yeah, i actually have the book, ISBN# is 962-361-634-1 the picture is on page 27 and the title reads as: "Attila receives tribute from China, middle of 5th century AD". the same picture is also on the backside of the book. maybe the mistake is on the authors side, after all McBride only draws the pictures...
Thanks for the info. This is a major mistake I wonder who screw it up...
"Badly researched and full of errors... The artwork gets a 10 out of 10. The text gets 1."
"Beautiful illustrations do not make up for the fact that this is misleading, poorly researched rubbish. Newarks knowledge of costume is minimal at best. He actualy uses Victorian illustrations that were based on nothing but a guess, as the basis for some of the images. If you want a folio of Mcbride illustrations then buy it. If you want good historical reconstructions - forget it."
I don't think Attila had that much of facial or bodily hair at all ;D
Jordanes complained that the Huns couldn't grow beards after all.
"Their hardihood is evident in their wild appearance, and they are beings who are cruel to their children on the very day they are born. For they cut the cheeks of the males with a sword, so that before they receive the nourishment of milk they must learn to endure wounds. Hence they grow old beardless and their young men are without comeliness, because a face furrowed by the sword spoils by its scars the natural beauty of a beard."
Post by keaganjoelbrewer on Jan 3, 2009 12:58:51 GMT 3
As for the Jordanes quote, I have a few things to say.
Firstly, he's saying that they grow old without beards because they cut their faces, not because they naturally don't have beards.
Secondly, Jordanes may not have even seen any Huns. I'm not too sure about him specifically but many writers based their accounts on reports from others, especially soldiers who had fought them. Anyone have any more info? This point is probably void because of the first point though. I have often wondered about the facial scarring myself. It seems quite creepy.
I did a bit of research on Attila pictures last year, and the earliest visual representation of Attila (or any Hun for that matter) that I could find was from the 12th century. It is the picture that is the very first one posted on this topic, but the post is only a partial. The actual picture has the words "Attila Flagellum Dei [the Scourge of God]" above his head.
In any case what Attila actually looked like probably matters little. He is a symbol now, and so there are Attilas of all shapes and sizes, and hairinesses, lol.
In a church in Sydney, where I live, there is a 17th century Chinese painting of Mary and Jesus and they are both Chinese-looking. Quite funny! ;D ;D