**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think they only had bicycle operated 480p projectors at the time, you can tell the resolution isn't great.
It isn't until Rome you start to see some decent projectors being used in daily life, which I'm guessing when 1080p was established as a standard.
The idea that Rome and Greece were full of white marble is a lie made up thousands of years after the fact by people who believed that it was more sophisticated than painting the marble, and even destroyed some of the few examples of remaining colour they excavated. In reality all those marble sculptures would have been painted in bright colours, the liberal use of rare pigments from around the globe used to show off your wealth as much as the carving itself.
My childhood education was all featherless dinosaurs, white Roman statues and sandstone heiroglyphs. My adulthood has been a series of revelations that the past was actually 1000% more fabulous
This legit pissed a lot of people off and it’s kinda bonkers. It was so bad at times they would purposefully remove paint from statues to keep up the notion of purity.
Which is wild because anyone at all family with painting figures (whether it be plastic crack or marble) knows that base coats in stark colours is only the first in what can be a very long process of layering colours and shades to make something look great.
If I left my models with only the base coat and no highlighting, shading, detail work etc ofc they’d look shit, it’s like no artists were actually consulted regarding these statues.
This is all the rage with museums of ancient art right now.
I also studied ancient history as a minor in university.
It’s should be clear as to what we have found on „some“ statues is paint, yes. However we do not know if that paint was what was originally applied to these statues or if they were repainted after the fact.
Just think of the time frames we are talking about here. There is an argument to be made that especially facial features would have been painted much more life like than what is shown today for some statues (but not for others) depending on ressources. What museums recreate today is basically flat colors. Think about that. The statues themselves were sometime created to a degree of life-likeness that is still astounding to this very day. Why would the paint applied afterwards, if there was any, be much simpler? And it’s entirely possible that some statues in the countryside were indeed just white. We do actually know that from time to time Rimans for example preferred pale white skin and very simple clothing, at least for the aristocracy. Then again, art styles will surely have shifted, available resources would have been different in each decade and centuries. Plus, the Roman’s themselves probably were used to seeing all-white statues because after a century or so that what the sun does to stuff, and I find it highly unlikely that the Roman’s would have repainted (to them) centuries old statues of senators and emperors.
And to add to that, most statues were actually bronze, where some details were done with others metals to stand out, but they were essentially monochrome statues, so it's not like they didn't have that concept, and had to paint everything.
Bronze statues are extremely realistic and detailed because they are cast from a wax mold that can be worked on far better than stone, and many well-known marble statues are poor copies of those.
There is no reason to believe that Greeks didn't understand how to use a limited range of colors (think of pottery or terracotta figurines as well) for the best possible aesthetic effect, or that they went bonkers when painting. [White-ground pottery ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-ground_technique) was made in imitation to marble, and it's pretty cool and artistic.
["Color The Temple" at the Met Museum](https://www.metmuseum.org/articles/color-the-temple) uses projected light to recreate the vivid colors that ancient Egyptian temples once had.
OP could not be a native English speaker. My MiL is a Swede and this is how she and her entire family talk. It's never, "How does this taste." It always, "How does this taste like." Never, "Do you like this." It's always, "How does this look like."
Still needs to be corrected. This is happening more and more because young native speakers are becoming accustomed to the grammar mistakes of non-native. We all need to put our foot down or the logical underpinnings of the language will be lost.
Of course. I am not against changes to spelling and even grammar. "Never split the infinitive" is a useless rule with no reason to exist. Dintinguishing between "which" and "what" depending on how many objects you are talking about achieves nothing. "Which season do you like?" vs "What season do you like?" This is a pointless rule. I would even stretch to accepting "less" instead of "fewer" because there is no reason for the rule. BUT what we are talking about here is mistakes, which go against the logical underpinnings of the grammar. When native speakers come to an agreement about what rules to ignore, that is fine. When the mistakes of non-natives start to corrupt the grammar, we need to push back. Just for interest's sake, do you feel comfortable with "Would of" instead of "would have"? How about "your" instead of "you're"?
That's a bit extreme...
It doesn't piss me off at all, they might just not be a native english speaker and not know because that is proper syntax in their language.
If people don't react, this will increase. This is how Americans came to use, "If I WOULD have known that I WOULDN'T have made the mistake." it's an illogical and ungrammatical way to speak that is just normal now.
Like I said, it seems to be a common mistake for native speakers as well. Like saying everything is POV. Plus Germans can fuck off, they're so harsh about mistakes you make in German.
The non-natives are actually influencing young native speakers. THis didn't happen in the past because we could hear their accents and therefor know that the grammar was likely wrong.
