The Evil Genius of Fascist Design: How Mussolini and Hitler Used Art & Architecture to Project Power

When the Nazis came to pow­er in 1933, they declared the begin­ning of a “Thou­sand-Year Reich” that ulti­mate­ly came up about 988 years short. Fas­cism in Italy man­aged to hold on to pow­er for a cou­ple of decades, which was pre­sum­ably still much less time than Ben­i­to Mus­soli­ni imag­ined he’d get on the throne. His­to­ry shows us that regimes of this kind suf­fered a fair­ly severe sta­bil­i­ty prob­lem, which is per­haps why they need­ed to put forth such a sol­id, for­mi­da­ble image. The IMPERIAL video above explores “the evil genius of fas­cist design,” focus­ing on how Hitler and Mus­soli­ni ren­dered their ide­olo­gies in art and the built envi­ron­ment, but many of its obser­va­tions can be gen­er­al­ized to any polit­i­cal move­ment that seeks total con­trol of a soci­ety, espe­cial­ly if that soci­ety has a suf­fi­cient­ly glo­ri­ous-seem­ing past.

Fas­cis­m’s visu­al lan­guage has many inspi­ra­tions, two of the most impor­tant cit­ed in the video being  Roman­ti­cism and Futur­ism. The for­mer offered “a long­ing for the past, an obses­sion with nature, and a focus on the sub­lime”; the lat­ter “wor­shiped speed, machines, and vio­lence.” Despite their appar­ent con­tra­dic­tion, these dual cur­rents allowed fas­cism “a pecu­liar abil­i­ty to look both back­ward and for­ward, to sum­mon the glo­ry of past empires while promis­ing a rad­i­cal new future.”

In Italy, such an empire may have been dis­tant in time, but it was nev­er­the­less close at hand. “We dream of a Roman Italy that is wise and strong, dis­ci­plined and Impe­r­i­al.” Even Hitler drew from the glo­ries of ancient Rome and Greece to shape his own aspi­ra­tional vision of an all-pow­er­ful Ger­man civ­i­liza­tion.

Hence both of those dic­ta­tors under­tak­ing large-scale Neo­clas­si­cal-style archi­tec­tur­al projects “to bring the aes­thet­ics of ancient Rome to their city streets,” includ­ing even mus­cu­lar stat­ues meant to embody the offi­cial­ly sanc­tioned human ide­al. Of course, the builders of the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca had also looked to Roman forms, but they did so at a small­er, more humane scale. Fas­cist struc­tures were designed not just to be eter­nal sym­bols but over­whelm­ing pres­ences, intend­ed “not to ele­vate the soul, but to crush the indi­vid­ual into the crowd and pro­mote con­for­mi­ty.” This, in the­o­ry, would make the cit­i­zen feel small and pow­er­less, but with an accom­pa­ny­ing qua­si-reli­gious long­ing to be part of a larg­er project: that of fas­cism, which sub­or­di­nates every­thing to the state. For the likes of Mus­soli­ni and Hitler (an artist-turned-politi­cian, as one can hard­ly fail to note), aes­thet­ics was pow­er — albeit not quite enough, in the event, to ensure their own sur­vival.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Wal­ter Ben­jamin Explains How Fas­cism Uses Mass Media to Turn Pol­i­tics Into Spec­ta­cle (1935)

Yale Pro­fes­sor Jason Stan­ley Iden­ti­fies 10 Tac­tics of Fas­cism: The “Cult of the Leader,” Law & Order, Vic­tim­hood and More

Mus­soli­ni Sends to Amer­i­ca a Hap­py Mes­sage, Full of Friend­ly Feel­ings, in Eng­lish (1927)

Are You a Fas­cist?: Take Theodor Adorno’s Author­i­tar­i­an Per­son­al­i­ty Test Cre­at­ed to Com­bat Fas­cism (1947)

