arnash posted: " We've all been exposed to the Greek Acropolis and the amazing classical Parthenon atop it, but it, and the several other temples on it, hold a secret that has never been made public, and as a consequence great credit has been given to those who did not e"
We've all been exposed to the Greek Acropolis and the amazing classical Parthenon atop it, but it, and the several other temples on it, hold a secret that has never been made public, and as a consequence great credit has been given to those who did not earn it while those who did have been left invisible. Now, after reviewing closely the images seen in two videos, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l71ziIi1rRAIrena Sgrfktr Ancient Wonders of the Acropolis] it is apparent that while everyone assumes that since the Parthenon was built of stone it therefore is 100% the product of stone masons, but that is not the actual truth. In fact it may be as much the work of stone casters as stone cutters & carvers...or more.
That is revealed by the ornate embellishments and the significant structual pieces that they are found on. If those embellishments are always cast and never carved, then the blocks or bases that they appear on were also cast via the reconstituting of stone from the powder, sand and grit resulting from the quarrying and cutting of blocks of natural stone. It appears that the stone used was not all marble but included plenty of limestone (which is the precursor of marble). We never hear about that fact.
I don't know how they acquired both types of stone but the Acropolis is very large so it's likely that it is comprised both of limestone and its denser form which is marble. It makes sense that the stone closest to the top would be under much less pressure than the stone far below near the bottom, so that may explain it. But no doubt there is also an intermediate stage at which the stone is no longer typical limestone and not yet typical marble, so there's that probability.
It is readily apparent to any discerning person why one can't escape the conclusion that finely detailed embellishment was not the product of hammer & chisel, nor any other manual tools used against stone. Such detail could only be produced in clay, wax, or wood... and they then had to be the source of a mold used to cast the objects in stone concrete.
Before diving into the photos and the evidence they contain, here's a brief history of why the Pantheon is in ruins. (It was BLOWN UP!)
~The Parthenon was well-maintained even long after Hellenistic paganism went the way of the dodo, and served as both an ancient church and a medieval mosque. It survived well into the modern era, and likely would be standing still, if it weren't for some very careless Turks and some very trigger-happy Venetians.
The origins of the so-called Great Turkish War are long and complex, but the short version is that the Ottoman Empire was clashing with European powers over control of the Aegean Sea.
The Parthenon was just fine UNTIL THE OTTOMAN TURKS STARTED STUFFING IT FULL OF EXPLOSIVES!
This led to several attacks on European states in 1683, resulting in a war between the Ottoman Empire and the Roman Catholic Empire on the other (via Artillery History).
By 1687, the Venetian armies, led by Captain-General Francesco Morosini, had made significant headway into the then-Ottoman-controlled Greek peninsula, marching his armies northward from Peloponnese to Athens. The Ottomans, doing what they had to do, retreated and fortified at the city's Acropolis, and then, for reasons we might never understand, began storing their gunpowder and munitions in said Acropolis's most prominent, therefore most shootable, feature: the Parthenon.
It's not clear exactly what the Ottomans were thinking. Maybe they were under the impression that the Venetians wouldn't dare fire on a building of such historical import. If that was the case, they were severely mistaken. Morosini began shelling the Acropolis on September 23, 1687; on the 26th, what he later called a "fortunate shot" managed to pierce through the Parthenon's marble roof, and the entire thing blew sky-high. The city of Athens burned for two days straight, and the Turks were sent packing (via Gizmodo).
Athens was only under Venetian control for a year or so — in 1688, the Ottomans took it back — but the Parthenon was (obviously) never the same. ~ (via Greek Reporter)
The heart of the evidence of casting stone blocks and bases is the semi-spherical fine details seen in the moldings on temples other than the Parthenon, -temples that may be of Roman origin. The Parthenon itself was built before their invention, so the evidence for it is unrelated to moldings. Here's some information regarding moldings.
