Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Great discovery Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Michael A. H.




Location: Earth
Joined: 18 Feb 2015

Posts: 28

PostPosted: Sun 12 Nov, 2017 11:32 pm    Post subject: Great discovery         Reply with quote

While its not my time period or location of interest, still a very interesting find:

http://magazine.uc.edu/editors_picks/recent_f...piece.html

The detail on the weapons depicted and their use in close combat is amazing - the use of the short Xiphos vs. the long spear is obvious.

Great reading, specially the links to other reports at thhe bottom.

Cheers

Michael

Michael

"Its just the laudanum speaking." Stephen Maturin
View user's profile Send private message
Matthew Amt




Location: Laurel, MD, USA
Joined: 17 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,221

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 6:25 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Oh, yes, isn't that something? A few of us have been geeking out over it. It seems to be a depiction of a particular episode from history or mythology, because there are a couple other seal stones that show the same scene. I'm *not* sure we can draw too many *tactical* lessons from it!

Definitely a fabulous find. It's practically a Frank Frazetta.

Matthew
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Joe A




Location: Philadelphia, USA
Joined: 17 Oct 2013

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 6:47 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Not a xiphos I would say, Matthew would you agree it's a bit too early for that type of sword?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Matthew Amt




Location: Laurel, MD, USA
Joined: 17 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,221

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 7:24 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Joe A wrote:
Not a xiphos I would say, Matthew would you agree it's a bit too early for that type of sword?


Oh, yeah, probably a minor technical point, since "xiphos" is just Greek for "sword"! But yes, *I* tend to reserve "xiphos" for the Late Archaic/Classical hoplite sword. Whereas this is a much earlier bronze sword, looks like a Type C "rapier".

Geez, the details in that carving are just bananas...

Matthew
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,065

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 7:30 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

This scene isn't Homeric. The equipment and the style of fighting were phased out a couple of centuries before the Trojan War.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Joe A




Location: Philadelphia, USA
Joined: 17 Oct 2013

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 7:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Matthew Amt wrote:
Joe A wrote:
Not a xiphos I would say, Matthew would you agree it's a bit too early for that type of sword?


Oh, yeah, probably a minor technical point, since "xiphos" is just Greek for "sword"! But yes, *I* tend to reserve "xiphos" for the Late Archaic/Classical hoplite sword. Whereas this is a much earlier bronze sword, looks like a Type C "rapier".

Geez, the details in that carving are just bananas...

Matthew


The NYT has it here and it is amazing https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/science/greece-griffin-warrior-archaeology-homer.html
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,214

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 9:50 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
This scene isn't Homeric. The equipment and the style of fighting were phased out a couple of centuries before the Trojan War.


Let me see if I remember well from your book... Wink 15th century BC?
View user's profile Send private message
Roger Hooper




Location: Northern California
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Likes: 1 page

Spotlight topics: 3
Posts: 3,545

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 10:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

See the last page of this thread - http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=326200#326200
View user's profile Send private message
Michael A. H.




Location: Earth
Joined: 18 Feb 2015

Posts: 28

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 12:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sorry - like I said, not "my" period (which is more 10th to 11th century Anglo-Saxon Norse history) ... but still, an amazing find. Almost makes me want to delve into central/northern European late bronze age / early iron age material culture :-)

Anyway, thought you all might find it interesting.

Cheers,

Michael

Michael

"Its just the laudanum speaking." Stephen Maturin
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,065

PostPosted: Mon 13 Nov, 2017 3:01 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luka Borscak wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
This scene isn't Homeric. The equipment and the style of fighting were phased out a couple of centuries before the Trojan War.


Let me see if I remember well from your book... Wink 15th century BC?


Yep, but I think the chronology we are currently using is dodgy. If the bogus Dark Ages are removed then this sealstone dates to the 12th-13th C and the Trojan War occurred in the 10th C.

Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,214

PostPosted: Tue 14 Nov, 2017 11:18 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
This scene isn't Homeric. The equipment and the style of fighting were phased out a couple of centuries before the Trojan War.


Let me see if I remember well from your book... Wink 15th century BC?


Yep, but I think the chronology we are currently using is dodgy. If the bogus Dark Ages are removed then this sealstone dates to the 12th-13th C and the Trojan War occurred in the 10th C.


