It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ancient UFO Depiction Discovered in Romanian Monastery Painting?

page: 5
62
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: NoNameNeeded
FURTHERMORE

why, if it IS a shield, does it not even protect HALF the building? Is it a shield that only served to protect the tv antenna of the local church??


Well, as this is symbolism, I believe the fact that the shield is above the building is more than enough, as it's just that... symbolism, no need to get into dimensions with regards to the shield's range of cover. You mentioned the artist's accurate depiction of the building architecture, well that the realism side where the artist is showing you a real-life scenario, something you can relate too, and hence made that part of the depiction realistic.

I don't think it's that far fetched to believe this theory instead, rather than believing it is a depiction of a UFO... less plausible really.




posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Sigh,.. if people really want to see a UFO in a depiction such as this... they will see it. Some posters here are so determined to see a UFO, they are almost blinded by their sensationalism. OKAY I have seen some unusual depictions from ancient artifacts and illustrations before, but this is just not one of them.

Now grow up, and accept that it's way more likely to be a symbolic shield than a flying spacecraft....



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
This is from the Tismana monestary - are those guys flying through the start on flying carpets? And, what is the weird thing those two guys are holding? I have no clue, but a weird painting to have in a monestary no doubt.



Bigger version

-MM


edit on 20-10-2014 by MerkabaMeditation because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
Sigh,.. if people really want to see a UFO in a depiction such as this... they will see it. Some posters here are so determined to see a UFO, they are almost blinded by their sensationalism. OKAY I have seen some unusual depictions from ancient artifacts and illustrations before, but this is just not one of them.

Now grow up, and accept that it's way more likely to be a symbolic shield than a flying spacecraft....


seems an odd way to use a shield from the stuff from above, I wonder if the artist new much about warfare, and the correct way to angle a shield from advancing danger, by the looks he thought it better to use it in a contrary way to eons of warfare experience



funbox
edit on 20-10-2014 by funbox because: wolves riding shields in a blizzard of #



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

I don't think it is unlikely that these odd symbolic paintings could be representing dreams or visions. Someone back then who had hallucinations brought on by any number of conditions would not know what to make of it. These types of experiences can be very profound. There was really no concept of mental illness back then. Heck, there is barely a real understanding of it today.
edit on 20-10-2014 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: ISeekTruth101

Allow me to play devil's advocate. What makes you sure certain that it's a symbolic shield? The interpretation of the images on the jetons by some scholars? As I tried to point out earlier, there have been numerous historic accounts of "flying shields" (and in some cases, flying ships) not related to Frank Edward's BS Alexander story.

217 BC "at Arpi round shields (parmas) were seen in the sky"
154 BC "at Compsa weapons (arma) appeared flying in the sky"
104 BC "the people of Ameria and Tuder observed weapons in the sky rushing together from east and west, those from the west being routed."
100 BC "a round shield (clipeus), burning and emitting sparks, ran across the sky from west to east, at sunset."

There are quite a few examples cited by Dr. Richard Stothers in The Classical Journal 103.1 (2007) p.79-92 the text of which can be viewed here.

I also made reference in an earlier post in this thread to an excerpt from Annales Laurissenses about flying shields over a church in 776:

"...and the same day, while they [the Saxons] were preparing for another assault against the Christians who were living in the castle, the glory of God manifested itself above the church inside the fortress. Those who were watching in the square outside - many of which still live today - said that they saw something resembling two large flaming shields of reddish color moving above the church itself." Annales Laurissenses Maiores, in MGH SRG 6, p. 44

Don't be so quick to be dismissive. Just because something may not be a UFO in the traditional sense, with all the typical extraterrestrial connotations, doesn't immediately make it symbolic.
edit on 2014-10-20 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

But is the shield not directly place above the building? Is it not then clear to be symbolic of a shield attempting/ perhaps failing even to guard the property from whatever danger.

The shield/ your supposed flying saucer could have been placed anywhere else on the painting, in the distance, in the corner, so on and so forth.

I honestly think this is a classic case of symbolism existing in a realistic image for the effect of dualism by the artist.

Is this not a far more plausible theory then a flying saucer, I mean..



