79 A.D. no more: Pompeii got buried in 1631

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
952
Likes
1,480
Featured Thread #1
The official version states that in 79 A.D. the ancient Roman city of Pompeii was buried under 4 to 6 m (13 to 20 ft) of volcanic ash in the eruption of Mount Vesuvius. The site was eventually lost until its initial rediscovery in 1599 and broader rediscovery almost 150 years later in 1748.

After thick layers of ash covered Pompeii and Herculaneum, they were abandoned and eventually their names and locations were forgotten. The first time any part of them was unearthed was in 1599, when the digging of an underground channel to divert the river Sarno ran into ancient walls covered with paintings and inscriptions. The architect Domenico Fontana was called in; he unearthed a few more frescoes, then covered them over again, and nothing more came of the discovery. Pompeii was rediscovered as the result of intentional excavations in 1748 by the Spanish military engineer Rocque Joaquin de Alcubierre.

Pompeii-Vesuvius-Eruption.jpg


79 A.D.

Pompeii.png


Roque Joaquín de Alcubierre was a military engineer in the Spanish Army
who discovered architectural remains at Pompeii and Herculaneum in 1748.

Roque Joaquín de Alcubierre.jpg
1702-1780

IMPORTANT: Officially the city of Pompeii was lost till 1748. Whatever they claim was dug out in 1599, was not linked to Pompeii at the time.
  • If Pompeii was not discovered and identified prior to 1748, than any mentioning of it prior to 1748 would be a clear and obvious evidence of the scientists trying to substitute true world chronology with bogus data.

* * * * *

I plan on showing you that Pompeii suffered its fate in 1631, which makes our official history 1,552 years off. I have a pretty strong feeling that the official liars (and I do not mean your local history teacher) know about their mess up. Unfortunately for them, there was some supporting fake evidence created, and it is no longer possible to portray this Pompeiigate as a simple mistake. They simply cannot play it down due to some highly questionable "fakish" evidence of the Vesuvius eruption, and Pompeii/Herculaneum destruction, created to support the date of 79 A.D. The "officials" tied too many historical individuals into this story. It is impossible to correct the timing of the destruction of Pompeii without messing up the entire timeline. Below is an example of such evidence.

Nuremberg_chronicles_Suetonius.png

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus commonly known as Suetonius (c. 69 – after 122 AD), was a Roman historian belonging to the equestrian order who wrote during the early Imperial era of the Roman Empire. His most important surviving work is a set of biographies of twelve successive Roman rulers, from Julius Caesar to Domitian, entitled De Vita Caesarum. He recorded the earliest accounts of Julius Caesar's epileptic seizures. Other works by Suetonius concern the daily life of Rome, politics, oratory, and the lives of famous writers, including poets, historians, and grammarians. A few of these books have partially survived, but many have been lost. - Wiki

Our official history claims he stated the following about the Roman Emperor Titus , "There were some dreadful disasters during his reign, such as the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in Campania, a fire at Rome which continued three days and as many nights, and a plague the like of which had hardly ever been known before."

titus_rome.jpg

39 A.D. - 81 A.D.
Coincidentally Titus ruled from 23 June 79 - 13 September 81 A.D., which covers the "official" last day of Pompeii.

My Point: If the eruption indeed took place in 1631, than this Suetonius account is clearly fake. This, in turn, puts the entire existence of the involved individuals in questions. Considering that Titus is tied into the entire history of the Ancient Rome... fill in the blanks yourself.

List of evidence pointing to 1631

1. Old Maps: 1514, 1570, 1575, 1603
2. Etchingss: 1633
3. Epitaffio di Portici: 1631
4. The Three Graces: 1st century AD vs. 1503/1505
5. Pineapples on the Pompeii frescoes
6. Domenico Fontana's Water Conduit: 1590s and water wells
7. Piranesi and Pompeii
8. Christianity in "Before Christ" Pompeii, ROTAS (CIL IV 8623)
9. Pompeii Surgical Tools

1. Old Maps
1514, 1570, 1575, 1603

1514 Opusculum, Distinctum, Plenum, Clarum, Doctum, Pulcrum, Verum, Graue, Varium & Utile
Leone, Ambrogio, 1458/9 - 1525

Plan Bay of Naples 1514 Girolamo Mocetto in de_nola_2.jpg Plan Bay of Naples 1514 Girolamo Mocetto in de_nola.jpg