I meant traditional chronology. Happy
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,065

PostPosted: Tue 14 Nov, 2017 2:03 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luka Borscak wrote:
I meant traditional chronology. Happy

I know. I just don't like to miss an opportunity to hammer the case for revising the chronology Happy

Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,214

PostPosted: Wed 15 Nov, 2017 8:38 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
I meant traditional chronology. Happy

I know. I just don't like to miss an opportunity to hammer the case for revising the chronology Happy


Don't worry, I'm already a believer in it. Big Grin
View user's profile Send private message
Peter Lyon
Industry Professional



Location: New Zealand
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Reading list: 39 books

Posts: 219

PostPosted: Wed 15 Nov, 2017 9:29 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
I meant traditional chronology. Happy

I know. I just don't like to miss an opportunity to hammer the case for revising the chronology Happy


Ever since I read "Centuries of Darkness" by Peter James, I've looked at the ancient timelines quite differently. He makes a strong argument, which the established historians don't seem to want to accept or even acknowledge, except by massaging the numbers a bit.

Still hammering away
View user's profile Send private message
J.D. Crawford




Location: Toronto
Joined: 25 Dec 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,546

PostPosted: Wed 15 Nov, 2017 11:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Roger Hooper wrote:
See the last page of this thread - http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=326200#326200


Regardless of the date, function or academic value, it's a beautiful piece of art.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,652

PostPosted: Thu 16 Nov, 2017 4:54 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Peter Lyon wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
I meant traditional chronology. Happy

I know. I just don't like to miss an opportunity to hammer the case for revising the chronology Happy


Ever since I read "Centuries of Darkness" by Peter James, I've looked at the ancient timelines quite differently. He makes a strong argument, which the established historians don't seem to want to accept or even acknowledge, except by massaging the numbers a bit.


Actually, it's not the "established historians" -- it's mostly the older ones. Many in the younger generation are more prepared to accept the Low Chronology thesis, and the "massaging" is because James probably did overstate his case somewhat.
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,065

PostPosted: Yesterday at 8:28 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:
Actually, it's not the "established historians" -- it's mostly the older ones. Many in the younger generation are more prepared to accept the Low Chronology thesis, and the "massaging" is because James probably did overstate his case somewhat.

Yeah. I think there is a very strong case for a reduction of at least 200 years but 300 years seems a stretch.

Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Joe A




Location: Philadelphia, USA
Joined: 17 Oct 2013

Posts: 46

PostPosted: Yesterday at 9:29 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:
Peter Lyon wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
I meant traditional chronology. Happy

I know. I just don't like to miss an opportunity to hammer the case for revising the chronology Happy


Ever since I read "Centuries of Darkness" by Peter James, I've looked at the ancient timelines quite differently. He makes a strong argument, which the established historians don't seem to want to accept or even acknowledge, except by massaging the numbers a bit.


Actually, it's not the "established historians" -- it's mostly the older ones. Many in the younger generation are more prepared to accept the Low Chronology thesis, and the "massaging" is because James probably did overstate his case somewhat.


So, which one of the younger historians are prepared to publicly accept the Low Chronology??? Names please, and I don't mean folks arguing that the period was not as "dark" as we once thought, those new historians only argue life was not so bleak not that the time period was 200-300 years shorter .

Trojan War in the 10th century? Brian Rose of the Penn Museum is the lead archaeologist there and has been working there his entire professional life, since 1988, and thinks that's a bit silly.

C'mon Peter, everyone who is serious has read "Centuries of Darkness" by Peter James and it's not ignored by mainstream ancient Historians and Archaeologists at all. At Dan's suggestion I read it and asked quite a few folks if they read it, seems like I was the last to read it. Snodgrass, apparently a mentor of sorts of James, has written at least two reviews of the book and just about everyone is required to read it in good grad schools here so they know what's the non-traditional pov. Unless better evidence is presented that refutes folks like Rose and Snodgrass, the conventional wisdom stands. Rose is quite open minded and fair and plugged in everywhere to everyone working on this sort of thing and his views have not changed much. There is no conspiracy to suppress this idea, it's just not considered accurate that's all.

For those curious: https://www.centuries.co.uk/index.htm
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,065

PostPosted: Yesterday at 11:19 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Kokkinos, N. 'Ancient Chronography, 'Eratosthenes and the Dating of the Fall of Troy' Ancient West and East 8 (2009) page 37-56.

Nikkos Kokkinos went back to look at the original Greek chronographers and his study concluded that the Greeks themselves thought that the Trojan War occurred in 940BC.


Furlong, P. J., Aspects of Ancient Near Eastern Chronology (c. 1600 700 BC), PhD Thesis, Melbourne University, 2007

Pierce Furlong studied the Assyrian chronology and his PhD thesis attempted to reconcile it with the Egyptian chronology. He concluded that the Egyptian chronology had to be reduced by 200 years.

"This chronological adjustment is achieved in two stages: first, the removal of precisely 85 years of absolute Assyrian chronology from between the reigns of Shalmaneser II and Ashur-dan II; and second, the downward displacement of Egyptian Memphite dates relative to LBA Assyrian chronology by a further 115 years."

Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Great discovery
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2017 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum