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.

 

UFO's in European paintings - Did the creators have access to secret knowledge?

page: 2
27
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: filthyphilanthropist Ez 11:24 Rev 4:2 It's in the context that it is used
edit on 11-3-2017 by TheKestrel04 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-3-2017 by TheKestrel04 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Harte



Average people don't have any inkling of Art History, not that they should. Anyone that believes these are UFO depictions should stop for a minute and realize that, when these works were painted, people could write. It's well known among Art Historians what these "UFOs" actually represent. After all, people did write about them.

Harte


I don't have a belief about these depicting UFO's, but I haven't seen enough evidence to believe they are not, either.

But the people writing about the events at the time weren't really knowledgeable enough to make it clear for us either. Describing black and red balls battling in the sky for two days.... or wheels flying in the sky....strange balls that were observed traveling, changing directions, or sitting still in the sky....

How have you come to the conclusion that these events can be clearly identified now, through the writings?



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma
If you refer to Glaser's woodcut of the skies over Nuremberg, Glaser's own narrative states he wasn't there to see it. It was done 5 or 6 years after the fact.

That same narrative describes it as a warning from God. Glaser's art represents the thoughts of the people of Nuremberg who witnessed the phenomenon. He did other woodcuts with a similar narrative. You can see many of them here.

There are clear representations of Sun dogs in the Nuremberg woodcut.

The woodcut appears in a "broadsheet," a type of flyer for the common people, not unlike the "Weekly World News" or the "National Enquirer." Note:

I encourage people to understand the genre of the 15th century woodcut, or “broadsheet”, which was the early predecessor of today’s newspaper, actually it is more accurate to say they were the predecessors to today’s Enquirer because they contained the news of the weird or violent, and they had no problem stretching the truth to sell a few copies, and nearly a quarter of them are astronomical phenomenon like auroras which are interpreted as signs from God, which I’m sure made them sell more copies.


Source

It's an interesting picture, but only reflects the religious beliefs of the time.
My remarks you responded to were broader in that they included all the other so-called "UFOs in Artwork" which are completely understood (and were written about) to be religious symbolism.

Harte



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 07:59 AM
link   
1:11

If nobody else says it, I have to:

"Dogs can't look up!"



edit on 12-3-2017 by Hecate666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Personally, I am not as interested in the woodcut (nor most of these paintings,) as I am in the writings. It seems to me that none of those mentioned were done by actual witnesses, but were based on hearsay.

What I repeatedly find a little frustrating in these cases, (including in the link provided) is that you start reading with mentions of having "debunked" certain interpretations, but by the time you get to the end, you realize they didn't prove anything! That the real focus of the piece was simply to point out possible alternatives to the notion to be debunked.

Basically, it's like the conversation you hear between theists and atheists- one argues "this is the truth", the other argues, "you have no proof that that is the truth". (with no proof that it isn't).

I kinda get excited about finding the solutions to some mysteries- and it's such a let down.

So potential explanations have been added to the pot, great. No one has proved anything, despite all their confident claims.


Hecate- My dog looks up! He looks up at me, he looks up at birds in trees, and he looks up at low flying planes (hubbies friends that like to tickle us with flybys). Is he special or something??
edit on 12-3-2017 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: SirBlackKnight

I think it is pretty safe to say that our past has been lied about. There is gaps in our history and specific teachings in schools are not thorough. Which points me to the idea that those that do know our past, do their best to promote the ideals to not question what is being told. We have reached a point in time now where we have no information other then what is in books, granted the internet but the internet is funnelled too.

There is clearly a UFO presence in our past and I always have and always will deem religious texts as misrepresentations of basically other life coming to this planet. They always talk about visitations, beings coming from the skies. This is not by chance that all texts speak like this. With paintings to back this up, like the ones you posted just show the clear interjection these beings have had in our past.

Why does the system wish to laugh at us when we point this out? Maybe due to the fact that they are still working side by side them and the idea of you knowing of this, would put any plan at risk.

For better, or for worse. I do not know.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: seattlerat
Your bottom painting has been in my mind since I was young. It started my belief in ufos. Thats not a star, thats not an asteroid or the sun or the moon. this is obviously a flying craft. TO paint that, took time and effort and its not on accident



Yes and not to mention the guy looking up at it. This is a crazy painting with implications.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheAlleghenyGentleman




Unfortunately, most paintings with UAP's can be pigeon holed into some sort of religious context if tried hard enough.