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


I am not completely dismissive of the theme at hand in this thread. I have come across unusual depictions, that can't be explained such as the aeroplane and submarine illustrations on the hieroglyphs at Egypt...

But I think there is a weak case here for UFO intervention.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
What we really need here in this thread is not a historian or UFOlogist, but a true artist, to understand the artistic and symbolic approach behind the painting. lol



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: ISeekTruth101

It seems to me that you're setting up a false dichotomy — it's either little green men (silly!) or it's purely symbolic (sensible!) — but what about other possibilities? Celestial event? Rare atmospheric phenomena heretofore unknown to science?

Of course, it may in fact be a symbolic representation of God protecting a church or even a modern addition to a very old painting but there is also a well established precedence for "flying shields" in the historical record.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
What we really need here in this thread is not a historian or UFOlogist, but a true artist, to understand the artistic and symbolic approach behind the painting. lol


ever heard of John Berger? an interesting read 'ways of seeing'

also a youtube shortcut
for the lazy eyed



funbox



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
What makes you sure certain that it's a symbolic shield?


What makes you think it depicts a "spaceship" in a time without actual spacecraft or a "flying saucer/UFO" pop culture?



Looking at the image, it's difficult to imagine what the painting could be depicting if not a spacecraft!


Perhaps difficult in a "modern" context, but it's not a modern depiction, is it?



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Fair enough, I acknowledge your points that it may be open to other interpretations - however less likely in my opinion versus the symbolic shield theory

Celestial event? the angle and trajectory as well as the overall relative distance between the object (I think is a shield) wouldn't seem to add up, especially from an artistic point of view if we are depicting realism here (an actual event)

Rare atmospheric phenomena? Hmm possible, but I feel this is also less likely as what are the odds.. we have pretty sophisticated equipment today so I'd imagine we would have picked something up similar by now.. this was only a few hundred years ago right?


Just for the record- I didn't imply the saucer/ green men was silly (merely improbable) with the symbolic theory being more rationale (instead of sensible)
edit on 20-10-2014 by ISeekTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: draknoir2

Spaceship was perhaps a bit sensational but my argument stands. I've demonstrated that there exists numerous accounts of literal objects seen in the sky — not symbolic or metaphorical objects — in the historical record. Going far back into antiquity, men have possessed a concept of flying things (ships, chariots, carpets, stones, entire buildings, etc). In some instances, what was purportedly seen was shield-like in appearance. So why is it more likely that what is depicted is symbolic?



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ISeekTruth101

A shield is certainly symbolic of defense. It's used as such to this day (antivirus software icons for example or game controls) but we have no provenance for this painting so it's not really clear if this is a mythological scene or a depiction of a real historical account.

As for our modern understanding of atmospheric phenomena:

Sprites - reported observations go back at least to the 1800's, not confirmed until 1989.
Blue Jets - predicted in the 1920's, not filmed until 1989.
Earthquake lights - reports going back to at least the 1800's, not filmed until 2007.
Ball lightning - still an unexplained phenomena.

Did you happen to catch the coverage of undulatus asperatus last month?

There's also a host of optical effects from sun dogs and light pillars to things with possible physiological causes like the Miracle of the Sun.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: draknoir2
So why is it more likely that what is depicted is symbolic?


There are other examples.







Doesn't have to be symbolic... just artistic.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
Is this pic in the midst of refurbishing does anyone know? Try as I might I can't keep from noticing how pristine the top portion looks compared to the weathered and decayed bottom.


It's since been fully restored.




posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Looking at the image, it's difficult to imagine what the painting could be depicting if not a spacecraft!
But with some understanding of mythology it is not so difficult. It is a representation of a mythical Roman shield which, in the middle ages, took on the ability to offer protection from lightning. Looks like a pretty stormy sky there.



It does not seem to me like drawn to represent a shield protecting from lightning. If that were what they wanted to express, they would have done that more accurately with some actual lightning bolts, no doubt.

There needs to be some explanation of pictures at the time it was created, why artists in the past never left a note what it represents?



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I think at some point the artist saw a massive, metallic extraterrestrial craft in the sky (as so many others have seen throughout history) and it staggered him to the degree that he put it in his painting.



posted on Oct, 20 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Complete obfuscation... show everyone this picture with no title and I bet they don't say UFO



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join