Model van die Akropolis van Athene

Model van die Akropolis van Athene


Akropolis, Athene (Griekeland) © UNESCO Unesco Wêrelderfeniswebwerf

Uitstekende universele waarde
Kort sintese

Die Akropolis van Athene is die mees opvallende en volledige antieke Griekse monumentale kompleks wat nog in ons tyd bestaan ​​het. Dit is geleë op 'n heuwel van gemiddelde hoogte (156m) wat in die bekken van Athene styg. Die totale afmetings is ongeveer 170 by 350 m. Die heuwel is rotsagtig en steil aan alle kante, behalwe die westekant, en het 'n uitgebreide, amper plat top. Sterk vestingmure omring die top van die Akropolis vir meer as 3300 jaar. Die eerste vestingmuur is gedurende die 13de eeu vC gebou en omring die woning van die plaaslike Mykenese heerser. In die 8ste eeu v.C. het die Akropolis geleidelik 'n godsdienstige karakter verkry met die vestiging van die kultus van Athena, die beskermvrou van die stad. Die heiligdom bereik sy hoogtepunt in die argaïese tydperk (middel van die 6de eeu tot die vroeë 5de eeu vC). In die 5de eeu v.C. het die Atheners, bemagtig uit hul oorwinning oor die Perse, 'n ambisieuse bouprogram uitgevoer onder leiding van die groot staatsman Perikles, bestaande uit 'n groot aantal monumente, waaronder die Parthenon, die Erechtheion, die Propylaia en die tempel van Athena Nike. Die monumente is ontwikkel deur 'n uitsonderlike groep argitekte (soos Iktinos, Kallikrates, Mnesikles) en beeldhouers (soos Pheidias, Alkamenes, Agorakritos), wat die rotsagtige heuwel omskep het in 'n unieke kompleks wat die ontstaan ​​van klassieke Griekse denke en kuns. Op hierdie heuwel is demokrasie, filosofie, teater, vryheid van uitdrukking en spraak gebore, wat tot vandag toe die intellektuele en geestelike grondslag bied vir die hedendaagse wêreld en sy waardes. Die monumente van die Akropolis, wat byna vyf en twintig eeue lank oorleef het deur oorloë, ontploffings, bombardemente, brande, aardbewings, afdankings, ingrypings en veranderings, het aangepas by verskillende gebruike en die beskawings, mites en godsdienste wat mettertyd in Griekeland floreer het.

Kriterium (i): Die Atheense Akropolis is die hoogste uitdrukking van die aanpassing van argitektuur by 'n natuurlike terrein. Hierdie wonderlike samestelling van perfek gebalanseerde massiewe strukture skep 'n monumentale landskap van unieke skoonheid, bestaande uit 'n volledige reeks argitektoniese meesterwerke uit die 5de eeu v.C.: die Parthenon deur Iktinos en Kallikrates met die samewerking van die beeldhouer Pheidias (447-432) die Propylaia deur Mnesikles (437-432) die Tempel van Athena Nike deur Mnesikles en Kallikrates (427-424) en Erechtheion (421-406).

Kriterium (ii): Die monumente van die Atheense Akropolis het 'n buitengewone invloed uitgeoefen, nie net in die Grieks-Romeinse oudheid, waartydens dit as voorbeeldige modelle beskou is nie, maar ook in die hedendaagse tyd. Oor die hele wêreld is neo-klassieke monumente geïnspireer deur al die Akropolis-monumente.

Kriterium (iii): Van mite tot geïnstitusionaliseerde kultus, die Atheense Akropolis, deur sy presisie en diversiteit, lewer 'n unieke getuienis van die godsdienste van antieke Griekeland. Dit is die heilige tempel waaruit fundamentele legendes oor die stad ontstaan ​​het. Vanaf die 6de eeu v.C. het mites en oortuigings aanleiding gegee tot tempels, altare en stemme wat ooreenstem met 'n uiters uiteenlopende kultus, wat ons die Atheense godsdiens in al sy rykdom en kompleksiteit gebring het. Athena is vereer as die godin van die stad (Athena Polias) as die godin van die oorlog (Athena Promachos) as die godin van die oorwinning (Athena Nike) as die beskermende godin van kunsvlyt (Athena Ergane), ens. Die meeste van haar identiteite word verheerlik by die hooftempel wat aan haar opgedra is, die Parthenon, die tempel van die beskermgodin.

Kriterium (iv): Die Atheense Akropolis is 'n uitstekende voorbeeld van 'n argitektoniese ensemble wat belangrike historiese fases sedert die 16de eeu vC illustreer. Eerstens was dit die Mykeense Akropolis (Laat-Helladiese beskawing, 1600-1100 v.C.) wat die koninklike woning insluit en beskerm is deur die kenmerkende Mykeense vesting. Die monumente van die Akropolis is kenmerkende unieke strukture wat die ideale van die klassieke 5de eeu vC ontlok en die toppunt van antieke Griekse argitektoniese ontwikkeling voorstel.

Kriterium (vi): Die Akropolis hou direk en tasbaar verband met gebeure en idees wat in die loop van die geskiedenis nog nooit vervaag het nie. Die monumente daarvan is nog steeds lewendige getuienisse van die prestasies van klassieke Griekse politici (bv. Themistokles, Perikles) wat die stad lei tot die vestiging van demokrasie, die denke van Atheense filosowe (bv. Sokrates, Plato, Demosthenes) en die werke van argitekte (bv. Iktinos, Kallikrates, Mnesikles) en kunstenaars (bv. Pheidias, Agorakritus, Alkamenes). Hierdie monumente is die getuienis van 'n waardevolle deel van die kulturele erfenis van die mensdom.

Die Akropolis van Athene bevat binne sy grense al die belangrikste eienskappe wat die uitstaande universele waarde van die eiendom oordra, as 'n ensemble van unieke prag in 'n uitstekende toestand. Die perfeksie van antieke boutegnieke verseker die weerstand van die monumente teen natuurlike kragte deur die tyd. Ten spyte van die onvermydelike tydskade, vertoon hulle steeds hul skoonheid en dra hulle hul onskatbare artistieke en historiese waarde oor, en behou al die kenmerke wat hulle direk en tasbaar met die gebeure en idees van demokrasie en filosofie verbind. Die wisselvallighede van die geskiedenis tussen die 5de eeu vC en ons dae het onvermydelik groot skade aangerig wat suksesvol aangepak word met die voortgesette herstel- en bewaringswerk, wat die stabiliteit en die leesbaarheid van die monumente verhoog.

Die egtheid van die Acropolis -heuwel, gekroon met die meesterwerke van Griekse klassieke kuns en argitektuur, word goed bewaar. Om die egtheid en strukturele integriteit van die monumente te handhaaf, het 'n geïntegreerde ingryping in 1975 begin en duur vandag voort. Die werke is gebaseer op duidelike teoretiese en wetenskaplike grondslae en volg die beginsels van die Venesiese Handves. Die ingrypings is beperk tot die absoluut noodsaaklike en respekteer die ou strukturele stelsel, terwyl dit in ooreenstemming bly met die beginsel van omkeerbaarheid. Boonop is die tegnieke en gereedskap wat vir die restourasiewerk gebruik word, soortgelyk aan dié van die ou vakmanne, terwyl die wit marmer wat gebruik is vir die voltooiing van die erodeerde argitektoniese elemente, uit dieselfde berg as in die antieke tye (Mount Penteli) ontgin word. Daarom is die restaurasies volledig versoenbaar met die oorspronklike dele van die monumente.

