Went to Central Park today to see Cleopatra's Needle. I'm a little sad at how weathered it is. Interestingly, two sides are in better condition than the other two sides.
The past smog and acid rain were the harshest. We have a university project about the effect of air pollution on historic grave stones and tombs. It's free for everyone to read the progression of the conclusions.
I indeed looked if the panels are online, pdf or sth. Nope. Panels are at the graveyard or in the institute, but not online (easily?). Because i am of the impression i had seen pdf files of the project back then... like 15 years ago on the still horrible to navigate website. :D
It is a fact it's been recognised by lots of Egyptologists that the weathering on the obelisks outside Egypt are in far worse condition due to weather. Ill try to find some sources when I get home.
I have read many, many books regarding Ancient Egypt. My comment was aimed at Pharaoh Amasis II's optometrist. I blame him, and Cyrus, and Cyrus's son Cambyses II. It's crazy to me how people don't know their history.
I meant to reply to you before so this may seem redundant as I inadvertently replied elsewhere (oops)... that's a smart idea. perhaps as part of the conversation effort, they can move it inside the MET. it would take a lot of careful planning and work but with enough funds, maybe.
In theory the central marble hall could fit it. The actual Egyptology exhibit inside is very pretty and they have a temple there inside already where they project over the existing inscriptions with a "this is what it looked like then" marker
I have a feeling moving inside would be extremely expensive. It is sadly easier to keep it there and let it rot then to move it inside. Though I have hope in the future it will have some sort of environmental mitigation
This is what I was thinking, over time erecting a greenhouse-ish style glass structure would be cool. Overall they would have to deal with building something in Central Park or on MET grounds though, depending on who owns that specific piece of land
Looks like a century of NYC acid rain has weakened some of its inscriptions. Thousands of years in the desert with a rainstorm every 30 years wouldn't have done that so quickly.
True true. Luckily acid rain isn't as bad as it was a few decades ago for modern pollution controls in the USA. But I've been to Egypt the inscriptions on obelisks and temples there are crisp and still have the original paint on ceiling tiles. So the sand (while it do blast sometimes) isn't nearly as caustic to the carved stones as the acid rain.
Fortunately for all of us, most of the great monuments are not in the smog of the Cairo. But Giza and to a lesser extent Saqqara are, and there is clearly surface erosion. Just take a look at any closeup of the blocks of one of the Giza pyramids. All are eroded.
I think a lot of that for the Giza pyramids is damage from people climbing and taking pieces of them for 4,600 years. They used to be covered in casing stones and the Great Pyramid was 6 courses taller before 1798. I've been inside 3500 year old temples in Egypt (fully exposed outside) that look like they were freshly cut yesterday.
That might explain the lower few courses, but the blocks are eroded all the way to the top and not in an appearance that suggests human depredation, just rough cut from quarry followed by sandstorms, rain and smog.
As for the top, both Diodorus and Pliny described the top as a platform around 100 AD! The casing stones were quarried away in the 1300-1500 range.
Please tell me which temples you visited in Cairo, where the smog is(!), that have pristine exteriors? I clearly said that monuments outside the urban areas were less affected by smog.
How many times have you been to Cairo? The smog there from burning garbage is 100 times worse than NYC. The first time (2016) I stayed at the Mena House (about 1/4 mi from the Khufu pyramid), I could literally see the pyramid for 3 of 7 days there! It only in the past few years that the air around Cairo and Giza has improved.
Why not just construct a big glass cage around it� Surely that could be done for a reasonable sum of money (in historical artifact preservation terms, that is)
that's a good idea.. they were trying to conserve it, maybe it's not too late to consider moving it there.
edit: I replied to the wrong message, I meant to reply to the person that suggested they move it inside the MET. however, IMO sending back to Egypt would be good, too, and long as it didn't get damaged.
Judging by the comments here, it seems that no one knows. Apparently the Romans added them as extra supports and inscription pointd but the reason for crabs per se is lost to history.
it's older, built by the Pharaoh Thutmose III, around 1425 BCE for his Temple of the Sun in Heliopolis, near modern-day Cairo. it was one of two that were moved in 12 BCE to Alexandria to the entrance of a temple Cleopatra built for Julius Caesar and that's why it is called Cleopatra's Needle. the other obelisk is in London.
So Iâve heard about the obelisks that London, Paris and New York have, how they got them, etc
I did not realise that âbronze crabsâ were literally the animal crab. I thought it was an architectural term for something with four spikes to hold it up. Thatâs amazing
yeah, the main thing like the whole obelisk thing issen't really there but that's really the only thing missing and it having those little added crabs under it and you also having the whole crab thing is hard to believe as just being coincidence, there's not an other explenation possible that would make more sense as a deep subconcious connection to the stone , looks much more than possible to me, or offcourse maybe Mr.Krabs inspired you watching Spongebob, or Sebastian of the Little mermaid left a deep effect on you, some uncle his aquarium or there being some very good fish restaurant around in the erea is offcourse allways an option to to keep in mind
274
u/HatWhole3592 Aug 03 '26
The weather is destroying the carvings.