1570 Ortelius Regni Neapolitani verissima / Link 2
Ortelius, Abraham, 1527-1598

Ortelius Regni Neapolitani verissima_Pompeii_1_1.jpg Ortelius Regni Neapolitani verissima_Pompeii_2.jpg Ortelius Regni Neapolitani verissima_ 1570.jpg

1575 Regno Di Napoli / Link 2
Lafreri, Antonio, 1512 - 1577

Regno di Napoli 1575 Lafreri 1 Credit Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division_1_1.jpg Plan Regno di Napoli 1575 Lafreri 1 Credit Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division_4.jpg

1603 Italia Antiqva
Philipp_Clüver 1580 - 1622

Italia antiqva_2.jpg Italia antiqva_0.jpg


2. Etchings
Done in 1633. Pertains to the eruption of 1631.
Mascolo, Giovanni Battista, 1582/3 - 1656, “Mount Vesuvius before / after the eruption,”
Loyola University Chicago Digital Special Collections

Mascolo_Pompei_1_1.jpg Mascolo_Pompei_1.jpg


3. Epitaffio di Portici
Following the disastrous eruption of Vesuvius in 1631, the Viceroy Zunica had an Epitaffio placed to admonish the dangers of the volcano in the future. The epitaph is placed in the current corner between Corso Garibaldi and Via Gianturco, just to the left of Palazzo Ruffo di Bagnara. Below is the original Latin version and the Italian translation by the Lions Club "Portici Miglio D'Oro" reported on a sign on the right of the Epitaph.
AT O
VIII ET LX POST ANNO XVII CALEND (AS) IANUARII
PHILIPPO IV REGE
FUMO, FLAMMIS, BOATU
CONCUSSO CINERE ERUPTIOHE
HORRIFICUS, FERUS SI UNQUAM VESUVIUS
NEC NOMEN NEC FASCES TANTI VIRI EXTIMUIT QUIPPE, EXARDESCENTE CAVIS SPECUBUS IGNE, IGNITUS, FURENS, IRRUGIENS,
EXITUM ELUCTANS. COERCITUS AER, IACULATUS TRANS HELLESPONTUMDISIECTO VIOLENTER MONTIS CULMINE,
IMMANI ERUPIT HIATU POSTRIDIE,
CINEREM
PONE TRAHENS AD EXPLENDAM VICEM PELAGUS IMMITE PELAGUS
FLUVIOS SULPHUREOS FLAMMATUM BITUMEN,
FOETAS ALUMINE CAUTES,
INFORME CUIUSQUE METALLI RUDUS,
MIXTUM AQUARUM VOIURINIBUS IGNEM
FEBRVEM (QUE) UNDANTE FUMO CINEREM
SESEQ (UE) FUNESTAMQ (UE) COLLLUVIEM
IUGO MONTIS EXONERANS
POMPEIOS HERCULANEUM OCTAVIANUM, PERSTRICTIS REАTINA ET PORTICU,
SILVASQ (UE), VILLASQ (UE), (UE)
MOMENTO STRAVIT, USSIT, DIRUIT
LUCTUOSAM PRAEA SE PRAEDAM AGENS
VASTUMQ (UE) TRIUNPHUM.
PERIERAT HOC QUOQ (UE) MARMOR ALTE SEPQLUM CONSULTISSIMI NO MONUMENTUM PROREGIS.
NE PEREAT
EMMAHUEZL FONSECA ET SUNICA COM (ES),
MONT IS RE (GIS) PROR (EX),
QUA ANIMI MAGNITUDINE PUBLICAE CALAMITATI EA PRIVATAE CONSULUIT
EXTRACTUM FUNDITUS GENTIS SUI LAPIDEM.
COELO RESTITUIT, VIAM RESTAURAVIT,
FUMANTE ADHUC ET INDIGNANTE VESEVO.
AN (NO) SAL (UTIS) MDCXXXV,
PRAEFECTO VIARUM
ANTONIO SUARES MESSIA MARCHI (ONE) VICI.
POMPEIOS HERCULANEUM OCTAVIANUM, PERSTRICTIS REАTINA ET PORTICU,

Epitaffio_di_Portici,_Napoli.jpg Epitaffio_di_Portici,_Napoli_0.jpg Epitaffio_di_Portici,_Napoli_0_1.jpg


4. Three Graces
What a bizarre coincidence, considering that Pompeii was not found till 1748,
and Raphael painted his masterpiece in 1503/5.

