Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Not a shield but the circle of the zodiac!
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="lrbguy, post: 3128929, member: 88829"]The point is that we are only seeing half of whatever the object is. The example on the left has the striations that we agree are consistent with reading the figure as a zodiac band, if we grant that interpretation. But then the example on the right which lacks those striations would support reading the image as a shield. Note the curvature at the top which gives a sense of size of that figure in relation to the person holding it up. The mosaics portray a zodiac band that is larger than the figure of the being holding it up.</p><p><br /></p><p>Moreover, the striations in the figure on the left are not definitive for a zodiac band, and would not preclude it from being a shield. What would it take to nail it down?</p><p>[ATTACH=full]797849[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>I think a good case is being developed for reading this as a zodiac image, but given the longevity of the alternative reading, for which we still need to critique the rationale of <i>its</i> origin, the onus is on us to preclude that alternative reading by evidence and not merely a sense of conviction. Otherwise we might fall into the kind of interpretive trap that gave us a shield here in the first place.</p><p><br /></p><p>Logically we are attracted to the narrative argument you have been building in which we are able to make a coherent reading of the coin and its imagery with the zodiac reading, whereas the shield approach left open questions about the identity of the female figure and the narrative behind it all. That all is nice to consider, but that is still a plausibility from conjecture rather than evidence. Our imagination about what things meant to the ancients need more than our creative energy to make our insights relevant. It has value in weighing evidence, but it is not the source of evidence. </p><p><br /></p><p>Let us grant that there is some evidence that the imagery could be based on a zodiac motif. What evidence could we show that would indicate the image in question <b>can <i>not</i></b> be a shield?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="lrbguy, post: 3128929, member: 88829"]The point is that we are only seeing half of whatever the object is. The example on the left has the striations that we agree are consistent with reading the figure as a zodiac band, if we grant that interpretation. But then the example on the right which lacks those striations would support reading the image as a shield. Note the curvature at the top which gives a sense of size of that figure in relation to the person holding it up. The mosaics portray a zodiac band that is larger than the figure of the being holding it up. Moreover, the striations in the figure on the left are not definitive for a zodiac band, and would not preclude it from being a shield. What would it take to nail it down? [ATTACH=full]797849[/ATTACH] I think a good case is being developed for reading this as a zodiac image, but given the longevity of the alternative reading, for which we still need to critique the rationale of [I]its[/I] origin, the onus is on us to preclude that alternative reading by evidence and not merely a sense of conviction. Otherwise we might fall into the kind of interpretive trap that gave us a shield here in the first place. Logically we are attracted to the narrative argument you have been building in which we are able to make a coherent reading of the coin and its imagery with the zodiac reading, whereas the shield approach left open questions about the identity of the female figure and the narrative behind it all. That all is nice to consider, but that is still a plausibility from conjecture rather than evidence. Our imagination about what things meant to the ancients need more than our creative energy to make our insights relevant. It has value in weighing evidence, but it is not the source of evidence. Let us grant that there is some evidence that the imagery could be based on a zodiac motif. What evidence could we show that would indicate the image in question [B]can [I]not[/I][/B] be a shield?[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Not a shield but the circle of the zodiac!
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...