- Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3 - Part 4 - Part 5 - Part 6 - Part 7 - Part 8 - Part 9 - Part 10 - Part 11 - Part 12 - Part 13 - Part 14 - Part 15 - Part 16 - Part 17 - Part 18 - Part 19 - Part 20 - Part 21 - Part 22 - Part 23 -
False
Usually, dictionaries and encyclopedias give similar definitions to the concept of "false", and they look something like this:
In general, at first glance, everything seems to be correct, but there are several "buts" at once, without which this definition in itself is a lie. First, a false statement is not necessarily a statement. Silence and suppression are also a kind of lie. In addition, there are different types of images. This is not only painting and sculpture, but also architecture, as well as objects that are carriers of signs that explicitly or implicitly indicate that they are created or artificially processed.
Everything is quite simple for understanding modern man when it comes to such objects as functional structures made of stone, the purpose of which is beyond doubt; these are all kinds of fortresses, castles, religious buildings (which at least now are used in the form of religious buildings), etc.
There are much more questions about structures like the "Temple of Jupiter" in Baalbek (Lebanon). Most likely, the modern name of this structure did not appear quite recently, and what it was originally, no one knows now. But it's not that. In Baalbek, this is not the only "ancient" structure, there are no questions about the Temple of Venus, but how the Temple of Jupiter was built, which is based on so-called trilithons weighing thousands of tons, science cannot explain.
Promotional video:
Similar questions are raised by the trilithons located at the base of the so-called "Wailing Wall" in the Palestinian city of Al-Quds, which for some reason has been considered Jerusalem, the capital of Israel since 1950.
No one doubts that these objects are the result of the creation of the mind. The only catch is that no one can explain exactly how this is done. At least, to repeat these creations, no one has yet been found. And some of the megaliths of similar configuration and size are generally not recognized as artificial, because they are located on the territory of Russia in "unhistorical" Siberia:
Trilithons of Mountain Shoria.
The situation is much more complicated with objects, to which not only the question of "how?" Arises, but also the question "Why?" These are, of course, pyramids, and dolmens, and structures of Mesoamerica, and, undoubtedly, most of the structures of the Urals, Siberia, Sayan, Primorye, Yakutia, Kolyma and Chukotka. And a simple ignorance of an existing phenomenon can also be regarded as a lie. But this lie is innocent, if in relation to such a concept it is generally possible to speak of degrees of guilt, in comparison with the one with which we are faced in St. Petersburg.
Lie about Montferrand
Since childhood, each of us has in our heads detailed descriptions of how the "Alexandrian pillar" was cut down in the Peturlak quarry, near Vyborg, in a dense forest, then dragged on a platform to the sea, and delivered to Kronstadt on a barge towed by two steamers. The whole process, from the extraction of a monolithic block to its installation on Palace Square, is described in detail, replete with a host of details that, it would seem, are simply physically impossible to invent. And all this is backed up by many engravings, maps, diagrams and even memories of contemporaries, about how it all happened. It would seem, what doubts can there be? Still documented!
But it was not there. An elementary examination of the "Pillar of Alexandria" itself completely refutes everything that we know about its history from official sources. This photo made a lot of noise at the time:
Today it is already difficult to establish who the author of the idea is to simply "play" with light filters in a program for editing graphic images, but the result, as they say, is obvious. The first thought of most researchers was something like this: “Fraud! Montferrand cut down the column not from a monolithic piece of granite, but from small pieces, which he then docked, passing it off as a world record for creating monolithic columns from natural stone."
And it's true. Fraud is evident. The column is not monolithic, it consists of ten parts stacked on top of each other, which greatly facilitated the work of the builders. But … What to do with tons of documents with memoirs, letters, all kinds of notes, replete with information about how many soldiers participated in the rise of the column, how many men, what they were wearing, etc. And what to do with the financial documents that exist in the archives to this day? After all, every ruble spent on construction is confirmed by invoices, receipts and receipts!
But the full extent of the falsification becomes clear only when you understand that the column is not made of natural granite at all! In this photo you can clearly see the cracks on the column body, and … Fingerprint!
Now there is no longer any doubt that the famous Alexandrian pillar was cast on the spot, in stages, from the bottom up, setting in succession ten cylindrical formwork tapering upward. When the formwork was removed, the artificial granite was still wet and easy to dress and sand. Throughout the body of the column, we can observe multiple patches that the builders left when repairing flaws that were opened after removing the formwork.
As for the fingerprint, it is located at the very top, near the capital, and is invisible from the ground with the naked eye. The negligent builder saw cracks appearing in the drying solution, which is actually quite a common thing, and any modern builder will confirm this, he decided to wipe them, but something prevented him from finishing the finishing of the tenth sector of the column to the design view. Maybe the foreman was in a hurry, or maybe it was just laziness, and as is customary with us, he exhaled with cheerful enthusiasm: "So it will do!"
