• BBQueue
    24
    If you have seen pictures of the stone, it is only around half as tall as a person, and there is a great deal of writing on it which from a distance appears very small and close together. Moreover, I am assuming that in order for the writing to have been preserved for as long as it was and not otherwise faded (and because part of it was in hieroglyphics), that the writing was likely created using a chisel type tool to physically carve the letters into the stone, although I imagine this had to be a very laborious and time-consuming process.

    In any case, I am curious as to how so much writing could have been created using this method, and yet still be legible enough and free enough of errors that the Greek passage could be translated entirely. I would just think that if you were using a chisel to chisel something into stone, that there would be at least several mistakes from parts of the stone potentially chipping off or breaking, and that this might occur even if you were moderately skilled from having done it many times before since no one can predict what might happen during the process. The Greek letters also appear to be fairly neat when viewed close up, almost as neat as if they were written by hand, so I also don't know how that was achieved by any measure.
  • christian2017
    1.4k
    If you have seen pictures of the stone, it is only around half as tall as a person, and there is a great deal of writing on it which from a distance appears very small and close together. Moreover, I am assuming that in order for the writing to have been preserved for as long as it was and not otherwise faded (and because part of it was in hieroglyphics), that the writing was likely created using a chisel type tool to physically carve the letters into the stone, although I imagine this had to be a very laborious and time-consuming process.

    In any case, I am curious as to how so much writing could have been created using this method, and yet still be legible enough and free enough of errors that the Greek passage could be translated entirely. I would just think that if you were using a chisel to chisel something into stone, that there would be at least several mistakes from parts of the stone potentially chipping off or breaking, and that this might occur even if you were moderately skilled from having done it many times before since no one can predict what might happen during the process. The Greek letters also appear to be fairly neat when viewed close up, almost as neat as if they were written by hand, so I also don't know how that was achieved by any measure.
    BBQueue

    My guess is the stone might be more workable than a stone used for carving. They may have used paint as a stencil or guideline when applying the chisel. And the guy (or girl lol) probably was trained from child hood or something like that on how to do this stuff kind of like an apprenticeship.
  • Sir2u
    3.5k
    It is difficult to imagine them doing it, but try to imagine them making a mistake and having to start again. They have not found any previous drafts of it some they must have gotten it right the first time.

    Lots of planning involved I would guess and all outlined before carving began.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.