Beskermings- en bestuursvereistes

Die Akropolis werk sedert 1833 as 'n argeologiese terrein, kort na die stigting van die moderne Griekse staat. Deesdae word die eiendom sterk beskerm onder die bepalings van wet nr. 3028/2002 oor die “beskerming van oudhede en kulturele erfenis in die algemeen”. Boonop word die Akropolis en sy omgewing, wat op sigself monumente vorm, beskerm deur wetgewende voorskrifte (Ministeriële Besluite F01/12970/503/25.2.82 met betrekking tot die aanwysing van die buffersone en F43/7027/425/29.1.2004 oor die die aanwysing van die perifere gebied van die stad Athene en verpligte beheer oplê voordat 'n bou- of ontwikkelingspermit binne die grense daarvan uitgereik word). Die feit dat die buffersone van die eiendom self 'n beskermde argeologiese gebied is, tesame met die implementering van die streng wetlike raamwerk - veral vir die stedelike weefsel in die historiese sentrum van Athene sedert 2002 - en die intense monitering deur die bevoegde Ephorate, verseker dat stedelike ontwikkelingsdruk voldoende aangespreek word. Spesiale beskerming word verleen deur die presidensiële besluit nr. 24/2007, wat die gebied Akropolis tot 'n vliegvrye gebied verklaar.

Die eiendom is onder die jurisdiksie van die Ministerie van Kultuur, Onderwys en Godsdienssake, deur die Ephorate of Antiquities van Athene, sy bevoegde streeksdiens, wat verantwoordelik is vir die veiligheid en beskerming van die webwerf, sowel as die implementering van 'n doeltreffende webwerf en besoekers se bestuurstelsel. Boonop implementeer die Ministerie van Kultuur, Onderwys en Godsdienssake die wetgewende bepalings betreffende die beskerming van die eiendom en die perifere gebied (wat ooreenstem met die grense van die antieke stad Athene en sy omgewing) en verseker die visuele integriteit van die terrein. Veral vir die herstel, beskerming en monitering van die eiendom, is 'n adviesliggaam, die Committee for the Restoration and Conservation of the Acropolis Monuments, in 1975 gestig en is verantwoordelik vir die beplanning, leiding en toesig oor die ingrypings. In 1999 het die oprigting van die Αcropolis Restoration Service toegelaat om die akademiese en tegniese personeel te vergroot en het die enorme ontwikkeling van die restourasiewerk moontlik gemaak, onder toesig van die voormelde Komitee en in samewerking met die bevoegde Ephorate. Die uitgebreide navorsingsprogram en die toegepaste metodologie is innoverend op hierdie gebied en dien as verwysingspunt vir ander herstelprojekte. Die finansiële hulpbronne vir die werke op die perseel word verkry uit die staatsbegroting sowel as uit die EU -fondse.

Spesiale aandag is gegee aan die toeganklikheid van die terrein, paaie en besoekersgeriewe, veral vir gestremdes. Verder word noodplanne vir besoekersveiligheid en wetenskaplike studies ter beskerming van die terrein uitgevoer, soos die monitering van aardbewingsaktiwiteite.


Lêer: Model van die Akropolis van Athene in die Stoa van Attalus in Athene, van bo af gesien.jpg

Klik op 'n datum/tyd om die lêer te sien soos dit destyds gelyk het.

Datum TydDuimnaelsketsAfmetingsGebruikerLewer kommentaar
huidige16:25, 13 Junie 20172.336 × 4.160 (2,73 MB) Gregor Hagedorn (bespreking | bydraes) Gebruikersgeskepte bladsy met UploadWizard

U kan nie hierdie lêer oorskryf nie.


'N Blik op antieke Athene deur ongelooflike 3D -modelle (VIDEO)

As u ooit gewonder het hoe die antieke Athene lyk, het die Griekse kunstenaar Dimitrios Tsalkanis ongelooflike 3D-modelle gemaak van die beroemde bakens van die stad, waaronder die wêreldbekende Akropolis, wat u sal laat glo dat u in die tyd teruggetree het.

Tsalkanis het 'n webwerf geloods om die monumente en geboue van Athene vanaf die Mykeense tydperk (1600 v.C.) tot die vroegmoderne tydperk (1833 nC) deur middel van 3D -voorstellings aan te bied.

Dit stel gebruikers in staat om 'n virtuele reis deur Antieke Athene te beleef deur een van die historiese tydperke uit die hoofkieslys te kies. Die tydperke word geskei deur die beduidende veranderinge in argitektuur en stadsbeplanning in ag te neem, en elke periode bevat 'n lys van monumente en gebiede. Die tydperke word verdeel in Mykeense Athene, Argaïese Athene, Klassieke Athene, Hellenistiese Athene, Romeinse Athene, Middeleeuse Athene en Ottomaanse Athene.

Vir elke monument is daar 'n kort beskrywing en ander inligting saam met hul 3D -voorstelling, insluitend 'n panoramiese uitsig op die Akropolis, die Propylaea, die stoa van Braubronia Artemis in 'Π' vorm, die Chalkotheke en die Parthenon. Hierdie monument bevat ook ruïnes van die ouer tempel van Athena en langs hulle, die Erechteum.

Hierdie webwerf is vir opvoedkundige doeleindes geskep en die inhoud word gratis aan almal verskaf.


3. Oprigting van Akropolis -monumente

'N Oorvloed geboue, klein of groot, het een keer op die Acropolis -heuwel gestaan ​​gedurende sy lang geskiedenis. Vandag staan ​​slegs drie ongeskonde: die Parthenon, die tempel van Athena Nike en die Propylaia. Die fondamente van ander ou strukture is egter steeds duidelik sigbaar op die Acropolis -heuwel.

Die meeste van die bogenoemde geboue is direk op natuurlike rots gegrond. In sommige gevalle, hoofsaaklik as gevolg van die onreëlmatige geometrie van die rots op die geselekteerde plek vir die oprigting van elke monumentale struktuur, moes tipiese fondamente van kalkstene egter gebou word. Die besonderhede van die oorblywende monumente op die Akropolis word hieronder bespreek.

3.1 Fundamentbesonderhede van die Parthenon

Die Parthenon is in die middel van die Acropolis -heuwel gebou. Dit staan ​​bo -op die rots. Slegs driekwart van die monument beskik oor fondamente. Die volgende punte beskryf die grondliggende besonderhede van die Parthenon:

  1. Kalksteen -ashlers is gebruik vir die fondament, wat veral vir die konstruksie daarvan ontgin is.
  2. Die hoogste fondamentdiepte is 20 m in die suidoostelike hoek.
  3. Die stigting bestaan ​​uit 22 kursusse. Die onderste baan bestaan ​​uit 'n enkele rek en die tweede baan bestaan ​​uit 'n enkele ry kopstukke. Die derde baan het vier rye brancards, en die vierde baan het twee rye koppe. Hierdie volgorde is weer gevolg vanaf die vyfde kursus tot die 19de kursus.
  4. Die drie topkursusse volg die gewone beginsel. Die derde baan van bo het slegs kopstukke, die tweede baan van bo af het net rekkies, en die eerste baan het ook net kopstukke.
  5. Die binnekant van die fondament is nie toeganklik nie. Die meeste navorsers glo egter dat dit waarskynlik 'n volledige klipblok is.

Vanuit 'n geotegniese ontwerpoogpunt maak hierdie tipe fondament wat op die natuurlike kalksteen gesteun is, hoë dravermoë en neerslag moontlik deur die werking van die strukturele vragte.

Die fondamentontwerp skep 'n stewige basis om die vertikale boonste vragte veilig te dra. Boonop verseker die droë metselwerk 'n relatief buigsame fondamentbasis wat hoë energie kan absorbeer wat voortspruit uit die voortplanting van seismiese golwe.