The Sto­ry of Fas­cism: Rick Steves’ Doc­u­men­tary Helps Us Learn from the Painful Lessons of the 20th Cen­tu­ry

Umber­to Eco’s List of the 14 Com­mon Fea­tures of Fas­cism

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

How Movies Created Their Special Effects Before CGI: Metropolis, 2001: A Space Odyssey & More

The youngest movie­go­ers today do not, of course, remem­ber a time before visu­al effects could be cre­at­ed dig­i­tal­ly. What may give us more pause is that, at this point in cin­e­ma his­to­ry, most of their par­ents don’t remem­ber it either. Con­sid­er the fact that Steven Spiel­berg’s Juras­sic Park, with its once impos­si­bly real­is­tic (and still whol­ly pass­able) CGI dinosaurs, came out 32 years ago. That may put it, we must acknowl­edge, into the realm of the “clas­sic,” the kind of pic­ture whose enter­tain­ment val­ue holds up despite — or because of — the qual­i­ties that fix it in its time. Equal­ly spec­tac­u­lar but longer-can­on­ized clas­sics pose a greater chal­lenge to the imag­i­na­tions of young view­ers, who can hard­ly guess how they could have been made “before com­put­ers.”

After see­ing the notable exam­ples pro­vid­ed in the new Pri­mal Space video above, they’ll cer­tain­ly under­stand one thing: it was­n’t easy. Even a seem­ing­ly sim­ple effect like the pen float­ing loose through the zero-grav­i­ty cab­in in 2001: A Space Odyssey required no small degree of inge­nu­ity. We might nat­u­ral­ly assume that film­mak­ers in 1968 would have accom­plished it with a cou­ple of pieces of Scotch tape and fish­ing line, but that would have result­ed in unac­cept­able tan­gling prob­lems, to say noth­ing of the trick­i­ness of ensur­ing, quite lit­er­al­ly, that the strings did­n’t show. Instead, Kubrick­’s team end­ed up attach­ing the pen to a sheet of glass — metic­u­lous­ly cleaned, no doubt, to elim­i­nate the pos­si­bil­i­ty of streaks — large enough to occu­py the entire frame and thus go unno­ticed by the view­er. It was then slow­ly rotat­ed by a crank-turn­ing assis­tant.

A few dif­fer­ent effects from 2001 come in for expla­na­tion through­out the course of the video, includ­ing the mul­ti­ple-expo­sure pho­tog­ra­phy that made pos­si­ble shots of space­craft pass­ing plan­ets as well as the psy­che­del­ic “Star Gate” sequence toward the end. Though some of the devices used in these process­es were put togeth­er just for the pro­duc­tion, the under­ly­ing tech­niques had already been evolv­ing for more than 60 years. Indeed, many were pio­neered by Georges Méliès, pre­vi­ous­ly fea­tured here on Open Cul­ture for A Trip to the Moon from 1902, the very first sci­ence-fic­tion film. This video goes behind the scenes of a work from the year before: L’Homme à la tête en caoutchouc, or The Man with the Rub­ber Head, in which Méliès man­aged a shot in which his own cra­ni­um inflates to huge pro­por­tions with­out the use of so much as a zoom lens.

Oth­er exam­ples, drawn from a range of beloved films from Metrop­o­lis to Mary Pop­pins, illus­trate the inven­tive­ness born of sheer tech­ni­cal lim­i­ta­tion in the days when film­mak­ing was a whol­ly ana­log affair. In some cas­es, the effects these pro­duc­tions pulled off with minia­tures, prisms, and mir­rors 60, 80, 100 years ago look as good as any­thing Hol­ly­wood puts on the screen today — or rather bet­ter, since the innate phys­i­cal­i­ty behind them makes them feel more “real.” Per­haps unsur­pris­ing­ly, this video’s arti­fi­cial-intel­li­gence course spon­sor makes ref­er­ence to the end­less range of visu­al pos­si­bil­i­ties avail­able to those who mas­ter that tech­nol­o­gy. And it’s not impos­si­ble that we now stand on the cusp of a rev­o­lu­tion in visu­al effects for that rea­son, with at least as much of an upside and down­side as CGI. If so, we should pre­pare our­selves to hear the ques­tion, from chil­dren born today, of how any­one ever made movies before AI.

