>ca.

>ca. 400 BCE
what the fuck

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And ? There are some older better looking Greek bronzes like the Riace ones

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Show them

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >what the fuck
      >better looking
      Explain what's wrong with it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Not to rain on your parade but Egyptians were making stuff like pic rel in 1350 BCE

      also true. The fact that Etruscans made impressive bronze works just offers even more evidence that greek styles spread across italy in the early iron age.
      Imagine being so retarded you think Italians just coincidentally used the same realism and lost wax casting as Greeks who were colonizing in the same peninsula

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Damn, they really improved since those boar vessel (600BC-500BC) times

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not to rain on your parade but Egyptians were making stuff like pic rel in 1350 BCE

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This.
      >Wooden statue of the ancient Egyptian scribe Kaaper (also known as as Sheikh el-Beled), 5th or 4th dynasty of the Old Kingdom c. 2500 BC.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It feels good to know that fat fucks like me could still succeed even ~5000 years ago.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This.
      >Wooden statue of the ancient Egyptian scribe Kaaper (also known as as Sheikh el-Beled), 5th or 4th dynasty of the Old Kingdom c. 2500 BC.

      looks really primitive compared to op's pic

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        also, I am a mentally retarded tranny. Thats why I think OPs pic looks so good

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        Not nearly as impressive

        They were made 2000 years before the OP

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Looks shit
      Amarna art was just ugly

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Head of a man ( known as Akkadian ruler). From Nineveh. c. 2300-2200 BCE

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Head of a ruler ca. 2300–2000 BC, Mesopotamia

      Not nearly as impressive

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        still goes hard you have to admit

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Biased af

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes? I know you are. The size alone of the lion make the casting much more impressive since they had to fuse the different pasts together, obviously making one small stylized head was much easier

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >from nineveh
      doubt.jpg

      Looks shit
      Amarna art was just ugly

      >amarna art was just ugly
      wrong, it was unique and had soul, which is hardly something you can say for much of the other monumental egyptian art

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Head of a ruler ca. 2300–2000 BC, Mesopotamia

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How the FUCK did they do it
    They mogged everyone until the 19th century

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Bronze casting is easy, just make a good mold and you can mass produce any shape. Bronze in ancient times was like modern day plastics

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That's a lion. They were all over the med until Latin naggers hinted them to extinction

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The famous lions with snake tails and a goat's head on back

      But no, Italy had no lions since at least the upper Paleolithic, Greece did have lions until the classical age or roman period though

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is realism the most based style of art? Seems like everyone here wants to claim it for their own culture

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yes, progress and evolution are ideological lies

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Piece of an Gravettian ivory atlatl.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

    >ca. [1500] [CE] [(CHRISTIAN ERA)][.]

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Found and sold in 1500 you lying retard
      The statue itself is ancient

      • 2 weeks ago
        ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

        >The statue itself is ancient[.]

        ACCORDING TO WHOM?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          According to the fact that its Etruscan in origin
          https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1006/chimera-of-arezzo/

          • 2 weeks ago
            ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

            1. ACCORDING TO WHOM?

            2. IT IS INFERRED THAT IT IS ETRUSCAN, BASED ON THE CHRONOLOGY; THE CHRONOLOGY IS BASED ON FAULTY DATING METHODS.

            3. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT STATUE, AND BELIEVE THAT IT IS FROM THE FIFTH CENTURY BEFORE CHRIST OUR LORD, YOU ARE DUMB.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It has an Etruscan inscription on it, my dear pedo retard

              • 2 weeks ago
                ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

                AH, YOU ARE RIGHT; I FORGOT THAT INSCRIPTIONS ARE VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO FALSIFY.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ah yeah someone just wrote the unknown etruscan language on it, that was lost nearly 2000 years ago and is only just now being redeciphered

              • 2 weeks ago
                ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

                HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS «LOST NEARLY TWOTHOUSAND YEARS AGO», AND THAT PEOPLE IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY DID NOT KNOW ETRUSCAN?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you trying to peddle some new chronology garbage?

              • 2 weeks ago
                ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

                NO.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm just gonna pre-empt this "ALL CHRONOLOGY IS LIES" and ask you to explain why european historical chronologies and observations of astronomical events match ones from other civilizations like persia and china including ones in central and south america that died out and had their ruins swallowed by the jungle centuries before spaniards even arrived

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                because cringe christian theological myths take precedence over educated guesses that is history.

                One just happens to be more false than the other, so they yell and bitch about it like their words are orphaned.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >IF YOU LOOK AT THAT STATUE, AND BELIEVE THAT IT IS FROM THE FIFTH CENTURY BEFORE CHRIST OUR LORD, YOU ARE DUMB.
              according to whom?

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We need but sever the tail!

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Roman Bedroom from 79 AD. Because of the Christian Dark Ages this level of art wouldn't appear in Europe for another 1400 years.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    ࿇ C Œ M G E N V S ࿇

    >because cringe christian theological myths take precedence over educated guesses that is history.
    >One just happens to be more false than the other, so they yell and bitch about it like their words are orphaned.

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >wojak
    Point discarded

Your email address will not be published.