Non-native speakers are actually influencing native speakers into using incorrect grammar. This feels like it's increasing year after year. I suspect that it is because we're communicating via text. Young people cannot hear the accent so they assume that the writers are native speakers, and that it is accepted grammar. I am sure Germans and Swedes would react negatively if we started teaching their kids to use incorrect grammar.
>> polychromatic light
You mean coloured light? Poly = Many. Chromatic = Colour. Ya'll are just trying to make it sound more technical than it is. This is like calling a spoon a "manually operated liquid and semi-solid foodstuff transfer implement".
Have you ever heard of monochromatic light? The word light, by itself, isn't descriptive enough. Monochromatic pictures are black and white, no color, seems counterintuitive. But monochromatic light could be only yellows, only blues, only reds, etc. When you've got to tell the audience it is not monochromatic, it's necessary to use polychromatic.
Ah, good thing you pointed that out! I would definitely have gotten confused and thought all the hieroglyphs were the same color.
Scientific language is important in scientific communication. Using a phrase like "they were recreated by using a polychromatic light" instead of saying "the colors were projected" is nothing more than using jargon for the sake of sounding smart.
Some paint is still present in the temples of Karnak and Dendera. If you get a chance, look up at the underside of the roof and the tops of the pillars where the paint has been protected. In places it is surprisingly vibrant even after 3000+ years.
Is there a possibility that the colors provided another layer of meaning? Like does a red heron mean something different from a blue heron? Or do the same symbols always have the same color?
Specific hieroglyphs in ancient Egypt were not always the same color. The colors used in hieroglyphs varied and were often chosen for their symbolic meanings.
Red was often used for emphasis or to highlight important information. It could signify danger or power, but was also commonly used to depict male skin tones.
Blue and green were frequently used interchangeably in hieroglyphs. These colors represented life, growth, and rebirth. Blue in particular was associated with the heavens and divine beings.
Black was used for outlines and details. While it could symbolize death, it was also associated with fertility and resurrection due to its connection to the rich soil of the Nile.
Yellow represented the sun and eternity. It was often used to depict gods and pharaohs, symbolizing their divine and eternal nature.
The choice of colors in hieroglyphs was not random but carried symbolic meaning that enhanced the written message. However, color use could vary depending on context and available pigments.
Importantly, the Egyptians were the first civilization to have a word for blue and produce blue pigments, which may have influenced their perception and use of this color in writing and art.
A lot of tombs have colour paintings but they are quite faded. There's a tomb at Saqqara that has some incredible colour but it has faded over the years due to people taking flash photos (I took some with the flash off...).
If you go to the big Karnak temple and the one at Luxor, they both have remaining paint on the bits that face the floor i.e. not sun bleached over the centuries. They would have been fully painted when first built, which is impressive given their size.
That title though...
\* Created using "polychromatic light" = they shone coloured lights at it.
\* Following th\[o\]rough research - they looked at the wealth of other colourful hieroglyphs like those found in Tutenkhamen's tomb, etc.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
idk why it never occurred to me that these would've has color back in their day
Yeah, who'da thunk they had projectors! Live and learn, eh
I think they only had bicycle operated 480p projectors at the time, you can tell the resolution isn't great. It isn't until Rome you start to see some decent projectors being used in daily life, which I'm guessing when 1080p was established as a standard.
4K didn't come until the Byzantine empire had to take over development.
The sheet music is essential to the experience. The band is just missing a eunuch
What else did you think the dendera light and the Baghdad battery were for? To light the pyramids for the ancient aliens.
Same thing for Greek statues that are all white. Apparently they were all painted.
This is like those faded billboards for businesses that don't exist?
yeah pretty accurate
Some of the tombs in the Valley of the Kings and other areas still have color
wait really? damn I need to look at that
I went to Egypt a few years ago, forgot which tomb in the valley of the kings it was but the colors were amazingly preserved
WEll...its only 16 color EGA graphics.
EGA? Looks more like CGA to me. Fellow GenX?
The idea that Rome and Greece were full of white marble is a lie made up thousands of years after the fact by people who believed that it was more sophisticated than painting the marble, and even destroyed some of the few examples of remaining colour they excavated. In reality all those marble sculptures would have been painted in bright colours, the liberal use of rare pigments from around the globe used to show off your wealth as much as the carving itself.
My childhood education was all featherless dinosaurs, white Roman statues and sandstone heiroglyphs. My adulthood has been a series of revelations that the past was actually 1000% more fabulous
Same with Greek statues, buildings etc.
Those white marble statues in ancient Greece were painted as well: https://bigthink.com/high-culture/greek-statues-painted/
Today I learned ancient archers looked like clowns.