Relat­ed con­tent:

How Georges Méliès A Trip to the Moon Became the First Sci-Fi Film & Changed Cin­e­ma For­ev­er (1902)

The Art of Cre­at­ing Spe­cial Effects in Silent Movies: Inge­nu­ity Before the Age of CGI

The 1927 Film Metrop­o­lis Cre­at­ed a Dystopi­an Vision of What the World Would Look Like in 2026–and It Hits Close to Home

How Stan­ley Kubrick Made 2001: A Space Odyssey: A Sev­en-Part Video Essay

How 2001: A Space Odyssey Became “the Hard­est Film Kubrick Ever Made”

Why Movies Don’t Feel Real Any­more: A Close Look at Chang­ing Film­mak­ing Tech­niques

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

How Many Humans Have Ever Lived, and How Many Are Alive Right Now?

?si=RT8MgKeGcVzX6p9X

How many peo­ple have ever walked the earth? Good ques­tion, even if you’ve nev­er quite pon­dered it before. Accord­ing to the Pop­u­la­tion Ref­er­ence Bureau, a non-prof­it research orga­ni­za­tion, if you trav­el back to 8000 B.C.E., the world pop­u­la­tion stood at about 5 mil­lion. By 1 C.E., the num­ber climbs to 300 mil­lion, before grad­u­al­ly increas­ing to 500 mil­lion in 1650. Once we get beyond the plagues of the medieval peri­od, our pop­u­la­tion explodes, reach­ing the 1 bil­lion mark in 1800 and then 8 bil­lion in 2022. Tak­en togeth­er, an esti­mat­ed 117 bil­lion peo­ple have col­lec­tive­ly lived on our plan­et, and, of that total num­ber, 7% are alive right now. A strik­ing fig­ure. Using sim­i­lar data, video jour­nal­ist Cleo Abram visu­al­izes the his­tor­i­cal trend in a short, suc­cinct video above.

Relat­ed Con­tent 

Buck­min­ster Fuller Cre­ates an Ani­mat­ed Visu­al­iza­tion of Human Pop­u­la­tion Growth from 1000 B.C.E. to 1965

200,000 Years of Stag­ger­ing Human Pop­u­la­tion Growth Shown in an Ani­mat­ed Map

Crowd­ed House: How the World’s Pop­u­la­tion Grew to 7 Bil­lion Peo­ple

Take a Tour of 18th-Century London, Recreated with AI

If you want to know what it was like to live in sev­en­teenth-cen­tu­ry Lon­don, read the diary of Samuel Pepys. While doing so, take note of his fre­quent ref­er­ences to the unclean­li­ness of the city’s streets: “very dirty and trou­ble­some to walk through,” “mighty dirty after the rain,” and dur­ing the large-scale rebuild­ing in the after­math of the Great Fire of 1666, “much built, yet very dirty and encum­bered.” If you want to know what it was like to live in nine­teenth-cen­tu­ry Lon­don, read Charles Dick­ens. How­ev­er much-lament­ed the dif­fi­cul­ties it presents to young read­ers, the open­ing of Bleak House remains high­ly evoca­tive, set­ting the scene with “as much mud in the streets, as if the waters had but new­ly retired from the face of the earth,” “dogs, undis­tin­guish­able in mire, and “hors­es, scarce­ly bet­ter; splashed to their very blink­ers.”

This “mud,” an unspeak­ably foul admix­ture of sub­stances, only began to recede per­ma­nent­ly from Lon­don’s streets in the eigh­teen-fifties, after the instal­la­tion of sew­er sys­tems. So nor­mal for so long, its pres­ence would hard­ly have been down­played by the city’s observers back then, whether they record­ed their obser­va­tions on the page or on the can­vas.