3.2 Fundamentbesonderhede van die Propylaea

Die Propylaea bestaan ​​uit 'n hoofgebou en twee vleuels aan die noordwestelike en suidwestelike kant. Die suid-westelike vleuel volg die rotsrug waarop dit staan. Die noordwestelike vleuel, die Pinakotheke genoem, is laer as die hoofgebou geleë en staan ​​op 'n hoë podium. Die Pinakotheke bestaan ​​uit 'n reghoekige kamer en 'n stoep met drie Doriese kolomme wat na die suide kyk. Die volgende punte beskryf die grondbesonderhede van die Propylaea:

  1. Die fondament van die noordwestelike gebou is met groot kalkblokke op die gelyke rots gebou, bestaande uit geïsoleerde mure met opvulling.
  2. Aan die westekant is die fondament deel van die Acropolis -muur. Dit word egter beskou as die podium van die Pinakotheke.
  3. Die ou opvulling van die podium was redelik dig en het die struktuur van groot mislukkings verhoed. Die sloping van die Middeleeuse strukture en die intensiewe argeologiese opgrawings wat die vulsel met los grond vervang het, het egter bygedra tot die ophoping van reënwater in die fondament. Daarom het die kans op 'n toename in horisontale aarddruk toegeneem.
  4. Aan die suidekant is die sigbare deel van die gebou 'n luukse perseel en verteenwoordig dit die hoofgedeelte van die Pinakotheke. Die buitenste fondamentblokke van hierdie gedeelte is gemaak van marmer en vorm 'n spesiale vorm van 'n muur. Hierdie muur is gevorm in die voetstuk aan die voorkant en is gevul met groot blokke aan die agterkant.

Vandag ly die Pinakotheke aan strukturele vervormings met 3 cm algemene vestiging en klein horisontale vervorming wat in die noordwand waargeneem word. Daar is ook 'n algemene vestiging van 3 tot 7 cm, uitwaartse verplasing, vate en helling van die westelike muur waargeneem.

In 1955 is 'n betonvloer gebou om die westelike deel van die noordwestelike vleuel te beveilig. Die opgrawingsvulsel is verwyder en putte gevul met gewapende beton is geskep. Onlangs is die vloer herstel met koolstofveselversterking.

3.3 Fundamentbesonderhede van die Athena Nike -tempel

Die tempel van Athena Nike lê aan die suidwestelike rand van die Akropolis. Die kern van die tempelfondasie is 'n sterk toring van 'n muur. Die toringmuur is met kalksteenmure gebou en die binneste deel daarvan is vol grond. Die tempel is diensbaar afgebreek en die lede daarvan is gebruik om 'n verdedigingsmuur rondom die Akropolis te bou. Dit is tot dusver drie keer herstel (1835–1844, 1935–1940, 2003–2010). Tydens die onlangse herstel is vloer onder die tempel aangebring in die vorm van 'n roesvrye staalrooster oor die kelderruimte.

Die Akropolis is geleë in Athene, Griekeland.

Dit is in die 5de eeu gebou.

Die Parthenon is gebou uit 'n messelgrond. Kalksteen is gebruik om die fondament te bou.

Die Acropolis -heuwel bestaan ​​uit die mergels en sandstene van die rots van Athene.


Feite oor Athene

Die woord 'Akropolis' is die vereniging van twee Griekse woorde: Acro + Poli. 'Acro' beteken die buitenste punt en 'Poli' beteken stad. Die Akropolis van Athene is die belangrikste vesting van Griekeland. Dit lê op 'n rots met 'n hoogte van 156 meter (512 voet) bo seespieël. Daar is 'n afgrond aan drie kante en slegs die westekant is toeganklik. Die geskiedenis van die Akropolis van Athene gaan ver terug. Oorblyfsels uit die vroeë Neolitiese era is bo -op en aan die kante van die rots gevind. Gedurende die Myceniese tydperk (1600-1100 v.C.) is die Akropolis versterk met 'Pelasgiese mure'. Hierdie mure bestaan ​​uit enorme plate van 6 meter (20 voet) breed (destyds was die Akropolis die middelpunt van die stad en die koningsbasis). Rondom die paleis was die huise van edeles. As daar vyande was, sou elke burger daarheen vlug vir beskerming.

Namate die jare verbygegaan het, het die stad gegroei en die vorm daarvan verander (die koning is nie meer bo -op die Akropolis geleë nie). Gedurende hierdie tyd word die Akropolis verander in 'n geestelike sentrum (met die naam Heilige Rots) met heilige tempels daar rondom.

Ons bereik die historiese tydperk, waar ons nuutgeboude heiligdomme en die fondamente van die tempel van 'Athena Poliad' (gebou rondom 570 v.C.) onder die Karitat standbeelde. Die beelde van hierdie tempel kan vandag gevind word in die museum van die Akropolis. Argeoloë verklaar dat daar gedurende die tydperk meer geboue, tempels en standbeelde op die Akropolis was. Almal is egter omstreeks 480 v.C. deur Persiese hordes vernietig.

Die kontemporêre vorm van die 'Heilige Rots' het begin ná die Persiese Oorloë omstreeks 450-420 v.C. toe Perikles die heer van Athene was. Pericles het drie topkunstenaars van daardie tyd (Phidias, Iktinos en Kallikratis) 'n groot taak opgedra. Die taak was om alles wat deur die Perse vernietig is, te herbou en om weer die Heilige Rots te versier. Phidias was die algemene toesighouer en Iktinos met Kallikratis was die argitekte. Dit was die tyd van die 'Propilea' (ingang van die Akropolis), die tempel van Athena Nike, die Erechtheion met sy beroemde Karyatiede en laaste die Parthenon wat beskou word as een van die mooiste geboue van alle tye. Die Parthenon is gebou ter ere van 'Athena Parthenos' wat die stad Athene van die Perse gered het. Dit is gebou met Penteliese marmer en was in Doriese styl. Die buitekant was versier met baie beeldhouwerke wat almal uit Phidias en sy leerlinge bestaan ​​het. Binne-in die tempel het die goud-ivoor standbeeld gestaan ​​van die godin Athena wat in haar regtergodin Nike gehou het. Buite die tempel en in die rigting van die 'Propilea' het die bronsbeeld van 'Athena Promachos' gestaan, wat ook 'n skepping van Phidias was. Pericles het nie daarin geslaag om die voltooiing van alles wat hy gesien het, te sien nie. Hy het eers die Parthenon en die 'Propilea' gesien, en alles is na sy dood voltooi.

Tot die Romeinse Ryk het almal die Akropolis gerespekteer. Toe die Christendom as godsdiens die oorhand gekry het, het die Parthenon 'n kerk geword met die naam 'Madonna the Athenian'. Dieselfde gebeur met die Erectheion. Tydens die bewind van die Franken het die Parthenon 'n Katolieke kerk geword en tydens die Ottomaanse verowering van Griekeland is dit omskep in 'n moskee. Gedurende daardie tyd het die Turke die tempels gebruik as 'n opbergplek vir buskruit. Tydens die Venesiese beleg in 1656 en 1687 is 'n groot deel van die Akropolis vernietig deur ontploffings. Die Akropolis is vrygestel van die Turkse besetting en het in 1833 na die Grieke teruggekeer. Sedertdien vind daar opgrawings en bewaring van die ou terrein plaas.


Freud oor die Akropolis

Die tekste wat in hierdie afdeling van die publikasie gekies word, werk soos 'n dominospel. Hulle nooi ons uit om die roetes te volg wat die hoofrolspelers van die kultuurgeskiedenis van Suid -Europa en verder bepaal. Saam vorm hulle 'n moontlike portret van die Suide en die artistieke, politieke of filosofiese inisiatiewe wat dit gevorm het.

Le Corbusier voor 'n stukkende kolom
aan die westekant van die Parthenon, 1911
© Fondation Le Corbusier, Parys

Sigmund Freud was 80 jaar oud toe hy sy vriend Romain Rolland 'n reisgeheue in die vorm van 'n oop brief aangebied het ter geleentheid van die skrywer se 70ste verjaardag op 29 Januarie 1936. In die brief beskryf Freud 'n ongelooflike en spookagtige ervaring wat hy meer as dertig jaar vroeër gehad het, vroeg in September 1904, terwyl hy saam met sy broer Alexander in Athene besoek het.