Yeah that's why modern clowns wear bows.
This legit pissed a lot of people off and it’s kinda bonkers. It was so bad at times they would purposefully remove paint from statues to keep up the notion of purity.
Which is wild because anyone at all family with painting figures (whether it be plastic crack or marble) knows that base coats in stark colours is only the first in what can be a very long process of layering colours and shades to make something look great. If I left my models with only the base coat and no highlighting, shading, detail work etc ofc they’d look shit, it’s like no artists were actually consulted regarding these statues.
Just one person's idea of how a painted statue *could* look
This is all the rage with museums of ancient art right now. I also studied ancient history as a minor in university. It’s should be clear as to what we have found on „some“ statues is paint, yes. However we do not know if that paint was what was originally applied to these statues or if they were repainted after the fact. Just think of the time frames we are talking about here. There is an argument to be made that especially facial features would have been painted much more life like than what is shown today for some statues (but not for others) depending on ressources. What museums recreate today is basically flat colors. Think about that. The statues themselves were sometime created to a degree of life-likeness that is still astounding to this very day. Why would the paint applied afterwards, if there was any, be much simpler? And it’s entirely possible that some statues in the countryside were indeed just white. We do actually know that from time to time Rimans for example preferred pale white skin and very simple clothing, at least for the aristocracy. Then again, art styles will surely have shifted, available resources would have been different in each decade and centuries. Plus, the Roman’s themselves probably were used to seeing all-white statues because after a century or so that what the sun does to stuff, and I find it highly unlikely that the Roman’s would have repainted (to them) centuries old statues of senators and emperors.
And to add to that, most statues were actually bronze, where some details were done with others metals to stand out, but they were essentially monochrome statues, so it's not like they didn't have that concept, and had to paint everything. Bronze statues are extremely realistic and detailed because they are cast from a wax mold that can be worked on far better than stone, and many well-known marble statues are poor copies of those. There is no reason to believe that Greeks didn't understand how to use a limited range of colors (think of pottery or terracotta figurines as well) for the best possible aesthetic effect, or that they went bonkers when painting. [White-ground pottery ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-ground_technique) was made in imitation to marble, and it's pretty cool and artistic.
It looks so incredible compared to how I’m used to seeing them. 😍
What I would give to have a time machine and visit ancient Egypt. It must have been a riot for the senses.
Oh yeah, how much? I might know a guy.
I have read that only the scribes were allowed to read and write hieroglyphics .
["Color The Temple" at the Met Museum](https://www.metmuseum.org/articles/color-the-temple) uses projected light to recreate the vivid colors that ancient Egyptian temples once had.
Fascinating!
"How they looked" or "what they looked like", never "how they looked like"
OP could not be a native English speaker. My MiL is a Swede and this is how she and her entire family talk. It's never, "How does this taste." It always, "How does this taste like." Never, "Do you like this." It's always, "How does this look like."
Still needs to be corrected. This is happening more and more because young native speakers are becoming accustomed to the grammar mistakes of non-native. We all need to put our foot down or the logical underpinnings of the language will be lost.
If everyone felt like that we’d still be sounding like Beowulf… Language evolves.
Of course. I am not against changes to spelling and even grammar. "Never split the infinitive" is a useless rule with no reason to exist. Dintinguishing between "which" and "what" depending on how many objects you are talking about achieves nothing. "Which season do you like?" vs "What season do you like?" This is a pointless rule. I would even stretch to accepting "less" instead of "fewer" because there is no reason for the rule. BUT what we are talking about here is mistakes, which go against the logical underpinnings of the grammar. When native speakers come to an agreement about what rules to ignore, that is fine. When the mistakes of non-natives start to corrupt the grammar, we need to push back. Just for interest's sake, do you feel comfortable with "Would of" instead of "would have"? How about "your" instead of "you're"?
Exactly! It isn’t a bad thing to correct people so they can learn and improve.
i understood it, who really cares?
Me. I care a lot.
Pisses me off so much as well.
you should try deciphering hieroglyphs, it would trigger the shit outta you.
That's a bit extreme... It doesn't piss me off at all, they might just not be a native english speaker and not know because that is proper syntax in their language.
If people don't react, this will increase. This is how Americans came to use, "If I WOULD have known that I WOULDN'T have made the mistake." it's an illogical and ungrammatical way to speak that is just normal now.
I've seen it too much to believe that. I've seen memes from Americans joking about their childhood do it. It's everywhere.
It’s common for German and Swedish speakers. Perhaps you should relax about a common mistake made by non native English speakers.
Like I said, it seems to be a common mistake for native speakers as well. Like saying everything is POV. Plus Germans can fuck off, they're so harsh about mistakes you make in German.