Even the painter’s ide­al­iz­ing impulse could only do so much, as evi­denced by some of the shots includ­ed in the new video tour of eigh­teenth-cen­tu­ry Lon­don from Majes­tic Stu­dios above. Turn­ing con­tem­po­rary paint­ings and engrav­ings into cin­e­mat­ic ani­ma­tions with arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence-gen­er­at­ed video, it offers the next best thing to actu­al footage of the city as it would have been seen by the likes of Jonathan Swift, Samuel John­son, Thomas Gains­bor­ough, and Mary Woll­stonecraft.

Sev­en­teenth-cen­tu­ry Lon­don was the cul­tur­al and com­mer­cial cen­ter of Geor­gian Eng­land, but also a city well on its way to becom­ing the cen­ter of the world. Some of its famous sights seen here in their eigh­teenth-cen­tu­ry urban con­text include St. Paul’s Cathe­dral by Sir Christo­pher Wren, mas­ter­mind of the city’s post-Great Fire recon­struc­tion; the old Lon­don Bridge, still lined with hous­es and shops; St. James’s Square after its trans­for­ma­tion from a state once con­sid­ered “mud­dy, neglect­ed, and frankly, embar­rass­ing for such pres­ti­gious address­es”; and the Tow­er of Lon­don on the bank of the Riv­er Thames. As for the riv­er itself, it hard­ly goes ignored by the works of art that shape this video, or indeed un-glo­ri­fied by them. But if you know any­thing about its con­di­tion before the turn of the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, you’ll be relieved that AI can’t yet restore its smell.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Growth of Lon­don, from the Romans to the 21st Cen­tu­ry, Visu­al­ized in a Time-Lapse Ani­mat­ed Map

Take a Vir­tu­al Tour of Shakespeare’s Globe The­atre in Lon­don

The Evo­lu­tion of Lon­don: 2,000 Years of Change Ani­mat­ed in 7 Min­utes

The Old­est Known Footage of Lon­don (1890–1920) Fea­tures the City’s Great Land­marks

Hear the Evo­lu­tion of the Lon­don Accent Over 660 Years: From 1346 to 2006

The Sights & Sounds of 18th-Cen­tu­ry Paris Get Recre­at­ed with 3D Audio and Ani­ma­tion

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

Göbekli Tepe: The 12,000-Year-Old Ruins That Rewrite the Story of Civilization

We did­n’t have civ­i­liza­tion until we had cities, and we did­n’t have cities until we had agri­cul­ture. So, at least, goes a wide­ly accept­ed nar­ra­tive in “big his­to­ry” — a nar­ra­tive some­what trou­bled by the dis­cov­ery of ruins on Göbek­li Tepe, or “Pot­bel­ly Hill,” in south­east­ern Turkey. Appar­ent­ly inhab­it­ed from around 9500 to 8000 BC, the ancient set­tle­ment pre­dates the Pyra­mids of Giza by near­ly 8,000 years, and Stone­henge by about 6,000 years. Though it was once believed to be a site used for rit­u­al pur­pos­es only, lat­er research unearthed evi­dence that sug­gests it was host to a vari­ety of activ­i­ties we asso­ciate with urban civ­i­liza­tion, rather than what we usu­al­ly think of hunter-gath­er­er sites. Does it amount to rea­son enough to revise our very under­stand­ing of the his­to­ry of human­i­ty?

“Like Stone­henge, Göbek­li Tepe’s struc­ture includes cir­cles of T‑shaped lime­stone pil­lars, many of them fea­tur­ing etch­ings of ani­mals,” says YouTu­ber Joe Scott in the video above. These pil­lars are arranged into enclo­sures, which togeth­er con­sti­tute a site that “fea­tures archae­o­log­i­cal com­plex­i­ty that prob­a­bly would have been too advanced for hunter-gath­er­ers.”

