it in full. Friends of hers have though).

[rocktupac]

Paul: surprisingly, out of the nearly 1,000 examples of warriors wearing this type of armor (your tube and yoke) on vase paintings, none of them are shown wearing a belt (like the one Alexander has on the Alexander mosaic).

Perhaps 999? :wink: See below:

Well Paul, I'm ashamed to say that I have not seen this image before :oops:

Do you have the references for it?

[PMBardunias]

Well Paul, I'm ashamed to say that I have not seen this image before

No shame, I've learned to never say never where the ancient Greeks are concerned :wink: Like you, I poured through hundreds of images when I wrote that AW article. This is why I have been able to post so many recently, I still have the file handy. I found all sorts of oddities, most of which I chalked up to artistic liscense.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

So, concerning the original vase image of this thread, has anyone noticed the similarities it bears with this armour:
http://img304.imageshack.us/img304/7615/skythe28ak.jpg
Its essentially the same, frontally attached, single layer cuirass. Only in its Skythian version.
Khairete
Giannis

[Paullus Scipio]

Great find of an intact scythian armour, of an almost purely native tradition rather than Greek influnced. For a very similar, but Greek influenced, armour see the famous Solokha comb ( see below) - a huge 4th C BC burial mound on the lower Dnieper/Black sea region, with all the burial goods including many weapons etc found intact. It was excavated in 1913....

Do you have details of this find, Giannis ? Where? When? etc

I know I have seen these reconstructions ( but not the originals) in various publications....

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

No,unfortunately i don't have the info either. And i,too, have seen the very accurate reconstruction much more often than the actual find. There are some people here that are much more informed about Skythian archaeology. I suspect Sean will have a better answer.
Khaire
Giannis

[PMBardunias]

Since this thread restarted, I have a couple of odd images to share. In the first image below, what is that thick seam that runs up the side of the chest like an upside down "L"? The chest band looks like it is fastened over the top of it in a seperate piece.

The second image is of a type I have seen a few times. Would you agree that the artist has simply confused how the epidotes fasten?