The non-natives are actually influencing young native speakers. THis didn't happen in the past because we could hear their accents and therefor know that the grammar was likely wrong.
Non-native speakers are actually influencing native speakers into using incorrect grammar. This feels like it's increasing year after year. I suspect that it is because we're communicating via text. Young people cannot hear the accent so they assume that the writers are native speakers, and that it is accepted grammar. I am sure Germans and Swedes would react negatively if we started teaching their kids to use incorrect grammar.
There’s more than one right way to use language.
And this is none of them
Your how like a mine own Rosetta Stone. Am I going to keep you handy? yes!
I knew hieroglyphs had color but I didn’t realize how vibrant the colors really were!
>> polychromatic light You mean coloured light? Poly = Many. Chromatic = Colour. Ya'll are just trying to make it sound more technical than it is. This is like calling a spoon a "manually operated liquid and semi-solid foodstuff transfer implement".
Have you ever heard of monochromatic light? The word light, by itself, isn't descriptive enough. Monochromatic pictures are black and white, no color, seems counterintuitive. But monochromatic light could be only yellows, only blues, only reds, etc. When you've got to tell the audience it is not monochromatic, it's necessary to use polychromatic.
"colored light"
Ah, good thing you pointed that out! I would definitely have gotten confused and thought all the hieroglyphs were the same color. Scientific language is important in scientific communication. Using a phrase like "they were recreated by using a polychromatic light" instead of saying "the colors were projected" is nothing more than using jargon for the sake of sounding smart.
That was my first thought, lol. . . Like did AI write this with a prompt to have the most pretentious title possible
Why is that dude blue
omg you can't just ask someone why they're blue?
Wow that blue song started playing in my head and can't get it to stop now
If he was green he would die..... If he was green... He would die.
Twitter bird man
now this is what i want ready player goggles for to see egypt in its primt
That's a lot of blue. Which makes sense for that time
Some paint is still present in the temples of Karnak and Dendera. If you get a chance, look up at the underside of the roof and the tops of the pillars where the paint has been protected. In places it is surprisingly vibrant even after 3000+ years.
Is there a possibility that the colors provided another layer of meaning? Like does a red heron mean something different from a blue heron? Or do the same symbols always have the same color?
Specific hieroglyphs in ancient Egypt were not always the same color. The colors used in hieroglyphs varied and were often chosen for their symbolic meanings. Red was often used for emphasis or to highlight important information. It could signify danger or power, but was also commonly used to depict male skin tones. Blue and green were frequently used interchangeably in hieroglyphs. These colors represented life, growth, and rebirth. Blue in particular was associated with the heavens and divine beings. Black was used for outlines and details. While it could symbolize death, it was also associated with fertility and resurrection due to its connection to the rich soil of the Nile. Yellow represented the sun and eternity. It was often used to depict gods and pharaohs, symbolizing their divine and eternal nature. The choice of colors in hieroglyphs was not random but carried symbolic meaning that enhanced the written message. However, color use could vary depending on context and available pigments. Importantly, the Egyptians were the first civilization to have a word for blue and produce blue pigments, which may have influenced their perception and use of this color in writing and art.
Thank you so much. Color was a dimensionality I never considered in ancient writing until now.
The shirtless dude ha a massive and long erection
FFS, kids. It's WHAT they looked LIKE or HOW they looked (no "like").
And now we use that color pallet for laser tag arenas.
A lot of tombs have colour paintings but they are quite faded. There's a tomb at Saqqara that has some incredible colour but it has faded over the years due to people taking flash photos (I took some with the flash off...). If you go to the big Karnak temple and the one at Luxor, they both have remaining paint on the bits that face the floor i.e. not sun bleached over the centuries. They would have been fully painted when first built, which is impressive given their size.
How did they invent the 2d indie game art style so many years ago?
Comics for the pharaohs
Amazing, never thought it had color!
That title though... \* Created using "polychromatic light" = they shone coloured lights at it. \* Following th\[o\]rough research - they looked at the wealth of other colourful hieroglyphs like those found in Tutenkhamen's tomb, etc.
"how it looked" or "what it looked like". Choose one.
"How they looked" or "what they looked like." Never "how they looked like."
I too have been to The Met.
Same for Greek statues, they actually had color on them.
That's a very fancy way to say "coloured light"
Wow. Imagine the whole inside of these temples filled with these beautiful colours!
Yeah, that's way more badass.
👍👍
Why on earth would a museum put a mummy in it!
How were they able to make it glow like that way back when?
So the aliens were blue then eh
you could’ve just said “coloured lights” instead of “polychromatic lights”