Klaus Schmidt, the archae­ol­o­gist who led the exca­va­tions at Göbek­li Tepe between 1996 and 2014, believed that it was “a sanc­tu­ary and maybe a region­al pil­grim­age cen­ter where peo­ple gath­ered to per­form reli­gious rites.” But since his death, evi­dence of hous­es, a cis­tern, and grain-pro­cess­ing tools has turned up, indi­cat­ing “a ful­ly fledged set­tle­ment with per­ma­nent occu­pa­tion” well before the advent of farm­ing. This find­ing indi­cates that social and tech­no­log­i­cal inno­va­tions asso­ci­at­ed with ‘civ­i­liza­tion’ may have emerged long before the advent of agri­cul­ture, cities, or domes­ti­cat­ed ani­mals — under con­di­tions very dif­fer­ent from what his­to­ri­ans had pre­vi­ous­ly assumed. But as to the rea­son it was all built in the first place, this new infor­ma­tion has led to more ques­tions than answers.

One less than gen­er­al­ly accept­ed the­o­ry holds that Göbek­li Tepe was an astro­nom­i­cal obser­va­to­ry, and per­haps also a memo­r­i­al to a dev­as­tat­ing comet strike that occurred 13,000 years ago. Maybe it was “a last-ditch effort by a hunter-gath­er­er soci­ety to hang on to their van­ish­ing lifestyle as the world was tran­si­tion­ing to farm­ing.” That could have been the first large-scale tech­no­log­i­cal rev­o­lu­tion in human his­to­ry, but it cer­tain­ly would­n’t be the last, and as we here in the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry con­sid­er the ruins of Göbek­li Tepe — most of which still have yet to be exca­vat­ed — we nat­u­ral­ly find our­selves think­ing about the long-term sur­vival prospects of our own civ­i­liza­tion. But the more recent dis­cov­ery else­where in Turkey of oth­er, even old­er ruins with a dis­tinct­ly urban struc­ture may also make us feel that our way of life isn’t quite as mod­ern as we’d imag­ined.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Explore the Ruins of Tim­gad, the “African Pom­peii” Exca­vat­ed from the Sands of Alge­ria

Watch Ancient Ruins Get Restored to their Glo­ri­ous Orig­i­nal State with Ani­mat­ed GIFs: The Tem­ple of Jupiter, Lux­or Tem­ple & More

Pom­peii Rebuilt: A Tour of the Ancient City Before It Was Entombed by Mount Vesu­vius

How Civ­i­liza­tions Built on Top of Each Oth­er: Dis­cov­er What Lies Beneath Rome, Troy & Oth­er Cities

A Cul­tur­al Tour of Istan­bul, Where the Art and His­to­ry of Three Great Empires Come Togeth­er

Archae­ol­o­gists Dis­cov­er a 2,400-Year-Old Skele­ton Mosa­ic That Urges Peo­ple to “Be Cheer­ful and Live Your Life”

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

The Earliest Known Customer Complaint Was Made 3,800 Years Ago: Read the Rant on an Ancient Babylonian Tablet

Image via Wiki­me­dia Com­mons

The site Fast Com­pa­ny pub­lished an arti­cle that describes the “Com­plaint Restraint project,” an ini­tia­tive that aims to cre­ate a “pos­i­tive life by elim­i­nat­ing neg­a­tive state­ments.” It’s an admirable goal. Though most of us have a per­verse love of wal­low­ing in our misery—a human trait ampli­fied a thou­sand­fold by the internet—complaining rarely makes things any bet­ter. As in the Buddha’s para­ble of the “sec­ond arrow,” our grip­ing can make our suf­fer­ings dou­bly painful; as in the para­ble of the “poi­soned arrow,” it can post­pone or sub­sti­tute for the con­struc­tive actions we need to take in order to heal or improve our con­di­tion.