The symbology is actually quite consistent.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Since they were painted centuries after the "actual" events, they can't exactly be considered accurate representations. Can they? Not eyewitness interpretations, are they? They are illustrations of stories from long ago, illustrations sanctioned by the Church.



Ok yea and right. But in the painting with Mary, an annunciation, like many today believe UFOs, ships ect can be crossed over in interpretation as stars, angels ect. They may simply be trying to make a "modern" phenomena fit the context of old. The persons or person in the craft on looking the foretold event, keepers ect.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   


I don't think any of us can decide exactly what the artist was trying to depict...something real or something symbolic.

I remember going on art trips to galleries and having the teacher ask us what we thought the artist was "feeling" when they painted certain pieces.
I used to think "They're thinking that people are stupid and will hand over large amounts of money for this crap."
You can't climb into the artist's . and see what they were thinking at the time.

But I do see a painting that is very detail oriented.
The face is realistic, the light and shadow is meant to be realistic...her clothing, the landscape and the cherub/angel figures are also realistic.
Why would the artist not depict what is in the sky as 'realistic'?

It's obviously not the sun, it's not the right colour.
There are details that make it look almost like a submarine, and there is a circle (portal window?) on the side.

Perhaps the artist really was depicting something that had been seen.
Just a thought.
jacy



edit on 12-3-2017 by jacygirl because: un petite faux pas



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: jacygirl

Yea but this isnt modern art.....toss some paint on canvas willy nilly and claim deep abstract something or other.

This painting has a known context and known historical persons and events are represents which narrows it down considerably if you know what you are looking at. Knowing that also narrows down the possibility of meaning with the "flying craft" represented.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Logarock

I am well aware of all that.
I was not referring to modern art.

"...narrows down the possibility of meaning..." does not necessarily lead to a correct conclusion though.

Some people want to see a spiritual phenomena being depicted by the object in the sky (and it may be).
I'm just saying that the details made it look like a flying craft (and detail seemed to matter to the artist).



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: jacygirl


I don't think any of us can decide exactly what the artist was trying to depict...something real or something symbolic.


Well, they don't call it an Annunciation picture for nothing.

Have you tried reading the source text for this painting? Annunciation pictures are a sort of congeries of the verses that describe the event. That's why you always get a guy with a dog.

Also, there are a LOT of different Annunciation pictures. Some are more obvious than others, as time went by they became more abstract. That's why a lot of UFO-claimers pick this one. You might take a stroll through the history of Annunciation paintings, you'll see that when they first became popular that thing in the sky was much more obviously supposed to be an opening in the sky with angels looking down on the shepherd.



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Logarock




They may simply be trying to make a "modern" phenomena fit the context of old.

Of course they are. Obviously. Remove the context and viola! Spaceship!



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Logarock




They may simply be trying to make a "modern" phenomena fit the context of old.

Of course they are. Obviously. Remove the context and viola! Spaceship!


I didn't see a viola in the picture - is it hidden?

Sorry, being sarcastic. It's a commissioned painting that is intended to show God watching over the event, end of. I don't understand how so many people misconstrue such paintings as being eye witness events.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: jacygirl

Yea but this isnt modern art.....toss some paint on canvas willy nilly and claim deep abstract something or other.

This painting has a known context and known historical persons and events are represents which narrows it down considerably if you know what you are looking at. Knowing that also narrows down the possibility of meaning with the "flying craft" represented.


Returning to the above mentioned detail, the one that was interpreted as an UFO, we see that it is to be found in a great many "Nativities" of the '400 and '500. It is but the announcement to the shepherds, as told in St. Luke's Gospel:
«...and there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field keeping watch over their flock by night. And lo, an angel of the Lord come upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear ye not: for behold!, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you was born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord...»
The announcement to the shepherds as appears in the Nativity of Vincenzo Foppa (Detroit Institute of Arts)...

An entire page of this website covers that one painting and includes comparable details in other paintings.

Harte



posted on Mar, 15 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
This one has always been my favorite





top topics



 
27
<< 1   >>

log in

join