  • Excavated Fresco: Roman civilization, 1st-century A.D. Fresco depicting the Three Graces. From Pompeii, Italy. Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale. Found on south wall of tablinum of IX.2.16. Now in Naples Archaeological Museum. Inventory number 9236.
The Three Graces, from Pompeii_excavated.jpg

  • 1503-05 Oil on Canvas by Raphael: The Three Graces is an oil painting by Italian painter Raphael, housed in the Musée Condé of Chantilly, France. The date of origin has not been positively determined, though it seems to have been painted at some point after his arrival to study with Pietro Perugino in about 1500, possibly 1503-1505.
Raphaël_-_Les_Trois_Grâces.jpg

5. The Pompeii Pineapple
Palazzo Massimo alle Terme, close to the Termini train station in Rome, houses one of the world’s most important collections of Classical art. On the second floor of the museum, in the gallery dedicated to ancient Roman frescoes and mosaics, you can find something very peculiar hidden in what looks like an ordinary mosaic floor. Dating from the early 1st century A.D., this mosaic illustrates various food items. At the top of the scene, a basket of fruit is brimming with figs, grapes, pomegranates, and…. a pineapple! This fresco was discovered in Pompeii.

Pineapple_pompeii.jpg

In Pompeii's House of the Ephebe house there is the following fresco.It is inside the Lararium on the right as one enters the villa.

Pineapple_pompeii_1.gif

There is another fresco there, but somebody does not like pineapples, I guess.

Pineapple_pompeii_2.jpg
Pineapple history: The thing here is that according to our official history of pineapples, there could be no pineapples in Europe in the 1st AD. Here is an excerpt, "The plant is indigenous to South America and is said to originate from the area between southern Brazil and Paraguay; Columbus encountered the pineapple in 1493 on the leeward island of Guadeloupe. He called it piña de Indes, meaning "pine of the Indians", and brought it back with him to Spain, thus making the pineapple the first bromeliad to be introduced by humans outside of the New World." Unless ancient Romans discovered the American continents, it would be impossible for them to know what a pineapple is.

6. Domenico Fontana's Water Conduit: 1590s. Water wells.

This is probably one of the most damaging pieces of evidence there can be. In 1592 the renown Italian architect Domenico Fontana dug a water channel through Pompeii in order to bring water to Torre Annunziata.

pompeii-water_conduit_map.png Fontana_Pompeii_1.jpg Fontana_Pompeii.jpg
After thick layers of ash covered Pompeii and Herculaneum, they were abandoned and eventually their names and locations were forgotten. The first time any part of them was unearthed was in 1599, when the digging of an underground channel to divert the river Sarno ran into ancient walls covered with paintings and inscriptions. The architect Domenico Fontana was called in; he unearthed a few more frescoes, then covered them over again, and nothing more came of the discovery. Fontana's covering over the paintings has been seen both as a broad-minded act of preservation for later times, and as censorship in view of the frequent sexual content of such paintings. (KD: this sentence is a pure speculation) - Wiki

What we are lead to believe is that this professional architect was digging a tunnel 20 feet below the surface, and through the entire city of Pompeii. Along the way he was discovering building walls, roadways, paintings, frescoes... and was covering them as he barreled through.

Even with the above waterway information alone, it is logical to suggest that Fontana was building his water conduit through an operational city, unaffected by any volcano eruptions. But it gets better. Fontana's water conduit had water wells as was discovered during the excavation. These water wells clearly indicate that the conduit was being built through a live, and unburied city. Otherwise, if you are digging a tunnel 20 feet below the surface, why would you dig up 5 feet and build a water well which is useless due to still being under 15 feet of ash or dirt.

Fontana_Pompeii_waterwell.jpg

This water well, specifically, is screaming that Domenico Fontana was building in the living Pompeii.

Pompei_waterwell_4.jpg

There is one additional Pompeii water well which is worth mentioning. This one is depicted on the Francesco Piranesi's "View of the Temple of Isis in the City of Pompeii", Year 1788/89. In the right bottom portion of the etching we can see an access to Fontana's water conduit via a water well. The water well has a triangular shaped top, meant for access doors.

Piranesi-popmpeii-waterwell.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_water_well_2.png
Piranesi's letter "F" google translation from Latin "A well with two windows covered with movable covers, where the ashes of the victims were thrown."
As you can see in the below contemporary image, the appearence of the water well is somewhat different from the depicted by Piranesi.