But it would be a mis­take to think that com­plain­ing is some­how a recent phe­nom­e­non, though we may hear more of it every day, all the time, from every quar­ter of the globe. The Bud­dhist arrow sto­ries are, after all, at least a cou­ple thou­sand years old; lamen­ta­tion more or less con­sti­tutes its own genre in Bib­li­cal lit­er­a­ture.

Even old­er still than these reli­gious sources is the first doc­u­ment­ed cus­tomer ser­vice com­plaint, a spe­cif­ic vari­ety of com­plain­ing that we might be for­giv­en for asso­ci­at­ing main­ly with a mod­ern, con­sumerist age—and one of the few kinds of com­plaints that can gen­er­ate pos­i­tive results.

Absent a Yelp app, the ancient Baby­lon­ian con­sumer in this case inscribed his com­plaint on a clay tablet—which now resides at the British Muse­um—some­time around 1750 B.C. The irate pur­chas­er here, Nan­ni, writ­ing to some­one named Ea-nasir, received a ship­ment of cop­per ore of an infe­ri­or grade, after some annoy­ing delay and in a dam­aged con­di­tion. In the trans­la­tion below from Assyri­ol­o­gist A. Leo Oppen­heim, Nan­ni vents his spleen.

Tell Ea-nasir: Nan­ni sends the fol­low­ing mes­sage:

When you came, you said to me as fol­lows : “I will give Gim­il-Sin (when he comes) fine qual­i­ty cop­per ingots.” You left then but you did not do what you promised me. You put ingots which were not good before my mes­sen­ger (Sit-Sin) and said: “If you want to take them, take them; if you do not want to take them, go away!”

What do you take me for, that you treat some­body like me with such con­tempt? I have sent as mes­sen­gers gen­tle­men like our­selves to col­lect the bag with my mon­ey (deposit­ed with you) but you have treat­ed me with con­tempt by send­ing them back to me emp­ty-hand­ed sev­er­al times, and that through ene­my ter­ri­to­ry. Is there any­one among the mer­chants who trade with Tel­mun who has treat­ed me in this way? You alone treat my mes­sen­ger with con­tempt! On account of that one (tri­fling) mina of sil­ver which I owe(?) you, you feel free to speak in such a way, while I have giv­en to the palace on your behalf 1,080 pounds of cop­per, and umi-abum has like­wise giv­en 1,080 pounds of cop­per, apart from what we both have had writ­ten on a sealed tablet to be kept in the tem­ple of Samas.

How have you treat­ed me for that cop­per? You have with­held my mon­ey bag from me in ene­my ter­ri­to­ry; it is now up to you to restore (my mon­ey) to me in full.

Take cog­nizance that (from now on) I will not accept here any cop­per from you that is not of fine qual­i­ty. I shall (from now on) select and take the ingots indi­vid­u­al­ly in my own yard, and I shall exer­cise against you my right of rejec­tion because you have treat­ed me with con­tempt.

It does seem that Nan­ni maybe took this poor ser­vice a lit­tle too per­son­al­ly. In any case, let’s hope he received some sat­is­fac­tion for the trou­ble it must have tak­en to inscribe this angry mes­sage.

Note: An ear­li­er ver­sion of this post appeared on our site in 2015.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Mark Twain Drafts the Ulti­mate Let­ter of Com­plaint (1905)

Hunter S. Thomp­son Calls Tech Sup­port, Unleash­es a Tirade Full of Fear and Loathing (NSFW)

Behold the Old­est Writ­ten Text in the World: The Kish Tablet, Cir­ca 3500 BC

Hear the Old­est Song in the World: A Sumer­ian Hymn Writ­ten 3,400 Years Ago

How to Write in Cuneiform, the Old­est Writ­ing Sys­tem in the World: A Short Intro­duc­tion

Hear the Ear­li­est Record­ed Cus­tomer Com­plaint Let­ter: From Ancient Sume­ria 1750 BC

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. 

