those artists took a lot of liberties with the physique back then, i seriously doubt anyone actually looked like that. though if they depicted nobles as the shapeless blobs that they were, i'd imagine there would be some "punitive measures" taken.
the genitals are a dead giveaway, back then having large genitals was considered something to be made fun of, but somehow i doubt everyone suffered from micropenis. it's just embellishment
Because the proportions of the statues are completely correct, and because the sculptors would have had no other 'frame of reference', you're wrong.
Allow me to quote Arthur Jones:
FIRST: barbells, or something very similar, were in widespread use more than 2,000 years ago, about 400 years before
the birth of Christ. Clear proof of that statement is provided by the existence of a statue called the Farnese Hercules,
which was sculpted about 400 BC. This statue shows an almost unbelievable level of muscular size, muscular size that
can be produced in only one way, by exercise using high levels of resistance, muscular size that is never produced
without such hard exercise.
Secondly, probably only one or two men out of a group of 10,000 normal and healthy men are capable of producing that
degree of muscular size, regardless of how much exercise they perform; the average man simply does not have the
physical potential required to build such large muscles. Which means that large numbers of men, probably thousands,
were training in a similar manner. Because picking one man at random and then trying to produce that degree of
muscular size would be an exercise in futility at best.
Thirdly, it is obvious that the sculptor, whoever he was, used a model that actually looked like his statue; this being
obvious because the shape and proportions of the muscles on the statue are correct. As you increase muscular size in
response to exercise, the shape of the muscles, as well as their proportions, change to a dramatic degree. Changes that
could not have been anticipated by the sculptor unless he actually had such a man for a model. That man’s muscular
size was literally huge even when compared to the largest bodybuilder on the scene today.
It being obvious that a man of that muscular size actually existed more than 2,000 years ago, it is then also obvious that
the exercise tools required for producing that level of muscular size also existed. No contrary opinion is even worthy
of consideration, since the proof of my above statement is clearly established by the statue of the Farnese Hercules.
So it appears that the barbell, or something similar to a barbell, was used thousands of years ago; then, apparently, was
forgotten until sometime in the late 1800s, when the barbell was reinvented in Germany.