Piranesi_Pompeii_water_well_3.png Pompei_waterwell_5.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_water_well_1.png
This water well was too much to explain, and as you can see above the access was significantly altered. Yet, on the 19th century "Pompeii: Temple of Isis" postcard, the water well was pretty much intact.

pompeii_postcard_1.jpg

Water well conclusion: it is obvious that water wells connected to the Fontana's water conduit could not be built under 20 feet of ash and dirt. That would be stupid, and ridiculous, while simultaneously contradicting any common sense. They had to be constructed on top of the unobstructed surface.

NOTE: Archaeologists choose not to comment on the water well issue. I wonder why...

7. Piranesi and Pompeii
In 1748, digging proceeded sporadically, here and there at random; it was several years before the site was identified as Pompeii, and even then there was no systematic town plan. During the French occupation of Naples, 1806-1815, there was much more activity on the site, but with the restoration of the Bourbons excavations gradually slowed down again. The discovery of the House of the Faun containing the large mosaic depicting Alexander the Great in battle caught the imagination of people all over Europe following the Unification of Italy in 1861, the appointment of Giuseppe Fiorelli as director marked a turning-point in the excavations.

Most of the Pompeii excavations were done in the end of the 19th and first half of the 20th century.

Yet, Franchesco Piranesi (1758-1810), appears to know way too many of the intricate details, about everything existing in the still unearthed parts of the Pompeii. The below group of his etchings presents details he observed, which could prompt a reasonable question, "How did he know all that"? The other question to ask is why his etchings look more like an aftermath of the mud flood?

Apologies for not finding better quality of the images. On these ones you can not really read the fine print, but Pompeii is clearly visible. For better quality you will have to google "Piranesi Pompeii". Honestly, with farther and son Piranesis working on the Pompeii issue, it is hard to present even a small portion of all the works.

Most fascinating are detailed Pompeii building plans, and the door hardware. Cool stuff to have in 79 A.D. especially when compared to the hardware of the 17th century. 1500 years of no progress I guess.

Piranesi_Pompeii_1_1.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_2.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_3.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_4.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_5.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_6.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_7.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_8.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_9.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_10.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_11.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_12.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_13.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_14.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_15.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_16.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_17.jpg Piranesi_Pompeii_1_18.jpg

8. Christianity in "Before Christ" Pompeii

Sodom and Gomorra. 79 A.D. Pompeii new the Old Testament?

christianity_pompeii.png
christianity_pompeii_1.png

It reads, "Sator/Arepo/Tenet/Opera /Rotas/" You'll see its clever "palindromic-ness" . It means (literally translated) "Arepo the sower holds the wheels at his work". But, as is often pointed out, the letters can be re-arranged into two "pater noster"s in the sign of a cross with a couple of "a"s and "o"s left over - as in (converting to Greek) "alpha and omega". So it looks as if there could be a Christian significance: "our father" plus alpha and omega.

Of course, "One suggestion has been that this word square with its apparently Christian message was the scratching of people who dug down into Pompeii after the eruption. "
Source for the above. Below are a couple of etchings of the artifacts located in Pompeii, which bear Christian symbology. They were allegedly located by Rocque Joaquin de Alcubierre in February 1756. - The Crosses of Pompeii (I did not dig too deep into the Christianity issue. It honestly hurts my head. There are plenty of articles on the issue with people going back and forth.)

artifacts-of-pompeii.jpg artifacts-of-pompeii_1.jpg

9. Pompeii Surgical Tools
When you google "ancient Roman surgical tools" you immediately run into the surgical tools located in Pompeii. While its logical to assume that they were the best preserved due to being safely stored under the ash, it is also very suspicious due to those tools looking very similar to the surgical tools used in the 16th, and 17th centuries.

pompeii_surgical_tools.png

The explanation addressing the resemblance to the tools used 1500 years later is typical of our "not so honest" history science, "this collection is typical of surgical practice for nearly a millennium and illuminates the practice of medicine in ancient Rome". Once again, we are being told that our ancestors were dumb and stupid for thousands of years, and had no clue on how to develop and improve things. Here is a very good source covering the surgical tools located in Pompeii - Surgical Instruments from Ancient Rome (additional: Roman Medical Tools). Interesting, that quality contrast between Pompeii, and other ancient Roman surgical tools is striking.

Basically, our knowledge of the ancient Roman medical tools is based on the Pompeii find. Now let us look at what those 16th and 17th century surgical tools looked like.