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 3 ) |

Was the Baghdad Battery Actually a Battery?: An Archaeologist Demystifies the 2,000-Year-Old Artifact

Image by Ironie, via Wiki­me­dia Com­mons

The aver­age Open Cul­ture read­er may well be aware that there is such a thing as Archae­ol­o­gy YouTube. What could come as more of a sur­prise is how much back-and-forth there is with­in that world. Below, we have a video from the chan­nel Arti­fac­tu­al­ly Speak­ing in which Brad Haf­ford, a Uni­ver­si­ty of Penn­syl­va­nia archae­ol­o­gist, gives his take on the so-called Bagh­dad Bat­tery, an ancient arti­fact dis­cov­ered in mod­ern-day Iraq. He does so in the form of a response to an ear­li­er video on the Bagh­dad Bat­tery from anoth­er chan­nel host­ed by a young archae­ol­o­gy edu­ca­tor called Milo Rossi. At some points Haf­ford agrees, and at oth­ers he has cor­rec­tions to make, but sure­ly both YouTu­bers can agree on the fas­ci­na­tion of the object in ques­tion. After all: an ancient bat­tery?

Even those of us with­out any par­tic­u­lar invest­ment in archae­ol­o­gy may find our curios­i­ty piqued by the notion that some long-van­ished civ­i­liza­tion had man­aged to har­ness elec­tric­i­ty. The name Bagh­dad Bat­tery was grant­ed in the first place by Wil­helm König, who was the direc­tor of the lab­o­ra­to­ry of the Nation­al Muse­um of Iraq in the nine­teen-thir­ties, when the object was orig­i­nal­ly dis­cov­ered.

Giv­en that it con­sist­ed of not just a ceram­ic pot but also a cop­per tube and an iron rod, all attached to one anoth­er with bitu­men (a sub­stance present in crude oil used today in asphalt), the idea of its being used for pow­er stor­age was log­i­cal, in its way, if also fan­tas­ti­cal­ly anachro­nis­tic. Not that König sug­gest­ed the Bagh­dad Bat­tery was used to pow­er, say, a grid of street­lights; rather, he sup­posed that it could have been involved in some kind of elec­tro­plat­ing sys­tem.

Unfor­tu­nate­ly for König’s hypoth­e­sis, none of the oth­er gild­ed arti­facts recov­ered from ancient Iraq, no mat­ter how fine their craft, were actu­al­ly elec­tro­plat­ed. More prac­ti­cal­ly speak­ing, the Bagh­dad Bat­tery has no means of con­nec­tion to a cir­cuit, a neces­si­ty to charge it up in the first place. As of now, the pro­fes­sion­al con­sen­sus holds that it must have been cer­e­mo­ni­al: a default, as Rossi frames it, when­ev­er archae­ol­o­gists throw up their hands at a lack of dis­pos­i­tive evi­dence about an arti­fac­t’s orig­i­nal pur­pose. Though Haf­ford acknowl­edges that ten­den­cy, he also lays out the rea­sons he believes the mys­ter­ies don’t go quite as deep as pop­u­lar­iz­ers tend to assume. Like any good YouTu­ber, archae­o­log­i­cal or oth­er­wise, Rossi respond­ed with anoth­er video of his own, in which he address­es Haf­ford’s crit­i­cisms, and also keeps the Bagh­dad Bat­tery — as well as its new­ly cre­at­ed name­sake cock­tail — fir­ing up our imag­i­na­tions a lit­tle longer.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Behold the Old­est Writ­ten Text in the World: The Kish Tablet, Cir­ca 3500 BC

20 New Lines from The Epic of Gil­gamesh Dis­cov­ered in Iraq, Adding New Details to the Sto­ry

How the Ancient Greeks Invent­ed the First Com­put­er: An Intro­duc­tion to the Antikythera Mech­a­nism (Cir­ca 87 BC)

