16th November 2006, 02:10 PM | #11 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 485
|
with my very limited knowledge of persian history, i am under the impression that persia was never truly conquered at any point in its history.
is this correct? if so, then i am surprised at the lack of historical pieces pre-17thC and post 10thC in the museums. the museum pieces, whilst attractive, are not of higher quality than in many private collections outside persia. is there a reason for this? (genuine question - am i missing something within the country's history that accounts for this lack of early steel weapons?) there are many weapons in existance that cover this period, and i was hoping to see some early pieces still in persia (by early, i mean medieval and not before). kirill, i think that your review was honest and thorough. whether others agree or disagree is meaningless, for it is a personal opinion and one offered up for discussion. besides, after reading your review, manola has decided to buy the book. how can this possibly be a bad thing? the more people that buy the book, the more chance others will be published. |
|
|