Now that we already know for sure how exactly the Alexandrian Pillar was built, the meaning of Grigory Gagarin depicted on the engraving becomes clear:
Grigory Gagarin. Alexander Column in the woods. 1832 - 1833
That's it, no need to break lances on the question of what is in the picture. This is a temporary workshop where the column was being cast, which was later dismantled to reveal the "Montferrand masterpiece" to the world. And what did they tell us about this?
Rise of the Alexander Column /
Personally, my awareness of the scale of the operation to introduce misinformation about the true origin of the Alexandria Column caused both laughter and horror. Laughter at how we were all easily deceived, and horror at what gigantic resources the counterfeiters possess, who have created entire archives of forged documents. After all, it turns out that for them it cost nothing! But the worst thing is that in this way they, those whom I call progressors, thus unambiguously made it clear that to rewrite and falsify a whole layer of history for them is a mere trifle. What else did they put into our heads in a similar way?
But everything is right before our eyes. Even the technologies for creating columns and other elements of artificial stone are still used. Quietly, peacefully, without noise and dust in St. Petersburg, LLC "Colonna" (INN / KPP: 7839077670/783901001) successfully exists, which successfully uses "lost" technologies when creating building elements from various types of artificial stone, which is indistinguishable from natural monolith.
By the way, this enterprise is a contractor in the production of restoration work in the Hermitage, St. Isaac's Cathedral, and other structures of the Stone Age, which we know as masterpieces of architecture of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. I didn't make a reservation. Indeed, it was the "stone" age, not only with silicon spearheads and primitive scrapers, but the age of the flourishing of construction technologies using technologies of non-fired brick production and casting of building structures and artificial stone decor.
And from this enlightened Stone Age, someone "pulled" us into the Iron Age, in which steel took the main place in human life. Instead of affordable and cheap and at the same time perfect in every way buildings, we were forced to build dull boxes of steel, glass and concrete. What for? Perhaps only in order to make millions of people work for a pittance in mines and factories, i.e. distract them from real life, and force them to do things that are not typical for a person in principle. And at the same time, and divided into corporations.
Some wander from morning to night in the wilderness in geological surveys, in search of deposits of metal ores. Others on all fours carry trolleys with ore in narrow adits, while others load it, transport it and unload it. The fourth melt it, the fifth forge and stamp it, and so on ad infinitum. As the population grows, the question of its employment arises, otherwise it will simply be impossible to control the crowd. This is why simple, low-cost, but extremely effective technologies have gradually been replaced by industrialization.
Of course, the question arose of how to deal with artifacts that already exist in abundance. How to explain their origin to descendants? It's simple. It is enough to declare that hundreds of thousands of slaves worked with chisels and hammers, without receiving salaries for decades. But most of the questions disappear by themselves if you know how exactly megaliths and smaller building details were created. They were cast. Where the need arose, they plastered, and where it was required to apply a pattern, stucco or drawing, they simply painted on wet concrete, sculpted from it and made prints with pre-made cliches. After the surface has completely solidified, the product cannot be distinguished from the cut from natural stone.
Karnak. Egypt.
Hieroglyphs in Egypt are the clearest example of embossing images with ready-made cliches on wet plaster. The masters of Colonna LLC are happy to demonstrate exactly how this is done and how you can create relief patterns and bas-reliefs without much effort. After all, the sculptor does not work with a hammer and chisel, but with a stack, like on plasticine. Therefore, at the end, the result will be ideal, because, unlike a stone cutter, the sculptor does not work with a stone, but with a plastic material that will “endure” as many incorrect movements of the sculptor's hand as needed, because they can be easily corrected immediately:
There are many similar examples, but there are some that do not require expensive expertise. Everything is very clear from the very configuration of the impressions in wet concrete. One such example is presented to the public by the Alternative History Laboratory (ALA):
Scarab. Egypt.
Now fewer and fewer questions remain about the origin of "impossible" "ancient-pre-ancient" artifacts located in the territories of Hindustan and Southeast Asia. For example, in Cambodia.
Angkor Wat. 1-charm
Disappointment. Here is the main word that gnaws at the soul after visiting the ruins of the legendary capital of the Khmer Empire.
Do you know the feeling of bitterness and resentment experienced by a child who has been waiting for the arrival of Santa Claus for a whole year in order to receive the coveted gift, and instead of a gift, he is forced to say a rhyme, standing on a stool, and solemnly handed caramel?
I think you now perfectly understand how a person who has dreamed of adventures in the jungle, inspired by films about Indiana Jones and computer games, whose heroine is Lara Croft, feels, and instead finds himself on an unfinished construction of the early twentieth century.
Yes Yes! Exactly. Big deception breeds big frustration. One day my classmate returned from China, and when asked "How is it?" sounded frenzied: “Wiring! No sane person would ever believe that the Great Wall of China was built millennia ago. What tourists are shown is not even a reconstruction, but a design, and quite modern at that. And what is passed off as a wall that has not been restored is a rampart of piled stones. The wall has no military significance and could never have been, under any circumstances."
Moreover, during two weeks of staying in China, my friend did not manage to see a single antiquity. The entire thousand-year history of China exists only on the pages of travel guides. There is nothing older than the late nineteenth century.