16th_17th_century_surgical_tools.png 16th_17th_century_surgical_tools_1.jpg 16th_17th_century_surgical_tools_2.jpg 16th_17th_century_surgical_tools_3.jpg 16th_17th_century_surgical_tools_4.jpg

Considering, that the Pompeii tools were kept in the dirt for a few hundred years, they look pretty good when compared to the 16th, 17th century ones. They are definitely matching the complexity.

And here is a little excerpt from, "Pompeii. Surgical Instruments"

Analysis
This collection of instruments was found in the 1770s when the Spaniard Francesco La Vega cleared the villa, which later was named as the House of the Surgeon. These forty medical instruments were made of either steel or bronze and are relatively similar to the medical tools that are used in modern society today. This includes forceps, catheters, needles, tweezers and scalpels. The fresco portrays how the Ancient Roman people could possibly have treated a battle wound.

Developed Conclusions
These surgical tools are unique because they are the best surviving example of what medicinal instruments would be available to people during the first century AD. These tools have been preserved for centuries under volcanic pumice and ash; this has protected these instruments from weather damage, and also the advancement in medicine that would mean the abandonment of these tools. The methods of Roman medicine were based on trial and error, due to the fact that there were no laws regarding the practice of medicine, nor were there any schools that taught the practice of medicine. Because of this, the intent in Roman medicine was to prevent rather than treat, and Roman surgeons learnt as they practiced, gaining experience every time they treated a patient. The medical efforts of the Romans have been considered quite advanced; this has been proven by the insight given from the surgical instruments uncovered in the excavations of Pompeii. These instruments are strikingly similar to modern surgical instruments and many of them were used for the same purpose that today’s surgeons use them for. The medicinal practises of the Ancient Romans was so advanced that it wasn’t surpassed until the nineteenth century. The preservation of this kit of 40 surgical instruments has given researchers the opportunity to accurately compare them to modern tools. This kit also shows the conditions, of which typical Roman surgeons had to endure during the first century AD. Much of the focus for Roman medicine was on damage to the human body during battle; the Roman Empire’s soldiers were offered the most effective treatment as they were considered a high value, at the time of the Mt. Vesuvius eruption, medical practitioners were well experienced in body repair such as bone setting.

I definitely like the "steel" part in there,considering the state of the ancient Roman metallurgy, "Many of the first metal artifacts that archaeologists have identified have been tools or weapons, as well as objects used as ornaments such as jewelry. These early metal objects were made of the softer metals; copper, gold, and lead in particular, as the metals either as native metal or by thermal extraction from minerals, and softened by minimal heat "

And we need to remember that ancient Roman surgical tool making abilities are being based upon these Pompeii tools.

* * * * *
KD Summary: Based on #6 (Domenico Fontana's Water Conduit: 1590s and water wells) alone, the city of Pompeii had to be a living city during the time when the Water Conduit was being built. Which means that around 1590s the city of Pompeii was not buried under 20 feet of ash.

Additional 8 points just strengthen this theory.
 
Last edited:

Ayylmoe

New member
Messages
3
Likes
5
#3
Interesting proposition, but unfortunately most of the evidence presented here can be can be explained. For old maps that mention Pompeii/Pompeia, this link mentions that it was forgotten, but did remain as a name for the area. Not incredibly compelling evidence, but it's not hard to imagine that the area would still be known as Pompeii even if the town was gone or that it remained in folk memory. For the engravings and epitaph, this is simply because Vesuvius was a fairly active volcano. Mount Vesuvius erupted multiple times between the burying of Pompeii and the modern day, often causing damage and casualties so it's no surprise that there would be engravings recording these eruptions or epitaphs warning people of Vesuvius. The Three Graces was an interesting one, but I do believe that it can be convincingly argued that it was simply because the Three Graces was a popular subject for art both in antiquity and the Renaissance, which saw a revival in Classical motifs. This states that it is often asserted that Raphael was inspired by a ruined Roman marble statue in the Piccolomini Library, but other inspiration was possible because it was a popular subject in Italy at the time. Given that there were examples of the Three Graces in that particular configuration available in Italy at the time, it's reasonable to assume that the similarity of the two Three Graces was not necessarily Raphael copying that precise Pompeian fresco.
Now that I've proposed counterarguments to the pieces of evidence presented, I would also like to ask a few questions. If Pompeii had indeed been buried as recently as the 17th century, then why does it only have remarkably preserved Roman architecture and artifacts, way past the fall of the Rome chronologically? Furthermore, if it was indeed buried in the 17th century then why was there even a reference to it in ancient Roman records?
 