Freud was 'n groot bewonderaar van Romain Rolland, 'n sentrale figuur vir sy generasie. Hulle begin 'n korrespondensie in 1923. In 'n brief van 20 Januarie 1936 wat aan Arnold Zweig in Haifa gerig is, skryf hy:

Soveel vir Moses en monoteïsme. [...] Ek is baie gesoek om iets te skryf vir Romain Rolland se 70ste verjaardag. [...] Ek het daarin geslaag om 'n kort analise te skryf van 'n gevoel van vervreemding wat my in 1904 op die Akropolis in Athene oorwin het, iets baie intiems. [...] Maar kombineer die twee spreuke oor die skelm wat meer gee en die pragtige meisie wat nie meer sal gee as wat hulle het nie [sic] en jy sal my situasie sien.[1]

'N Nuwe Franse vertaling van hierdie brief is onlangs in Marlène Belilos gepubliseer Freud en ses voyages, Michel de Maule, Parys, 2010, pp. 83-96. Die brief is hier volledig herdruk.

'N Versteuring van die geheue op die Akropolis

Ek is dringend daarop aangedring om 'n skriftelike bydrae te lewer tot die viering van u sewentigste verjaardag, en ek het baie moeite gedoen om iets te vind wat u op enige manier waardig is en my bewondering vir u liefde vir die waarheid kan uitdruk jou moed in jou oortuigings en vir jou liefde en goeie wil teenoor die mensdom of, weer eens, iets wat my dankbaar kan bewys aan jou as skrywer wat my soveel oomblikke van verheffing en plesier besorg het. Maar dit was tevergeefs. Ek is tien jaar ouer as jy, en my produksievermoë is op 'n einde. Al wat ek kan vind om u te bied, is die gawe van 'n verarmde wese wat 'beter dae' gesien het.

U weet dat die doel van my wetenskaplike werk was om lig te werp op ongewone, abnormale of patologiese manifestasies van die gees, dit wil sê, om hulle terug te spoor na die sielkundige kragte wat daaragter werk en om die meganismes aan die werk aan te dui. Ek het begin om dit op myself te probeer, en daarna het ek dit op ander mense toegepas en uiteindelik, met 'n gewaagde uitbreiding, op die mensdom as 'n geheel. Gedurende die afgelope paar jaar het 'n soortgelyke verskynsel, wat ek self 'n generasie gelede in 1904 beleef het, en wat ek nog nooit verstaan ​​het nie, by my opgekom. Ek het eers nie gesien hoekom nie, maar uiteindelik het ek besluit om die voorval te ontleed, en ek bied u nou die resultate van die ondersoek aan. In die proses moet ek u natuurlik vra om meer aandag te gee aan sommige gebeurtenisse in my privaat lewe as wat hulle andersins sou verdien.

'N Versteuring van die geheue op die Akropolis

Elke jaar, teen daardie tyd, teen die einde van Augustus of begin September, het ek saam met my jonger broer op 'n vakansiereis vertrek, wat 'n paar weke sou duur en ons na Rome of na 'n ander streek van Italië of 'n deel van die Middellandse See. My broer is tien jaar jonger as ek, so hy is op dieselfde ouderdom as jy, en dit was 'n toeval wat my nou eers opgeval het. In daardie spesifieke jaar het my broer vir my gesê dat sy besigheidsaangeleenthede hom nie sou toelaat om lank weg te wees nie: 'n week sou die meeste wees wat hy kon regkry, en ons sou ons reis moes verkort. Daarom het ons besluit om via Trieste na die eiland Korfu te reis en die paar dae van ons vakansie daar deur te bring. By Trieste het hy 'n sakekennis wat daar gewoon het, gebel, en ek het saamgegaan. Ons gasheer het vriendelik navraag gedoen oor ons planne, en toe hy hoor dat dit ons voorneme is om na Korfu te gaan, het ons dit ten sterkste aanbeveel: 'Wat laat u daaraan dink om hierdie tyd van die jaar daarheen te gaan? Dit sal te warm wees om iets te doen. Dit is beter om na Athene te gaan. Die Lloyd -boot vaar vanmiddag, dit sal u drie dae daarheen neem om die stad te sien en u op die terugreis sal haal. Dit sou meer aangenaam en die moeite werd wees. ”

Toe ons wegstap van hierdie besoek, was ons albei in 'n merkwaardige depressiewe gees. Ons het die voorgestelde plan bespreek, was dit eens dat dit redelik onuitvoerbaar was en het niks anders gesien as probleme met die uitvoering daarvan nie; ons het boonop aangeneem dat ons nie in Griekeland mag land sonder paspoorte nie.

Ons het die ure wat verloop het voordat die Lloyd -kantore oopgemaak het, in 'n ontevrede en onbesliste gemoedstoestand deur die stad geloop. Maar toe die tyd aanbreek, het ons na die toonbank gegaan en ons gange vir Athene geboek asof dit 'n vanselfsprekendheid was, sonder om die minste te dink oor die vermeende probleme en inderdaad sonder om die redes vir ons besluit met mekaar te bespreek. Sulke gedrag, moet erken word, was die vreemdste. Later het ons besef dat ons die voorstel aanvaar het dat ons onmiddellik en maklik na Athene moet gaan in plaas van Korfu. Maar, indien wel, waarom het ons die interval deurgebring voordat die kantore in so 'n sombere toestand geopen is en niks anders as hindernisse en moeilikhede voorsien nie?

Toe ek uiteindelik, die middag na ons aankoms, op die Akropolis staan ​​en my oë op die landskap rig, kom daar skielik 'n verrassende gedagte in my gedagtes: 'Dit alles bestaan ​​dus regtig, net soos ons op skool geleer het!' Om die situasie meer akkuraat te beskryf, was die persoon wat die opmerking uitgedruk het, baie skerper as wat gewoonlik opvallend was, verdeeld van 'n ander persoon wat kennis geneem het van die opmerking en albei was verbaas, maar nie deur dieselfde ding nie. Die eerste gedra hom asof hy, onder die invloed van 'n ondubbelsinnige waarneming, verplig was om te glo in iets waarvan die werklikheid tot dusver twyfelagtig was. As ek 'n effense oordrywing wil maak, was dit asof iemand, langs Loch Ness, skielik die vorm van die beroemde monster raakgesien wat op die strand gestrand was, gevind het dat hy tot die toelating gedryf word: 'So dit bestaan ​​regtig – die seeslang waarin ons nog nooit geglo het nie! ” Die tweede persoon, aan die ander kant, was met reg verbaas, want hy was nie bewus daarvan dat die werklike bestaan ​​van Athene, die Akropolis en die landskap daar rondom ooit twyfelagtig was nie. Wat hy verwag het, was eerder 'n uitdrukking van vreugde of bewondering.

Nou sou dit maklik wees om te redeneer dat hierdie vreemde gedagte wat by my op die Akropolis opgekom het, net daarop dui dat iets met eie oë na iets anders is, anders is as om dit te hoor of te lees. Maar dit sou 'n baie vreemde manier van kleding bly, 'n oninteressante alledaagsheid. Of sou dit moontlik wees om aan te hou dat dit waar was dat ek as skoolseun gedink het ek was oortuig van die historiese werklikheid van die stad Athene en sy geskiedenis, maar dat die voorkoms van hierdie idee op die Akropolis presies getoon het dat in my bewusteloosheid het ek nie daarin geglo nie, en dat ek eers nou 'n oortuiging verkry het wat "tot by die onbewuste gekom het".

'N Uitleg van hierdie aard klink baie diep, maar dit is makliker om te beweer as om boonop te bewys, dit is baie oop vir teoretiese gronde. Nee. Ek glo dat die twee verskynsels, die depressie in Triëst en die idee oor die Akropolis, noue verband hou. En die eerste hiervan is makliker verstaanbaar en kan ons help om die tweede te verduidelik.

Die ervaring in Triëst was, sal opgemerk word, ook maar net 'n uitdrukking van ongeloof: 'Ons gaan Athene sien? Uit die vraag! – dit sal heeltemal te moeilik wees! ” Die gepaardgaande depressie stem ooreen met 'n spyt dat dit nie ter sprake was nie: dit sou so heerlik gewees het. En nou weet ons waar ons is. Dit is een van die gevalle van 'te goed om waar te wees' wat ons so gereeld teëkom. Dit is 'n voorbeeld van die ongeloof wat so gereeld ontstaan ​​as ons verras word deur 'n goeie nuus, as ons hoor dat ons byvoorbeeld 'n prys gewen het, of 'n wenner getrek het, of as 'n meisie verneem dat die man met wie sy het in die geheim het haar ouers verlof gevra om sy adresse aan haar te betaal.