The Advanced Tech­nol­o­gy of Ancient Rome: Auto­mat­ic Doors, Water Clocks, Vend­ing Machines & More

A Visu­al­iza­tion of the His­to­ry of Tech­nol­o­gy: 1,889 Inno­va­tions Across Three Mil­lion Years

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

See What the Original Mona Lisa Likely Looked Like

If you want to see the Mona Lisa in real life, your first thought may not be to head to the Pra­do. But accord­ing to a school of thought that has emerged in recent years, the Mona Lisa in Madrid has a greater claim to artis­tic faith­ful­ness than the one in Paris. That’s because researchers have dis­cov­ered com­pelling evi­dence sug­gest­ing that what was long con­sid­ered just anoth­er copy of the most famous paint­ing in the world was­n’t made after Leonar­do had com­plet­ed the orig­i­nal, but con­cur­rent­ly with the orig­i­nal, prob­a­bly by one of his stu­dents. Over half a mil­len­ni­um, in this view, the Prado’s Mona Lisa has retained the col­ors and details the Lou­vre’s has lost, result­ing in its preser­va­tion of Leonar­do’s inten­tions today.

Infrared pho­tog­ra­phy has even revealed, says the nar­ra­tor of the new Inspi­rag­gio video above, that both paint­ings “share the same changes in the orig­i­nal sketch. For years, it has been known that Leonar­do made small cor­rec­tions to the shape of the Mona Lisa’s hands, adjust­ments to the line of the eyes, and sub­tle mod­i­fi­ca­tions to the curve of the face,” the very same cor­rec­tions that were found in the new­ly exam­ined copy.

Unlike oth­er copies, the Prado’s ver­sion uses “incred­i­bly expen­sive pig­ments” such as lapis lazuli—imported from Afghanistan—for the sky. This only became evi­dent dur­ing the 2012 restora­tion, when the back­ground, long hid­den under a thick lay­er of black, was final­ly uncov­ered.

There­after, the Pra­do Mona Lisa was exhib­it­ed along­side the Mona Lisa at the Lou­vre in a tem­po­rary exhi­bi­tion. This gave the pub­lic the chance to see both how sim­i­lar they look, and how dif­fer­ent. Though unde­ni­ably La Gio­con­da, the copy does­n’t seem quite “right,” in large part because it has­n’t dete­ri­o­rat­ed in the man­ner or to the degree of the orig­i­nal. Leonar­do paint­ed it on a poplar wood pan­el that has giv­en way to count­less small cracks, and the lay­ers of yel­low var­nish added over the cen­turies have dark­ened to give the whole image a sepia tone. The result, of course, is the tex­ture and col­or­ing we’ve come to asso­ciate with the Mona Lisa by cease­less expo­sure to her in pop­u­lar cul­ture, even if we’ve nev­er seen any ver­sion hang­ing in any muse­um. If the Prado’s copy real­ly does reflect Leonar­do’s orig­i­nal artis­tic choic­es, we can put at least one hot­ly debat­ed mat­ter to rest: the lady real­ly did have eye­brows.

Relat­ed con­tent:

What Makes Leonardo’s Mona Lisa a Great Paint­ing?: An Expla­na­tion in 15 Min­utes

Did Leonar­do da Vin­ci Paint a First Mona Lisa Before the Mona Lisa?

How Did the Mona Lisa Become the World’s Most Famous Paint­ing?: It’s Not What You Think

Orig­i­nal Por­trait of the Mona Lisa Found Beneath the Paint Lay­ers of da Vinci’s Mas­ter­piece

An Immac­u­late Copy of Leonardo’s The Last Sup­per Dig­i­tized by Google: View It in High Res­o­lu­tion Online

A Chi­nese Painter Spe­cial­iz­ing in Copy­ing Van Gogh Paint­ings Trav­els to Ams­ter­dam & Sees Van Gogh’s Mas­ter­pieces for the First Time

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

More in this category... »
Quantcast