Live data from Hacker News

The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

edition.cnn.com

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#21
post #8

Another remarkable building that is not quite so old (a mere ~1500 years) is the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagia_Sophia

Too bad Turkey decided to convert it back from a museum to a mosque [1]. Guess I won't be visiting Istanbul, then... [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53366307

I've been there as a mosque and it was fine, I am agnostic but from a super Catholic family, didn't bother me or the rest of the group at all, it was quite cool.

The smell thought, was super funky, I guess that is what carpets and 1000's of feets do :)

You will be missing out, Turkey is a super cool country, awesome food, super very proud people.

Haia Sofia is not even in the TOP 10 of my list of cool stuff to do in Istambul. I really hope to go back some day and spend a at least 2 weeks in the region next time.

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#24
post #7

I'm not sure it counts as a 'building', but Stone Henge in the UK has been in use for more than 4000 years. It's also well worth a visit if you're at all interested in weird ancient stuff.

It's a little swamped with tourists and tour buses, though. If you want a place less overwhelmed with queues and cameras I suggest Avebury.

Isn't it right next to a highway?

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#25
post #12
post #5

My Wife surprised me with the Pantheon. We were walking through Rome and she steered me to this rather ugly building (at least on the outside). When we got in I was flabbergasted. It is an astonishing space, surpassed only by Saint Peters in Rome to me anyway. I had studied it as a kid but only in books, and never paid much attention to the outside, so the surprise was magnificent. One of the great experiences of my…

I loved it, but I went there for the ancient Roman aspect and was kind of sad that that has been overlaid with the Roman Catholic stuff.

Had it not been for various popes, the structure would’ve been pulled down for building materials after the end of the Empire in the west.

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#26

Building the Pantheon today would be a demanding feat, imagine building it 2000 years ago and even imagining the dome would hold up when you started the work, much less for 2000 years. Whoever the architect/engineer was, they were unbelievably bold.

Since it’s made of unreinforced concrete, getting it permitted in almost any jurisdiction in the world would be exceedingly difficult. Which is somewhat ironic, as it’s the lack of corrodable reinforcing that’s enabled it’s extremely long lifespan.

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little swamped with tourists and tour buses, though. If you want a place less overwhelmed with queues and cameras I suggest Avebury.

Isn't it right next to a highway?

Stonehenge is approx 250 metres from the A303, which is one of the main routes into the South West UK. The A303 at the closest point is a single lane in each direction, and frequently very slow at that point, so isn't massively obtrusive in the sense that a 6-lane motorway would be. That said, there is a plan to dig a tunnel nearby to get rid of the road completely.

Stonehenge is debatable as a visitor attraction, especially if you are in the UK only for a few days. By coach from London it is pretty much a full day, when there is a lot more history in London itself. In my opinion. Stonehenge itself (as opposed to the larger archaeological landscape) is small compared with Roman or Greek remains, so if you don't have an appreciation of the history of the place, may be underwhelming. It also gets crowded very quickly, although the fact that a close approach to the stones isn't usually possible means that everyone gets a view. Last time I went I arrived early, and got some great HDR images of the stones under an impressive moody sky.

[Edit - I also agree about Avebury being worth a visit. You can walk amongst the stones themselves, which are almost part of a historically pretty village. The really impressive structures in the nearby vicinity in my opinion are the hill forts such as Old Sarum [0] near Salisbury and Maiden Castle [1] near Dorchester. These are truly massive Iron Age earthworks.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Sarum#Prehistory

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maiden_Castle,_Dorset

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#29
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I loved it, but I went there for the ancient Roman aspect and was kind of sad that that has been overlaid with the Roman Catholic stuff.

Had it not been for various popes, the structure would’ve been pulled down for building materials after the end of the Empire in the west.

Probably true, but not the bit I was interested in or what makes the building special.

Re: The Pantheon: The ancient building still being used after 2,000 years

#30
post #12
post #5

My Wife surprised me with the Pantheon. We were walking through Rome and she steered me to this rather ugly building (at least on the outside). When we got in I was flabbergasted. It is an astonishing space, surpassed only by Saint Peters in Rome to me anyway. I had studied it as a kid but only in books, and never paid much attention to the outside, so the surprise was magnificent. One of the great experiences of my…

I loved it, but I went there for the ancient Roman aspect and was kind of sad that that has been overlaid with the Roman Catholic stuff.

And you didn't even mention the tacky "King of Italy" coffins.

I was discussing this yesterday with friends: the building is still a church but a few years ago it was sold to the State (so the Church doesn't have to be responsible for the upkeep...). This means the State could, in theory, throw out all the Catholic paraphernalia and ripristinate a classical-looking interior, if local government so wished. We don't have images of the original Roman statues but I'm sure there are plenty that could be moved in from other locations. It would be definitely something that would stir international attention and attract more funds (always good) and more tourists (not always good - it's debatable whether one of the most-visited hotspots in the city actually needs more attendance...)

In any case, it will likely never happen; not only because of the massive outcry from religious quarters in "the" Catholic city, but also because a lot of the academic world is strongly opposed to this sort of "restauration" both on philosophical and practical grounds, after some massive missteps that lost us priceless artefacts in the previous centuries.

It's a shame, I think a classical Pantheon would be superb, but that's life.

Post reply on HN