As ons die bestaan ​​van 'n verskynsel vasgestel het, is die volgende vraag natuurlik oor die oorsaak daarvan. Ongelooflikheid van hierdie aard is natuurlik 'n poging om 'n stukkie werklikheid te verwerp, maar daar is iets vreemds daaraan. Ons moenie verstom staan ​​as 'n poging van hierdie aard was gerig op 'n stuk werklikheid wat dreig om ontevredenheid te veroorsaak nie: die meganisme van ons verstand is, so te sê, beplan om op dieselfde manier te werk. Maar waarom moet so 'n ongeloof ontstaan ​​in iets wat inteendeel beloof om 'n hoë mate van plesier te bring? Regtig paradoksale gedrag! Maar ek onthou dat ek by 'n vorige geleentheid die soortgelyke geval behandel het van mense wat, soos ek dit stel, 'deur sukses verwoes' is. As 'n reël word mense siek as gevolg van frustrasie, omdat die noodsaaklikheid of begeerte nie vervul is nie. Maar by hierdie mense is die teenoorgestelde die geval dat hulle siek word, of selfs heeltemal stukkend raak, omdat 'n oorweldigend kragtige wens van hulle vervul is. Maar die kontras tussen die twee situasies is nie so groot soos dit aanvanklik lyk nie.

Wat in die paradoksale geval gebeur, is bloot dat die plek van eksterne frustrasie deur 'n interne ingeneem word. Die lyer laat homself nie geluk toe nie: die innerlike frustrasie beveel hom om vas te hou aan die eksterne. Maar hoekom? Omdat – so die antwoord in 'n aantal gevalle uitloop, kan 'n mens nie verwag dat Fate 'n mens so goed sal gee nie. In werklikheid nog 'n voorbeeld van 'te goed om waar te wees', die uitdrukking van 'n pessimisme waarvan 'n groot deel by baie van ons 'n tuiste vind. In 'n ander reeks gevalle, net soos by diegene wat deur sukses verwoes word, vind ons 'n gevoel van skuld of minderwaardigheid, wat vertaal kan word: "Ek is sulke geluk nie waardig nie, ek verdien dit nie." Maar hierdie twee motiewe is in wese dieselfde, want die een is slegs 'n projeksie van die ander. Want, soos lank reeds bekend, is die lot wat ons verwag om ons so sleg te behandel, 'n materialisering van ons gewete, van die erge super-ego in ons, self 'n oorblyfsel van die strafmaatreël van ons kinderjare.

Ek dink dit verklaar ons gedrag in Trieste. We could not believe that we were to be given the joy of seeing Athens. The fact that the piece of reality that we were trying to repudiate was to begin with only a possibility determined the character of our immediate reactions. But when we were standing on the Acropolis the possibility had become an actuality, and the same disbelief found a different but far clearer expression. In an undistorted form this should have been: “I could really not have imagined it possible that I should ever be granted the sight of Athens with my own eyes – as is now indubitably the case!” When I recall the passionate desire to travel and see the world by which I was dominated at school and later, and how long it was before that desire began to find its fulfilment, I am not surprised at its after-effect on the Acropolis I was then 48 years old. I did not ask my younger brother whether he felt anything of the same sort. A certain amount of reserve surrounded the whole episode and it was this which had already interfered with our exchanging thoughts at Trieste.

If I have rightly guessed the meaning of the thought that came to me on the Acropolis and if it did in fact express my joyful astonishment at finding myself at that spot, the further question now arises why this meaning should have been subjected in the thought itself to such a distorted and distorting disguise.

The essential subject-matter of the thought, to be sure, was retained even in the distortion – that is, incredulity: “By the evidence of my senses I am now standing on the Acropolis, but I cannot believe it.” This incredulity, however, this doubt of a piece of reality, was doubly displaced in its actual expression: first, it was shifted back into the past, and secondly it was transposed from my relation to the Acropolis on to the very existence of the Acropolis. And so something occurred which was equivalent to an assertion that at some time in the past I had doubted the real existence of the Acropolis – which, however, my memory rejected as being incorrect and, indeed, impossible.

The two distortions involve two independent problems. We can attempt to penetrate deeper into the process of transformation. Without for the moment particularising as to how I have arrived at the idea, I will start from the presumption that the original factor must have been a sense of some feeling of the unbelievable and the unreal in the situation at the moment. The situation included myself, the Acropolis and my perception of it. I could not account for this doubt I obviously could not attach the doubt to my sensory impressions of the Acropolis. But I remembered that in the past I had had a doubt about something which had to do with this precise locality, and I thus found the means for shifting the doubt into the past. In the process, however, the subject-matter of the doubt was changed. I did not simply recollect that in my early years I had doubted whether I myself would ever see the Acropolis, but I asserted that at that time I had disbelieved in the reality of the Acropolis itself. It is precisely this effect of the displacement that leads me to think that the actual situation on the Acropolis contained an element of doubt of reality. I have certainly not yet succeeded in making the process clear so I will conclude by saying briefly that the whole psychical situation, which seems so confused and is so difficult to describe, can be satisfactorily cleared up by assuming that at the time I had (or might have had) a momentary feeling: “What I see here is not real.” Such a feeling is known as a “feeling of de-realisation”. I made an attempt to ward that feeling off, and I succeeded, at the cost of making a false pronouncement about the past.

These de-realisations are remarkable phenomena, which are still little understood. They are spoken of as “sensations”, but they are obviously complicated processes, attached to particular mental contents and bound up with decisions made about those contents. They arise very frequently in certain mental diseases, but they are not unknown among normal people, just as hallucinations occasionally occur in the healthy. Nevertheless they are certainly failures in functioning and, like dreams, which, in spite of their regular occurrence in healthy people, serve us as models of psychological disorder, they are abnormal structures. These phenomena are to be observed in two forms: the subject feels either that a piece of reality or that a piece of his own self is strange to him. In the latter case we speak of “depersonalisations” de-realisations and depersonalisations are intimately connected. There is another set of phenomena which may be regarded as their positive counterparts – what are known as fausse reconnaissance, déià vu, déjà raconté etc., illusions in which we seek to accept something as belonging to our ego, just as in the de-realizations we are anxious to keep something out of us. A naïvely mystical and unpsychological attempt at explaining the phenomena of “déjà vu” endeavours to find evidence in it of a former existence of our mental self.

Depersonalisation leads us on to the extraordinary condition of “double conscience”, which is more correctly described as “split personality”. But all of this is so obscure and has been so little mastered scientifically that I must refrain from talking about it any more to you.

It will be enough for my purposes if I return to two general characteristics of the phenomena of de-realisation. The first is that they all serve the purpose of defence they aim at keeping something away from the ego, at disavowing it. Now, new elements, which may give occasion for defensive measures, approach the ego from two directions – from the real external world and from the internal world of thoughts and impulses that emerge in the ego. It is possible that this alternative coincides with the choice between de-realisations proper and depersonalisations. There are an extraordinarily large number of methods (or mechanisms, as we say) used by our ego in the discharge of its defensive functions. An investigation is at this moment being carried on close at hand which is devoted to the study of these methods of defence: my daughter, the child analyst, is writing a book upon them. The most primitive and thoroughgoing of these methods, “repression”, was the starting point of the whole of our deeper understanding of psychopathology. Between repression and what may be termed the normal method of fending off what is distressing or unbearable, by means of recognising it, considering it, making a judgement upon it and taking appropriate action about it, there lie a whole series of more or less clearly pathological methods of behaviour on the part of the ego. May I stop for a moment to remind you of a marginal case of this kind of defence? You remember the famous lament of the Spanish Moors, “Ay de mi Alhama”, which tells how King Boabdil received the news of the fall of his city of Alhama. He feels that this loss means the end of his rule. But he will not “let it be true”, he determines to treat the news as “non arrive”. The verse runs:

las cartas echó en el fuego,

[“Letters had reached him telling that Alhama was taken. He threw the letters in the fire and killed the messenger.”]

