Posted by Larry Joseph on November 25, 1998 at 07:03:48:
In Reply to: Animal pelt? posted by Steve Price on November 25, 1998 at 06:16:09:
: Dear Salonistas,
: At the risk of exposing my lack of imagination, I'd like to say that while the motifs on the field could be read as those on an animal's pelt, I don't see anything else suggesting that this is what the thing represents. In fact, even among the animal pelt theory proponents there is disagreement about whether the motifs are stylized tiger stripes, stylized leopard spots, or stylized nothing in particular on a wolf.
: I don't see any of the anatomical landmarks that say "animal", none at all. No eyes, no legs, no tail, no teeth. Nothing. It could just as easily represent a brick outhouse or a field full of sheep.
: What am I missing here?
: Steve Price
I wish someone would show this piece to some turkoman peoples, especially some who still maintained a nomadic existance, and get their opinion on what it represents and was used for. The next best thing would be to find someone who runs a museum in uzbekistan or there abouts. Perhaps Uncle Saul has some leads here?
Post a Followup