Another friend of mine who visited there told me about the same thing about Angkor Wat.
No adventures, risky transitions through the impenetrable jungle, cutting your way with a machete. No wild animals, snakes or scorpions. Moreover, no aborigines with bows and poisoned arrows. Everything is mundane and prosaic. They brought it to some construction site, they say, the ruins …
Where are the ruins? This is a warehouse of unused building materials! And fresh, recently sawn blocks, they are a maximum of a hundred years old!
Scientists know how to determine the age of a stone. At least, they themselves say so, but so far no one is able to determine the age of its processing. There are no such techniques. Therefore, stones that were sawn at the beginning of the twentieth century with the help of quite modern tools can be safely passed off as antediluvian, no one can check it!
It is amazing that the wooden details have been miraculously preserved in the door and window openings! Do you believe that in the hot and humid climate of Southeast Asia, wood pieces can last for centuries?
Part of the masonry is made at a rather low level of quality, and part is collected from fragments anyhow.
And here is the time to remember how the ancient, mysterious Angkor Wat “lost in the jungle” appeared to the world. Honestly, the "discoverer of ancient Egypt" Jean-Francois Champollion and the "discoverer of ancient Sumer" Henry Austin Layard are probably still rolling with laughter in the afterlife. Why, they were scoundrels who managed to force the whole world to study for centuries what did not exist in nature, write treatises and dissertations, describe the life and customs of peoples that disappeared millennia before the "discovery" of their material culture, but Henri Muot seems to be surpassed both of them.
Anri Muo - Discoverer of * an ancient Khmer pearl *. It was he who gave the world Angkor Wat.
It is hard to believe, but all three are united not only by the fact that they were the founding fathers of the sciences of Egyptology, Sumerology and Khmerology. Despite their different nationalities, they all belong to the same diaspora, all Masons, agents of British intelligence, and their expeditions were funded by the British Government! I think that there is no great need to explain who was the customer of the "discoveries".
As you know, whoever pays a girl for a restaurant dances her. Muo "found" what he was ordered to find, that's all. Here are two conflicting sources:
In addition, the researcher Anatoly Tyurin claims that in the area where the temple complexes of Angkor are located, there is nothing close to the jungle, which is capable of hiding and absorbing something there. And one more funny fact in general gives out all the absurdity of the discovery: at the time when Muo "got lost in the thickets", just a few kilometers away, life was raging in the capital of the local prince who governed the province. In my opinion, not witty.
There are enough facts to assert that the "discovery" is a fake. People lived in Angkor Wat before, live to this day, and no one has ever lost it. With the unleashed company of the birth of science "Khmerology", its construction began. It is obvious. The question arises of what actually appeared to Muo's gaze? I am ready to argue that over hundreds of years ordinary Cambodian guys have continuously changed the appearance of what they actually discovered by chance. Everything that seems mysterious and incomprehensible to a person, he immediately deifies and gives it cult significance.
The fact that the Khmers at one time came to the ruins of an incomprehensible structure does not cause doubts, it is a pity that there are no methods yet to determine what the structure looked like before it was adapted for their own religious needs.
Who can reliably state the time when the bas-reliefs were created? There are a lot of people willing, but who of them is not mistaken, there is no answer. If on the walls of the Reichstag in May 1945 there was an inscription "We are from Bryansk", this does not mean that the Reichstag was built by the Bryansk guys! So who can guarantee that the bas-reliefs are not the fruit of the labors of Hindus - monks who settled on the ruins that they themselves once found?
The carvings are incredibly skillful, and we know for certain that this level of skill was achieved by European stone cutters in the early twentieth century. Everything is adding up, don't you think? Simultaneously with the "restoration" of the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, in Cambodia - the French colony, by the way, exactly the same work was carried out, quite in accordance with the level of those technologies. However, adjusted for the style. And if you remember how such items are created by the masters of Colonna LLC, then there are no questions at all.
And no early Middle Ages are seen in this. Quite normal, modern fittings.
Well, here, there are clearly traces of recent restoration, with the use of mortar, which the builders did not use initially.
My conclusion on this object is as follows:
Something was built a long time ago, using technologies common to Cambodia, Mesoamerica and beyond. Polygonal masonry was used all over the world, as well as the “Swallow's Tail” type block fastening, which I met even on the Talab archipelago in Lake Pskov. The difference between Cambodian staples is only in the material from which they were made. Unlike all others, which were cast from copper, bronze, iron and lead, an unknown metal was used in Angkor Wat, similar in properties to aluminum.
Later, the ruins were adapted for their needs by the Cambodians, and the French helped them to restore them using technologies known in the nineteenth century, the main of which is artificial stone. So there were bas-reliefs in the "Khmer national style" and all kinds of balusters, carved on lathes. And we are offered to believe in grandfather Muo's fairy tales.
Special thanks to Sergey Izofatov for the provided photos from Angkor Wat.
Continued: Part 25
Author: kadykchanskiy