It is easy to guess that a further determinant of this behaviour of the king was his need to combat a feeling of powerlessness. By burning the letters and having the messenger killed he was still trying to show his absolute power.

The second general characteristic of the de-realisations – their dependence upon the past, upon the ego’s store of memories and upon earlier distressing experiences which have since perhaps fallen victim to repression – is not accepted without dispute. But precisely my own experience on the Acropolis, which actually culminated in a disturbance of memory and a falsification of the past, helps us to demonstrate this connection. It is not true that in my schooldays I ever doubted the real existence of Athens. I only doubted whether I should ever see Athens. It seemed to me beyond the realms of possibility that I should travel so far – that I should “go such a long way”. This was linked up with the limitations and poverty of our conditions of life in my youth. My longing to travel was no doubt also the expression of a wish to escape from that pressure, like the force which drives so many adolescent children to run away from home. I had long seen clearly that a great part of the pleasure of travel lies in the fulfilment of these early wishes – that it is rooted, that is, in dissatisfaction with home and family. When first one catches sight of the sea, crosses the ocean and experiences as realities cities and lands which for so long had been distant, unattainable things of desire – one feels oneself like a hero who has performed deeds of improbable greatness.

I might that day on the Acropolis have said to my brother: “Do you still remember how, when we were young, we used day after day to walk along the same streets on our way to school, and how every Sunday we used to go to the Prater or on some excursion we knew so well? And now, here we are in Athens, and standing on the Acropolis! We really have gone a long way!” So too, if I may compare such a small event with a greater one, Napoleon, during his coronation as Emperor in Notre Dame, turned to one of his brothers – it must no doubt have been the eldest one, Joseph – and remarked: “What would Monsieur notre Père have said to this, if he could have been here today?”

But here we come upon the solution of the little problem of why it was that already at Trieste we interfered with our enjoyment of the voyage to Athens. It must be that a sense of guilt was attached to the satisfaction in having gone such a long way: there was something about it that was wrong, that from earliest times had been forbidden. It was something to do with a child’s criticism of his father, with the undervaluation which took the place of the overvaluation of earlier childhood. It seems as though the essence of success was to have got further than one’s father, and as though to excel one’s father was still something forbidden.

As an addition to this generally valid motive there was a special factor present in our particular case. The very theme of Athens and the Acropolis in itself contained evidence of the son’s superiority. Our father had been in business, he had had no secondary education, and Athens could not have meant much to him. Thus what interfered with our enjoyment of the journey to Athens was a feeling filial piety. And now you will no longer wonder that the recollection of this incident on the Acropolis should have troubled me so often since I myself have grown old and stand in need of forbearance and can travel no more.


These 3-D Models Offer a Digital Glimpse Into 3,000 Years of Athens’ History

The Golden Age of Athens is long over. But thanks to photographer-animator Dimitris Tsalkanis, you can still stroll through the ancient city during its most prosperous time—at least in digital form.

A native of Greece’s (modern) capital, Tsalkanis has spent the past 13 years recreating the long-gone chapters of Athens’ history with 3-D modeling software, reports Sarah Rose Sharp for Hyperallergic. The product, an aptly-named website called Ancient Athens 3D, is an immersive experience unto itself, featuring the city’s monuments and landmarks through seven periods that date as far back as 1200 B.C., during the Mycenaean era, up through the early modern period, during the 19th century A.D.

In crafting the site, which first launched in 2008, Tsalkanis let waves of architecture guide the delineations of his seven featured eras, whose start and end dates overlap with—but don’t perfectly match—those in textbooks, according to the Greek City Times. Selecting one of the periods from the site’s menu takes the user to a page with a brief history lesson and links to individual monuments, rendered with each era’s architectural additions.

The website takes a bit of an open-source approach, adding tweaks or updates every time new data on Athens’ ancient archaeology surfaces, all in service of maintaining as much accuracy as possible. That’s impressive, considering the artist does all of this as a side hustle: The project began as, and remains, a “personal creation, without any official backing whatsoever,” Tsalkanis tells Hyperallergic. “I had no previous experience on 3-D and I started experimenting in my spare time.”

Writing on the website, Tsalkanis is upfront about the limitations of his approach. Perfect reconstructions, he says, are “impossible” given how much of the city’s ancient architecture has been lost to time. But in broad strokes, the city’s biggest changes are made clear. The acropolis—the city’s ancient citadel—has its roots in the Mycenaean era, when the first Greek tribes arrived to settle the region, and has housed a regular rotation of monuments and palaces ever since. As the civilization grew, builders forged a wall around Athens, adding temples to honor the gods, including the Parthenon, the remains of which still stand in the city today.

Conflict, too, shaped the city, according to the website. Each time Athens changed hands in the wake of battle, conquest or foreign occupation, its architecture was retooled—or simply destroyed. A series of clicks is all it takes to trace how the city’s built presence waxes and wanes through the Greco-Persian War, the ages of Roman and Ottoman occupation, and more, all in stunning detail. As Tsalkanis explains to Hyperallergic, the site contains more than a history lesson: It also offers a glimpse into what daily life might have been like many millennia ago.

𔄛-D is an amazing tool to visualize the past and to simulate what the people who lived 2,500 years ago might have experienced while walking around Athens,” he says. “[It] gives us the opportunity to experiment in every way possible without harming the actual monuments.”

Since its debut, Ancient Athens 3D has been freely available as an educational tool. The site maintains a presence on YouTube, Facebook and Instagram. Tsalkanis may even turn the site into an app someday, giving history buffs the chance to take the ancient city with them wherever they might go.


Acropolis, Athens

The Acropolis of Athens and its monuments are universal symbols of the classical spirit and civilization and form the greatest architectural and artistic complex bequeathed by Greek Antiquity to the world. In the second half of the fifth century bc, Athens, following the victory against the Persians and the establishment of democracy, took a leading position amongst the other city-states of the ancient world. In the age that followed, as thought and art flourished, an exceptional group of artists put into effect the ambitious plans of Athenian statesman Pericles and, under the inspired guidance of the sculptor Pheidias, transformed the rocky hill into a unique monument of thought and the arts. The most important monuments were built during that time: the Parthenon, built by Ictinus, the Erechtheon, the Propylaea, the monumental entrance to the Acropolis, designed by Mnesicles and the small temple Athena Nike.

Description is available under license CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0

Acropole d'Athènes

L'Acropole d'Athènes et ses monuments sont le symbole universel de l'esprit et de la civilisation classiques, et forment le plus extraordinaire ensemble architectural et artistique légué par la Grèce antique au reste du monde. Dans la seconde moitié du Ve siècle avant JC, Athènes, suite à sa victoire sur les Perses et à l'établissement de la démocratie, prit un ascendant sur les autres Cités-États du monde antique. Durant cette période, alors que l'art et la pensée florissaient, un groupe exceptionnel d'artistes mit en &oeliguvre les plans ambitieux de Périclès, homme d'État athénien, et transforma, sous la direction éclairée du sculpteur Phéidias, la colline rocheuse en un monument unique d'esprit et d'arts. Les principaux monuments furent érigés à cette époque : le Parthénon, construit par Ictinus, l'Érechthéion, les Propylées, l'entrée monumentale de l'Acropole, dessinés par Mnesiclès et le petit temple d'Athéna Nikê.

