Why are the hanging gardens of Babylon still a mystery? Because we know that they were real, indeed though they defy nature. They ’re listed by Antipater of Sidon in one of his poems along with the other seven ancient cautions that was 2000 times agene, which included the Great total of Giza, the Lighthouse in Alexandria, the ivory statue of Zeus at Olympia, the sanctum of Artemis in Ephesus, the Tomb of Mausolus at Halicarnassus, and the Colossus in Rhodes. Of the seven cautions, only the Great total remains to our day.
At the time the list of seven cautions was made, the Greeks set up themselves on a new age of achievement. Alexander had just expanded the Greek border from a numerous municipality businesses to an empire that stretched all the way to India and down to Egypt. They wanted a canon of all of the sensations of achievement within their borders to keep for seed.
“ I have set eyes on the wall of lofty Babylon, on which is a road for chariots, and the statue of Zeus by the Alpheus, and the hanging amphitheaters, and the Colossus of the Sun, and the huge labor of the high conglomerations, and the vast grave of Mausoleums; but when I saw the house of Artemis that mounted to the murk, those other sensations lost their brilliancy, and I said, ‘ Lo, piecemeal from Olympus, the Sun no way looked on aught so grand. ’”
Several other Greek muses, of other centuries, also point these cautions which also mention the hanging amphitheaters of Babylon; Strabo discusses them in detail, mentioning arched vaults, stairways, and terraced roofs, so there’s no reason to assume that any of these cautions are imaginary. Each of these cautions was in the days of Antipater, but how could an oasis as was described live in such a dry and desolate place as Babylon?
Not only that they was, but that they hung, they were elevated. How do you hang a theater? And formerly you get it up grandly, out of the path of courses and gutters, well also how do you water it in a land where it hardly rains?
We are talking about the Babel terrain of Iraq also.
still, we could walk some ancient expressways and structures, but we ’d find out there are surely no amphitheaters there now, If we travel the Babel terrain moment. And, we ’d find that the region, while not exactly the Sahara,( it does have the Euphrates sluice running through it), is still a dry and fine place where someone would have to be an ambitious maniac to believe a lush, tropical paradise could ever live there.
Besides the natural mystery around the plausibility of these amphitheaters, it’s hard to find validation that they were erected in any of the luxurious vestiges that have been dug up and studied. multitudinous vestiges have come out of this terrain which are histories commissioned by the lords detailing what they erected, especially a king called Nebuchadnezzar II, who kept truly detailed records of everything he fulfilled and erected, but nowhere in the records of any of the lords does it mention any of them erecting amphitheaters.
This makes scholars and biologists and archeologists all believe that the hanging amphitheaters ca not be real, but since they were cited so constantly by so multitudinous Greek historians, who were in the business of verity and were truly scientific about their styles, and all of the other cautions they cited have substantiation that they did formerly live, or still live, there’s no reason to suspect that commodity was in Babylon that must ’ve been a beautiful theater and that people of Antipater’s time could go see them.
So, of all the cautions, the hanging amphitheaters of Babylon are the most mysterious, defying explanation. We can still see the Gate of Ishtar, which is enough miraculous, monumental! And may give some suggestions that there was formerly a theater beyond the gate. The Ishtar gate was made with fire- glazed slipup. All the other bricks of Babylon were sun- dried, slush bricks. This kind of slipup would be easy to make, it takes truly little trouble. You just make a earth, fill it with slush, and let it sit in the sun until it hardens solid.
Babylon could get down with this type of structure material because they lived in a dry climate. Bricks made of slush fall piecemeal when exposed to water, so if they had been used near a theater, which would ’ve demanded constant water, bricks like that would ’ve fallen incremental really snappily. The fact that the Babylonians went to analogous great trouble and expenditure to glaze all of the bricks of their monumental Ishtar gate and the walls around it, suggest they did this because whatever was held outdoors had a lot of water which demanded fortification.
Multitudinous believe they used the traditional sun- dried bricks for the bulk of the wall, and only used the extremely precious fire- glazed bricks to line it, boxing it, like gold plated jewelry or the delicacy shells of M&Ms. And that, in between the bricks, they used bitumen which helped to foster waterproof them. They ’d only go to this important trouble if they were trying to cover commodity that demanded a lot of water, analogous as a massive theater which would also put off humidity and perspiration.
