Dogboy

3 minutes ago, David Scott said:

I think we have to differentiate between old Pavis walls - Roger Raup really captured this for me. And new Pavis walls which the last picture captures. The content of the first picture inside the walls is still valid for me. 

Oh, thank you. That was exactly what I meant. Culturally, the New Pavis walls are too European.

an example (Praxian, to keep it on topic):

We often see the birds eye view of Pavis (not the map, the drawing). It is iconic. It is "canon" (and has been for nearly 40 years).

It is also doesn't make sense, if we consider we are supposed to be in a Bronze Age setting: those walls are so anachronistic IMO, looking like something from Harn rather than Glorantha. it also doesn't really square with how it was described in the text.

Roger Raupp redid them slightly on his amazing River of Cradles cover. Now it reminded me of the castles of the Holy Land, but still not Bronze Age.

Damn, but it was an amazing piece though. Look at how the Zola Felli fish. I so wish we could get Raupp back, his covers were so evocative, and really shaped how I saw Prax.

Jans cover for Pavis, is probably my favourite piece of Gloranthan art.

Of all the art done of Pavis this most sums up how I see it: the colour, the architecture, the teeming masses.
But I image the walls of pavis look more like these:

16 minutes ago, David Scott said:

Please continue. This is a rare moment where we have two renowned artists of the Gloranthan world (@Dogboy and @JanPospisil) along with @M Helsdon who has done sterling work on the weaponry and armour of Glorantha and who @Jeff has been using as reference. Moving the thread would break it, contiuning is relevant as the Praxians don't make their own metal weapons an are reliant on foreign traders and what they can steal.

My point is, as far as artwork is concerned, there is no canon. The Guide has plenty of contradictory art, frustratingly so sometimes. Even art specifically commissioned for the books wanders off what is considered "correct" or "canon" (as has been shown, art direction often gets filtered by the artists sensibilities). 

This isn't a criticism of Martin BTW. I think Martin is doing amazing stuff. I may not agree with it all the time, but I wouldn't expect him to like everything I do either. I just think defining art canon is bad way to go. The Guides art are interpretations at best, though some are inspired interpretations.

12 hours ago, M Helsdon said:

???? I don't understand your comment.

 

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was just trying to work out  what you consider canon (I don't consider art as canon. It generally is good for flavour, but changes from book to book), but this is getting off the topic, so just ignore it :D.

1 hour ago, M Helsdon said:

There are two socketed axes in the picture if you mean a Celt, a wedge-shaped axe head with no shaft hole.

What no Celt?
Better?
But my point is, are these no longer canon in your opinion?

1 hour ago, M Helsdon said:

An attempt to categorize axes in the Guide and other canonical sources:

What, no socketed axes?

26 minutes ago, JanPospisil said:

Dammit, Dan replied to the "questionable" axe before my registration on here went through.

I've been waiting for a week to reply, but if I'd known, I'd have bowed to your greater knowledge.
Thanks for all the examples.

I always liked the animal with blade in mouth types, a kind of piercing axe type

Am I the only one who wonders what an Uncoli shaman knows about snake dances? Are there Ice snakes there? Or possible it is like the Siberian Death-Worm.

On 04/07/2017 at 3:42 PM, Steve said:

Specifically here, the Rathori's shoes are described are "wide". Hmm, not in this picture they're not. They look regular width to me, and the same as the Uncoling standing next to him. The shoes' netting mentioned in the description is also missing. This bothers me because it seems "off". I will give other examples in the other sections for similar mismatches.

 

 

Here I think it is referring to the snowshoes on his back

On 04/07/2017 at 11:51 AM, David Scott said:

My first contact with Pamaltela was in 1994 Tales of the Reaching Moon #11 the Pamaltela Special (I was guest editor!).

The Doraddi of the Guide are very much different to that interpretation. I liked the attempt to try and make it not "Fantasy Africa".

Not that I'd trying to have a go at you, Akhôrahil. Just that I know that Jeff Richard would have given extremely detailed art direction to Jeff Laubenstein.

Some would say too much

23 minutes ago, David Scott said:

Excellent @Dogboy what's the source of the photo?

it's Persian, circa 1200-900BC, so Iron rather than Bronze Age, but Glorantha isn't the real world (hence all the Art Nouveau in the Guide  ).

There are plenty of examples of similar axe heads with 3,4 or 5 spikes from antiquity
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/539798705320066695/ but this one was from http://thebaidunshop.com/index.php/baidun/bycivilization/persian/bronze-persian-socketed-axe-head.html

I found it while researching the Orlanth figure for Gods War

Seeing as there is a whole slew of films about people making just that mistake, I'd assume the Kralori determine the difference with great tact and care

On 03/07/2017 at 9:36 PM, Akhôrahil said:

I had an issue with the weapons instead - they're very much "fantasy weapons". Both the axehead and the spearhead are huge! And the triple spikes at the back don't seem to serve any obvious purpose (a single spike is for armor-piercing).

Yeah, the heads are huge, but the axe is probably meant to be an Orlanthi design (ritual or otherwise) with the 3 spikes representing the Mastery Rune. Runes aren't always "painted on" (personally I think they are almost always integrated/hidden into artifacts, but i appreciate most people like to see simple rune shapes). In Glorantha Form often makes Function.