Description is available under license CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0

أكروبول أثينا

يمكن اعتبار أكروبول أثينا الذي يجسد الحضارات والأساطير والأديان التي ازدهرت في اليونان منذ أكثر من ألف سنة والذي ترتفع فيه أربعة من أكبر تُحف الفن اليوناني الكلاسيكي، وهي معبد أثينا البارتينون ومدخل الأكروبول بروبيلي ومعبد أركيتون ومعبد الإلهة نيكي، عنصراً بارزاً في التراث العالمي.

source: UNESCO/ERI
Description is available under license CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0

source: UNESCO/ERI
Description is available under license CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0

Афинский Акрополь

Акрополь, содержащий напоминание о более чем тысячелетнем развитии цивилизаций, мифологии и религии, процветавших в Греции, является местом нахождения четырех величайших шедевров классического древнегреческого искусства &ndash Парфенона, Пропилей, Эрехтейона и храма Афины Паллады, которые могут рассматриваться, как символы всемирного наследия.

source: UNESCO/ERI
Description is available under license CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0

Acrópolis de Atenas

La acrópolis de Atenas y sus monumentos son el símbolo universal de la civilización y el espíritu clásico, y forman el más extraordinario conjunto arquitectónico y artístico legado por la Grecia antigua al mundo entero. En la segunda mitad del siglo V a.C., después de su victoria en la guerra contra los persas y el establecimiento de la democracia, Atenas ocupó una posición dominante con respecto a las demás ciudades-estados de la Antigüedad. En este periodo de florecimiento del pensamiento y las artes, un grupo excepcional de artistas ejecutó los ambiciosos planes del estadista ateniense Pericles y transformó, bajo la inspirada dirección del escultor Fidias, un montículo rocoso en un monumento excepcional del arte y el espíritu. Fue en esta época cuando se erigieron los principales monumentos del sitio: el Partenón, construido por Ictino, los Propíleos, la entrada monumental de la Acrópolis diseñada por Mnesicles, el Erecteion y el pequeño templo de Atenea Niké.

source: UNESCO/ERI
Description is available under license CC-BY-SA IGO 3.0

アテネのアクロポリス
Acropolis, Athene

De Acropolis van Athene en haar monumenten zijn universele symbolen van de klassieke geest en beschaving. Ze vormen de grootste architectonische en artistieke complexen uit de Griekse Oudheid. In de eeuw na de overwinning tegen de Perzen en de stichting van de democratie, kreeg Athene een leidende positie. In die periode werden de ambitieuze plannen van de staatsman Pericles uitgevoerd. Onder leiding van de beeldhouwer Pheidias veranderde de rotsachtige heuvel in een uniek monument voor het denken en de kunst. De belangrijkste gebouwen uit die periode zijn het Parthenon, het Erechtheion, de Propyleeën, de monumentale entree tot de Acropolis en de kleine tempel van Athene Nike.

  • English
  • Frans
  • Arabic
  • Chinese
  • Russies
  • Spanish
  • Japanese
  • Dutch

Outstanding Universal Value

Brief synthesis

The Acropolis of Athens is the most striking and complete ancient Greek monumental complex still existing in our times. It is situated on a hill of average height (156m) that rises in the basin of Athens. Its overall dimensions are approximately 170 by 350m. The hill is rocky and steep on all sides except for the western side, and has an extensive, nearly flat top. Strong fortification walls have surrounded the summit of the Acropolis for more than 3,300 years. The first fortification wall was built during the 13th century BC, and surrounded the residence of the local Mycenaean ruler. In the 8th century BC, the Acropolis gradually acquired a religious character with the establishment of the cult of Athena, the city’s patron goddess. The sanctuary reached its peak in the archaic period (mid-6th century to early 5th century BC). In the 5th century BC, the Athenians, empowered from their victory over the Persians, carried out an ambitious building programme under the leadership of the great statesman Perikles, comprising a large number of monuments including the Parthenon, the Erechtheion, the Propylaia and the temple of Athena Nike. The monuments were developed by an exceptional group of architects (such as Iktinos, Kallikrates, Mnesikles) and sculptors (such as Pheidias, Alkamenes, Agorakritos), who transformed the rocky hill into a unique complex, which heralded the emergence of classical Greek thought and art. On this hill were born Democracy, Philosophy, Theatre, Freedom of Expression and Speech, which provide to this day the intellectual and spiritual foundation for the contemporary world and its values. The Acropolis’ monuments, having survived for almost twenty-five centuries through wars, explosions, bombardments, fires, earthquakes, sackings, interventions and alterations, have adapted to different uses and the civilizations, myths and religions that flourished in Greece through time.

Criterion (i):The Athenian Acropolis is the supreme expression of the adaptation of architecture to a natural site. This grand composition of perfectly balanced massive structures creates a monumental landscape of unique beauty, consisting of a complete series of architectural masterpieces of the 5th century BC: the Parthenon by Iktinos and Kallikrates with the collaboration of the sculptor Pheidias (447-432) the Propylaia by Mnesikles (437-432) the Temple of Athena Nike by Mnesikles and Kallikrates (427-424) and Erechtheion (421-406).

Criterion (ii): The monuments of the Athenian Acropolis have exerted an exceptional influence, not only in Greco-Roman antiquity, during which they were considered exemplary models, but also in contemporary times. Throughout the world, Neo-Classical monuments have been inspired by all the Acropolis monuments.

Criterion (iii): From myth to institutionalized cult, the Athenian Acropolis, by its precision and diversity, bears a unique testimony to the religions of ancient Greece. It is the sacred temple from which sprung fundamental legends about the city. Beginning in the 6th century BC, myths and beliefs gave rise to temples, altars and votives corresponding to an extreme diversity of cults, which have brought us the Athenian religion in all its richness and complexity. Athena was venerated as the goddess of the city (Athena Polias) as the goddess of war (Athena Promachos) as the goddess of victory (Athena Nike) as the protective goddess of crafts (Athena Ergane), etc. Most of her identities are glorified at the main temple dedicated to her, the Parthenon, the temple of the patron-goddess.

Criterion (iv): The Athenian Acropolis is an outstanding example of an architectural ensemble illustrating significant historical phases since the 16th century BC. Firstly, it was the Mycenaean Acropolis (Late Helladic civilization, 1600-1100 BC) which included the royal residence and was protected by the characteristic Mycenaean fortification. The monuments of the Acropolis are distinctly unique structures that evoke the ideals of the Classical 5th century BC and represent the apex of ancient Greek architectural development.

Criterion (vi): The Acropolis is directly and tangibly associated with events and ideas that have never faded over the course of history. Its monuments are still living testimonies of the achievements of Classical Greek politicians (e.g. Themistokles, Perikles) who lead the city to the establishment of Democracy the thought of Athenian philosophers (e.g. Socrates, Plato, Demosthenes)and the works of architects (e.g. Iktinos, Kallikrates, Mnesikles) and artists (e.g. Pheidias, Agorakritus, Alkamenes). These monuments are the testimony of a precious part of the cultural heritage of humanity.

The Acropolis of Athens contains within its boundaries all the key attributes that convey the property’s Outstanding Universal Value, as an ensemble of unique splendor in excellent condition. The perfection of ancient building techniques ensured the resistance of the monuments to natural forces through time. Despite the unavoidable damage of time, they still display their beauty and convey their inestimable artistic and historic value, preserving all the features that directly and tangibly associate them with the events and ideas of Democracy and Philosophy. Inevitably, t he vicissitudes of history between the 5th century BC and our days have caused extensive damage that is being successfully addressed with the ongoing restoration and conservation works, which increase both the stability and the legibility of the monuments.

Authenticity

The authenticity of the Acropolis hill, crowned with the masterpieces of Greek Classical art and architecture, is well preserved. In order to maintain the authenticity and structural integrity of the monuments, an integrated intervention begun in 1975 and continues today. The works are based on clear theoretical and scholarly foundations, and follow the principles of the Venice Charter. The interventions are limited to the absolutely necessary and respect the ancient structural system, while remaining consistent with the principle of reversibility. Moreover, the techniques and the tools used for the restoration works are similar to those of the ancient craftspeople, while the white marble used for completing the eroded architectural elements is quarried from the same mountain as in antiquity (Mt. Penteli). Therefore, the restorations are fully compatible with the original parts of the monuments.