The Wack

Member
Messages
55
Likes
80
#5
Pineapples don't belong on pizzas...
...nor 1st century Italian ruins.....bazinga.

Its the little details like pineapples and rivets we need to find. Someone can and probably will write a book on how the 3 Graces got there and there will be this and that expert to back it up but, its just flashy diversion and distration... what about the pineapples and rivets?
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
952
Likes
1,480
#9
Interesting proposition, but unfortunately most of the evidence presented here can be can be explained. For old maps that mention Pompeii/Pompeia, this link mentions that it was forgotten, but did remain as a name for the area. Not incredibly compelling evidence, but it's not hard to imagine that the area would still be known as Pompeii even if the town was gone or that it remained in folk memory. For the engravings and epitaph, this is simply because Vesuvius was a fairly active volcano. Mount Vesuvius erupted multiple times between the burying of Pompeii and the modern day, often causing damage and casualties so it's no surprise that there would be engravings recording these eruptions or epitaphs warning people of Vesuvius. The Three Graces was an interesting one, but I do believe that it can be convincingly argued that it was simply because the Three Graces was a popular subject for art both in antiquity and the Renaissance, which saw a revival in Classical motifs. This states that it is often asserted that Raphael was inspired by a ruined Roman marble statue in the Piccolomini Library, but other inspiration was possible because it was a popular subject in Italy at the time. Given that there were examples of the Three Graces in that particular configuration available in Italy at the time, it's reasonable to assume that the similarity of the two Three Graces was not necessarily Raphael copying that precise Pompeian fresco.
Now that I've proposed counterarguments to the pieces of evidence presented, I would also like to ask a few questions. If Pompeii had indeed been buried as recently as the 17th century, then why does it only have remarkably preserved Roman architecture and artifacts, way past the fall of the Rome chronologically? Furthermore, if it was indeed buried in the 17th century then why was there even a reference to it in ancient Roman records?
Sorry it took me so long.

1. The location of Pompeii is clearly listed as lost and forgotten by multiple sources. The link you provided states, "Pompeii was forgotten, apart from perhaps a remnant folk memory, only existing as a name for the area". Just like Hardy mentioned, multiple map provide a precise location, as in go and dig it out. We can definitely speculate on the topic, but the location is precise.

2. Engraving and Epitaffio, unless there is some source out there stating that the cities of Pompeii, and Herculaneum were rebuilt on top of the ones allegedly buried in 79 B.C., and in turn buried by the eruption of 1631...

3. The Three Graces aka Charites. It could definitely be argued, just like anything else could. We are used to explanations like "revival of classical motifs" without asking why someone would start doing things which are 1500 years old and more. Within the totality of circumstances, this argument will remain a speculation. What we do have is thousands of fake Roman, Greek and Egyptian artifacts produced between God knows when and now. There are multiple sources explaining the issue.
Artifact were a profitable business for a long time. But what we have in reference to the Three Graces is the time frame.

three_graces_11.png
Meanwhile Raphael could definitely jack the design from whoever. As a matter of fact the below statue is being claimed to be a copy of the 2nd century AD one. But ... The three Graces. Roman copy of the Imperial Era (2nd century AD?) after a Hellenistic original. Restored for a large part in 1609 by Nicolas Cordier (1565-1612) for Cardinal Borghese.

Three_Graces_Louvre.jpg


So what we have is a copy statue produced nobody knows when, and allegedly restored in 1609. Where is the original, where is the painting, or a drawing of the original. The information does not exist. What we do have is 1609 for the statue, and 1505 for the Raphael's painting. But all of these "Graces" appear after late 1470s or early 1480s Boticelli's Primavera. And somehow The Three Graces of Pompeii does not fit in the mix with its 79 B.C.

4. As far as architecture goes, it is a way more complicated of a topic than just your question about it. The issue with architecture is much deeper: Similar style buildings are all over the world. Were they built by our civilization? We have this architecture all over the world, and no serious explanation besides "that's how they built during the colonization", and such.

Looking at the Pompeii remaining structures, I disagree with the "remarkably preserved Roman architecture". It appears to be preserved just like anything else. There are plenty of Greek, roman, and 18th, 19th century unmaintained "contemporary" buildings looking fairly the same.