Egg-and-dart
Egg-and-dart, also known as egg & tongue, egg & anchor, or egg & star, is an ornamental device adorning the fundamental quarter-round, convex ovolo profile of moulding, consisting of alternating details on the face of the ovolo—typically an egg-shaped object alternating with a V-shaped element. Wikipedia ~
"That classic architectural embellishment dates back to at least ancient Greece, Peter, and some experts believe it's derived from even earlier Egyptian designs. In the modern age, it shows up most often in crown molding for high-end interiors or built-in cabinets." "An egg-and-dart design is almost always along the length of an ovolo profile (a convex quarter circle or ellipse similar to quarter-round molding). Not all ovolo designs, however, have egg-and-dart features. "Eggs" alternate with pointed "darts" (any shape resembling arrows, anchors, or tongues). This feature can stand alone as the primary focus of a molding or be used in conjunction with other shapes to make up a wider molding."
"Some historians contend this ornamental device is supposed to represent the duality of life (the egg) and death (the arrow)."
The above photos illustrate the common ornamentation use of egg-and-dart design. The top photo is a detail of an Ionic column of the Great Court at the British Museum in London, England. This column's capital shows the volutes or scrolls typical of Ionic columns. Although the scrolls are a defining characteristic of the Ionic Classical Order, the egg-and-dart between them are added details—architectural ornamentation more ornate than found on many earlier Greek structures.
The bottom photo is a piece of cornice from the Roman Forum in Italy. The egg-and-dart design, which would run horizontally along the top of the ancient structure, is underscored by another design called bead and reel. Look carefully at the Ionic column in the picture above, and you'll notice the same bead-and-reel design beneath that egg-and-dart. In the egg-and-dart design on the ancient Parthenon in Athens, Greece combines both of these uses—between volutes and continuous design line on the entablature.
Classical Architecture
Here's some images from an Acropolis temple, -followed by three that are of the Parthenon which lacks any moldings.
~the unrestored face of the Parthenon~A base like this must be natual stone, -needed to support great weight. With steel mechanisms, gears, large potter's wheels, flywheels, and curved graving blades, this was very possible, -but not by pounding chisels to form concave and convex circular curvature.text: This column drum features the inexplicable nodules that appear in stonework across the globe, along with a section that appears to have been worked with a pointed chisel. My assessment is that this is limestone, not marble, and the nodules and chiseled area were added onto the surface after the drum was removed from the mold in which it was cast. That rectangular area contained engraved text which was chiseled off later by an opponent of the engraved message. The alternative is that all of the mass of stone below the outer-most reach of the extending nodules had to be removed. Who would do that and why? It makes zero sense. It didn't happen.The mold for that left column piece had a very short distance between the rounded end of the flute channels and the flat end of the section. No mason would have risked an accidental error in such a short distance. But with casting there's no risk of fracture from chisel pounding.THIS is the size of walls built by terrestrial builders, while single Trilathon blocks of Baalbek are as tall as the left side of this foundation. Explain that.
These statues, along with the dentil molding above & below them, were cast in molds. They're copies. The originals are preserved in a museum.
text: If these walls are original then they show that they were formed by spreading stone-mortar over stacked chunks of natural stone. That mixture came off in places, exposing the irregular stones beneath.
Those base shapes, concave and convex circular curves, weren't made by saws, nor by chisels, but on a potter's wheel in clay and then cast, -or on a high-speed powered lath with hardened steel graving blades shaped with those curves. ~ The mold for this molding was formed by using a patterned roller on a strip of clay that was added to a clay circle on a potter's wheel. ~Elaborate moldings are frivolous embellishments. They're always cast, never chiseled. Master casters made these columns, not stone masons.
Master casters didn't make these blocks. Having the look of natural marble, they were cut by stone masons.Those lines of molding were formed by screedomg from right to left, and finally from left to right near the protruding wall. See the line? Those gray foundation blocks were cut from bedrock. The wall blocks were cast in molds with chunks of natural stone as their cores. The outer layer of stone concrete is gone from two of them.
Everyone will assume that these are normal quarried blocks if you cover them with a coat of reconstituted stone and enscribe joint lines. That 'trick' has been used widely across the planet.
Nearly all of the images in this post are screen captures from a 20 minute Youtube video by "Ancient Sites" titled
WordPress.com
No comments:
Post a Comment