Protection and management requirements

The Acropolis has been operating as an archaeological site since 1833, shortly after the establishment of the modern Greek State. Nowadays, the property is strongly protected under the provisions of Law No 3028/2002 on the “Protection of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage in general”. Moreover, the Acropolis and its surroundings, which constitute monuments op sigself, are protected by legislative decrees (Ministerial Decrees F01/12970/503/25.2.82 concerning the designation of its buffer zone and F43/7027/425/29.1.2004 concerning the designation of the peripheral zone of the city of Athens and imposing obligatory control before issuing any building or development permit within its boundaries). The fact that the property’s buffer zone is a protected archaeological area itself, along with the implementation of the strict legal framework – especially for the urban tissue in the historical centre of Athens since 2002 – and the intense monitoring by the competent Ephorate, ensure that urban development pressures are adequately addressed. Special protection is provided by the Presidential Decree No 24/2007, which declares the Acropolis area a no-fly zone.

The property is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Culture, Education and Religious Affairs, through the Ephorate of Antiquities of Athens, its competent Regional Service, which is responsible for the site’s security and protection, as well as the implementation of an efficient site and visitors’ management system. Moreover, the Ministry of Culture, Education and Religious Affairs implements the legislative decrees concerning the safeguarding of the property and its peripheral zone (which corresponds to the boundaries of the ancient city of Athens and its surroundings) and ensures the visual integrity of the site. Especially for the restoration, protection and monitoring of the property, an advisory body, the Committee for the Restoration and Conservation of the Acropolis Monuments, was founded in 1975 and is responsible for planning, directing and supervising the interventions. In 1999, the establishment of the Αcropolis Restoration Service allowed to increase the academic and technical personnel and made the immense development of the restoration works possible, under the supervision of the aforementioned Committee and in cooperation with the competent Ephorate. The extensive research programme and the methodology implemented are innovative in this field and act as a reference point for other restoration projects. The financial resources for the works on the site are derived from the State budget as well as from European Union funds.

Special attention has been paid to the accessibility of the site, to pathways and to visitor facilities, especially for disabled people. Furthermore, emergency plans for visitor security and scientific studies for the protection of the site, such as monitoring of earthquake activity, are being carried out.

The New Acropolis Museum (inaugurated in 2009), in which most of the original sculptural and/or architectural pieces of the monuments are conserved, the on-going project “Unification of the Archaeological Sites of Athens”, as well as the long-term conservation works will enhance the protection and the presentation of the property.



The Acropolis with the Parthenon at the top with the odeion of Herodes Atticus under it.

Probably nothing represents Greek architecture better than the Acropolis. The most famous building is the Parthenon. The Acropolis has been in continuous use by the inhabitants of Athens, as a religious center, from the Mycenaean period (1500-1100 BC) until it was Christianized in 429 AD. The original Acropolis was destroyed by the Persians in 479 BC and what we see today was built under the leadership of Perikles 30 years later. He envisioned Athens as the leader of a panhellenic confederacy, as an ideal democracy, and above all as a city with magnificent edifices, temples, public buildings, and theatres. The primary building material was marble from quarries nearby. The marble was very strong and could hold very large loads of weight.

Certainly the most significant and ambitious project of Perikles involved the construction of the Acropolis. With Pheidias as adviser, the plans were soon laid. First and foremost would be the Parthenon, a large temple to goddess Athena Parthenos, then would follow the monumental entrance to the sacred rock, the Propylaia. Third in order would be the small temple of Athena Nike. And finally would come the temple to Athena Polias, the Erechtheion. This would replace the "Old Temple", burned down by the Persians.

The photo to the right shows the Parthenon on top of the Acropolis. Below is the theater or odeion of Herodes Atticus.

Historian John Julius Norwich said, "The Parthenon enjoys the reputation of being the most perfect Doric temple ever built. Even in antiquity, its architectural refinements were legendary, especially the subtle correspondence between the curvature of the stylobate, the taper of the naos walls and the entasis of the columns." Entasis refers to the slight bulge of the columns as they rise. Many of its proportions approximate the golden ratio, in which the sides are a deur a+b where (a+b)/a = a/b = &phi (phi). The internal Doric colonnades are in two tiers to support the roof, a total of 19 pillars. It has 46 exterior Doric columns with the corner columns slightly larger in diameter.

The Erechtheion consists of three almost independent sections (the main temple, the north extension and the porch of the Karyatides) with three separate roofs, and is built at four different levels. Ionic columns of three different dimensions and proportions are used. Use is also made of Korai as supports for the entablature - the famous Karyatides. The temple is divided into two main parts, the east devoted to Athena Polias and the west to Poseidon-Erechtheus. The Erechtheion is the finest expression of the Ionic order, yet the building loses none of the classical Attic architecture.

On Athena's birthday, once every four years, the Panathenaic games would be held. The vase to the left was given to the winner of one event of the games. This ceramic prize, amphora, has Athena in archaic form on one side, wearing a helmet, and carrying a shield and spear. On the other is a representation of the event for which the vessel was awarded, in this case a foot race.

Most of the architecture on the Acropolis was built several hundred years before Paul's visit described in Acts 17. It is assumed it was well maintained since the Athenians were so diligent in worshipping their gods. He would have had a good view of the Acropolis from where he preached. Below is an aerial view of the Acropolis and Mars Hill (Areopagus).


Move mouse over image to see where Mars Hill is.

The photo to the right is the Areopagus (Mars Hill or Aeros Hill) viewed from the Acropolis.

The Areopagus refers to either the location, or the council that meets there. In Greek mythology, Mars killed the son of Neptune and was tried for the murder here before twelve gods as judges. The Areopagus was the location where the judges convened who had jurisdiction of capital offences. The court itself was called Areopagus after the place where it met. It may be that when Paul was taken to the Areopagus, he was actually being tried.

16 While Paul was waiting for them in Athens , he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols . 17 So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there. 18 A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, "What is this babbler trying to say?" Others remarked, "He seems to be advocating foreign gods." They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. 19 Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus , where they said to him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? 20 You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we want to know what they mean." 21 (All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.)

22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship , I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD . Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you. 24 "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28 'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.' 29 "Therefore since we are God's offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone--an image made by man's design and skill . 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."

32 When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, "We want to hear you again on this subject." 33 At that, Paul left the Council . 34 A few men became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others. - Acts 17:16-34

Again in this passage, verse 26, we see God's plan in time.

Paul used what was relevant to the Athenians to preach about Jesus. He used their art as an illustration. The Greek poets Paul quotes from are Epimenides the Cretan (600 BC) and Aratus (310 BC).


Hoogtepunte

Perched atop a hill of limestone, an ancient she-warrior, an all-knowing seer, and staunch revelator watches over her realm. A physical statement of mythological beginnings and intellectual prowess. If you have ever visited modern-day Athens, at any time, from almost anywhere in the city, you can look up and view the ancient site of the Acropolis with its beauty of the past, the Parthenon, a focal feature in this celebrated Greek city.

On this live online tour from home, join a local Athenian guide as they take you from their home to yours and into the centuries where a small village in Greece became the seat of western culture. Through mythological tales of Gods, and more importantly for.

Perched atop a hill of limestone, an ancient she-warrior, an all-knowing seer, and staunch revelator watches over her realm. A physical statement of mythological beginnings and intellectual prowess. If you have ever visited modern-day Athens, at any time, from almost anywhere in the city, you can look up and view the ancient site of the Acropolis with its beauty of the past, the Parthenon, a focal feature in this celebrated Greek city.

On this live online tour from home, join a local Athenian guide as they take you from their home to yours and into the centuries where a small village in Greece became the seat of western culture. Through mythological tales of Gods, and more importantly for this subject, Goddesses, come to learn of our ancient past and present purpose. Your guide, who has a storied background in archeology, will share with you the most important aspects of Athens through the use of visuals, video, and expert storytelling.

Dive into the lesser-known stories of well-known features, hear the challenges faced in modern times - a missing woman, invading Persians, unbridaled propaganda, and the overall struggle of “order of chaos” on this expertly crafted storytelling adventure.

This tour is an excellent opportunity to be inspired for a future trip, relive the memory of a former, or for anyone with a passion for travel and culture.

Expressing gratitude to your guide through gratuities has never been easier - now featuring an online tipping portal!


Kyk die video: Yanni Live Concert 2006 convert by monopolyzzz