/his/ - Achaemenid art wasn't soulless dogshit - History & Humanities

Anonymous

Achaemenid art wasn't soulless(...) 04/22/24(Mon)10:13:30 No.16536515

File: IMG_9334.jpg (266 KB, 994x486)

Achaemenid art wasn't soulless dogshit Anonymous 04/22/24(Mon)10:13:30 No.16536515 Archived

I recently noticed the facial proportions in sovlfvl Qajar-era painting is the same as in achaemenid-era murals, meaning they probably were painted in a similar style

Anonymous
04/22/24(Mon)11:41:41 No.16536861

Anonymous 04/22/24(Mon)11:41:41 No.16536861

>>16536515
Discount neoassyrian reliefs + egyptian influence in architecture and motifs

Anonymous
04/22/24(Mon)12:24:50 No.16537012

Anonymous 04/22/24(Mon)12:24:50 No.16537012

>>16536515
How could you possibly draw such an inference? Qajar art is massively influenced by previous Persianate miniatures as well as European painting, neither of which existed around the Achaemenid period. There is NO WAY they looked similar

Anonymous
04/22/24(Mon)13:26:31 No.16537316

Anonymous 04/22/24(Mon)13:26:31 No.16537316

File: Qizilbash Turk moustasche.jpg (161 KB, 736x963)

161 KB JPG

>>16536515
This is what Iranian look like without Turkic influence; overly effeminate, bin laden look alike with gaudy jewelries
Now compare him with earlier safavid Turkic Qizilbash rulers

Anonymous
04/22/24(Mon)16:40:38 No.16537996

Anonymous 04/22/24(Mon)16:40:38 No.16537996

>>16537012
Because it's true

Anonymous
04/22/24(Mon)17:14:56 No.16538100

Anonymous 04/22/24(Mon)17:14:56 No.16538100

>>16537316
What?
a fat, shapeless Mongolian pig is objectively more feminine than a bearded Armenoid beast.