The constantinian St. Peter's basilica in Rome - La basilica costantiniana di san Pietro
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ย. 2011
- A three-dimensional reconstruction of the old St. Peter's basilica (X-XI century AD)
Una ricostruzione tridimensionale dell'antica basilica petrina ambientata attorno al X-XI secolo.
![[안방1열 직캠4K] 베이비몬스터 치키타 'FOREVER' (BABYMONSTER CHIQUITA FanCam) @SBS Inkigayo 2404707](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Tn3bGHiBWkg/mqdefault.jpg)
This is the Graduale "Tecum Principium", from the Christmas Midnight Mass, in Old Roman Chant.
Performers: Ensemble Organum, Director: Marcel Peres
Album: "Chant de l'Eglise de Rome (VIe - XIIIe Siècles)"
Bravo!
I wish that they would have been able to save this building, one of the greatest losses is all the tombs that were destroyed during the demolition and bones never recovered most were of ancient and medieval popes. The Pantheon is even older than Old St Peters and it is still a functioning building
You are totally right, as a person born in Rome and living in Rome ten minutes apart from St Peter, it is such a tragedy that this wonderful work of art has been totally lost. The fountain of the courtyard was a marvel, and so were the two mausolea you mentioned, one of them having been an even more ancient temple dedicated to Februa, an ancient goddess. They were astounding Roman monuments which hosted the remnants of the last great men and women of the Western Empire, similar in shape and size to Constantine mausoleum in Constantinopolis, also lost, and to Constanza's mausoleum and Helene mausoleum, both still standing here in Rome. The treasure resting aside with the body of Maria in the mausoleum was something else! Also Honorius tomb should still be there, buried beneath the new St Peter's basilica. What a loss man! The Ottoman Turks were nothing compared to various Popes in destroying Roman heritage!
@@mp6471 While visiting Rome we were told not to ask the Romans, for they don't know anything (about buildings, ruins, ecc.) - seems you are an exception! 😊So true what you say about the Popes, and not only in Rome, the Bishops of other cities were also "laboriosi" in destroying pagan temples ecc.
The decision to demolish the old basilica was shocking at the time. On the other hand, it was in terrible shape because of neglect and possibly a poor foundation (a lot of the site was fill rather than solid rock). Keep in mind also that the current basilica was planned at the height of the Roman Renaissance when the papacy was at the height of its secular power and wealth. Reverence for a sagging building from late Antiquity was probably not their first priority.
Alberti said the old basilica was structurally unsound, leading to its replacement:
I have noticed in the basilica of St. Peter's in Rome a crass feature: an extremely long and high wall has been constructed over a continuous series of openings, with no curves to give it strength, and no buttresses to lend it support... The whole stretch of wall has been pierced by too many openings and built too high... As a result, the continual force of the wind has already displaced the wall more than six feet from the vertical; I have no doubt that eventually some... slight movement will make it collapse...[6]
The basilica had fallen into disrepair during the popes' exile in Avignon. At first Pope Julius II had every intention of preserving the old building, and made a couple of minor modifications. The original altar and its orientation were preserved within the new altar. Recently Saint Peter's tomb was rediscovered under the new altar. Eight of the original Solomonic columns were moved to the piers of the new St. Peter's.
They could at least have saved the ancient fountain of the courtyard and the two mausolea on the left side!
Splendid!
bellisimo! complimenti!
non transigo
1 v 1 creative?
@@user-ej8lw8jk9i Letsgo no cap ti sfondo
I feel the same way. I just read a book on the new St. Peter's Basilica and it seems a shame they knocked down a building that at that time was about a thousand years old. It was kind of falling apart but surely they could have rebuilt it to the same exact proportions.
Also the modern St. Paul basilica in Rome is exactly what you say: a modern church rebuilt in the exact same way as the ancient one, which was gone in a fire
Bramante probably did not destroy that many papal tombs. The new basilica straddles the old one, and the old crypt would have necessarily been within the foundations of the old building. He made an effort to move any graves that he did have to disturb. St. Peter's tomb has been rediscovered during modern excavations. But it's highly likely that all records of many of the tombs had already been lost in the 1184 year history of the old basilica.
Very good work
What fresco of jesus you put in the apse basin, where do you found it ? And the same question about the pages of the gospel, where do you found it, and the same of the are you use, and the draw about the lectern? Thanks.
Very good.
This is so beautiful. I was just wondering something, though. Instead of having to knock down the Basilica and start practically all over, why didn't they just do regular maintenance over the years? Was there any point that the original basilica was under attack, which caused the ceiling to collapse? I mean don't get me wrong; I love the present Saint Peter's Basilica. But I wonder what it would have been like if this church, more or less, stood for almost 2000 years and in our lifetime.
Two Botticelli frescos were destroyed when Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel.
What sources did you use for this reconstruction?
Plus I was wondering when tabernacles for the Blessed Sacrament came into use.
Is there anyway to get access with this 3d model to use for educational purpose ? Thank you very much
È possibile scaricare il modello 3d fatto con SketchUp?
---> Molto bello, complimenti per l'impegnativa opera. Ottimo metodo per dare l'idea di costruzioni che non esistono più, immagino che questa presentazione sia stata realizzata con un programma per disegnare in 3D, una domanda, perché per questo video sono state utilizzate solo immagini statiche e non immagini con visioni in movimento? come solitamente è possibile ottenere con i programmi per disegnare in 3D; dando movimento alle immagini in 3D risulta molto più evidente la geometria di profondità del complesso architettonico, dando una visione più realistica dell'ambiente !!!
-----------------------------------------------------------
---> Very nice, congratulations for the challenging work. Great way to give the idea of buildings that no longer exist, I imagine that this presentation has been performed with a program to draw in 3D, a question, because for this video have been used only still images and moving images with visions? as usually you can get with the programs for drawing in 3D, giving motion to the images in 3D is much more apparent depth of the geometry of the architectural complex, giving a more realistic view of the environment!
È possibile fare un "giro" nella costruzione tridimensionale di san Pietro ma la registrazione anche di 6 minuti chiede alcune ore di elaborazione se il filmato è in HD come è necessario sia. Di qui per questo caso ho preferito immagini statiche. Questo non toglie che in un futuro prossimo non faccia qualcosa del genere...
On the altar? I think since XVI century.
What music you put into the video?
Tecum principium
Менты！притом лысые！🍼🍼🍼🍼
che fastidio