All the below buildings were allegedly built during different times. I, personally, think they all were built within the same time frame, but as far as general appearance goes, my opinion is irrelevant. We have some very old buildings looking great, because they were kept and maintained, and some much newer building looking terrible, because they were not. Vatican would not look that nice if it was abandoned for 500 years.

ancient_temple_1.jpg ancient_temple_2.jpg ancient_temple_3.jpg ancient_temple_4.jpg ancient_temple_5.jpg ancient_temple_6.jpg ancient_temple_7.jpg ancient_temple_8.jpg ancient_temple_9.jpg ancient_temple_10.jpg
As far as what could have happened to some of the poorly looking structures: What was Giovanni Battista Piranesi trying to say. 17-18th century apocalypse?

5. As far as original sources go.We do not have any sources, we only have copies of the copies of the copies. From here its up to one's personal preference. When we do not have a single original source to backup dogmatic science, I prefer to ask questions.

I did answer a similar question in an unrelated thread before. Additionally here.

Unfortunately we have no "sources". Just things which appeared after something like the 11th century at best. You can verify it yourself by looking up an ancient "source" for Pompeii, and see if it exists. I bet you will run into some medieval copies. I always do. The originals do not exist my friend.

This link here Some manuscript traditions of the Greek classics, contains a lot of names you must know. You might be surprised that originals, do not exist, and we only have 10th generation copies found in the most bizarre places. Copies always survive, and originals never do.

* * * * *
I personally would like to know how archaeologists explain my #6: Fontana's Water Conduit.
 

aaww1979

New member
Messages
14
Likes
24
#10
It may have been intentional overlooked because who would like to see ruins from 1631. If Pompeii was in the USA the 1631 would be very old, but not in Europe. History often gets embellished to make it more interesting or changed to align with current thinking.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
952
Likes
1,480
#11
I believe it was intentional but for the totally different reasons. Just like the ridiculous Industrial Revolution was intentional misrepresentation of true history, in my opinion.

The Russians are launching rockets from the submerged submarine in 1837, yet 30 years later in 1867 the world is still using cannon balls loaded through the muzzle. We are so dull.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
952
Likes
1,480
#13
wait... what?!
this deserves its own thread
I will try to get the info out.

* * *​

I think analyzing actual original available sources of the histories of Rome and Greece will show that we only have copies. I plan on taking a much closer look. If anyone wants to join, you are very much welcome.

We have a few 19th century works which are the cornerstone editions, and are the basis for everything we know about those two.

What could be better than convincing everybody that your claim for a specific World setup has a few thousands years of history?
 

CyborgNinja

Well-known member
Messages
103
Likes
251
#14
Sodom and Gomorra. 79 A.D. Pompeii new the Old Testament?
Interesting side note: The pop song 'Pompeii' makes reference to the link with Sodom and Gomorra.

...We were caught up and lost in all of our vices
In your pose as the dust settled around us...


...Oh where do we begin?
The rubble or our sins?...



The song writer Daniel Smith seems to be hinting some link between Pompeii and un-virtuous behavior. But how would he know this? His Wikipedia page tells us before becoming a musician he was an English language and literature major. Dan Smith (singer)

Maybe the truth of Pompeii is common knowledge among the intelligentsia of England. Perhaps they don't come out with the true because they fear no one will believe them, or its a cover up. Take your pick.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
952
Likes
1,480
#15
With all the crazy sex related stuff uncovered in Pompeii, Sodom and Gomorra could come to mind, I guess. Pompeii is so weirdly unfitting on the time scale, it makes you wonder how much they shuffled different events around.

I have no doubt that the original Sodom and Gomorra have been found. Only in their case I think their major sin was being an enemy of the party which layed havoc on them.
 

asatiger1966

New member
Messages
6
Likes
12
#17
Check the work of Anatoly Timofeevich born in 1945. He wrote a seven volume edition " History: Fiction or Science?"
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
952
Likes
1,480
#18
Yep, Nosovsky and Fomenko sure did a great job exposing the extra time which was added to our history with fake or duplicate rulers and events filling in the voids.

What they did not do, they did not identify the real events and real rulers which occupied that time. That is exsctly why we have this issue with cities being built in 2-3 months.

In other words, in my opinion, Fomenko and Nosovskiy are going in the wrong direction. It’s not the extra time which was added to our history. It’s specific events which were taken out of our history. Those empty historical periods were filed in with authorized historicsl data.
 
Top