lowell

--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> I agree with everything you have written below except your

second paragraph,

> which I have already refuted in my message 13991, as you

have noted.

yes & thanx for all the aiding & abetting in the ongoing
improvement of my & our belief structures

> Further, it is possible that the arms of the colonnade, as built

by Bernini, had

> steps along their outer margins at some points and not at

others due to

> irregularity in the natural topography over such a long distance.

yes i have already observed this too but would add now that
everything we have recently seen of the piazza & its main portal
leads me to believe further
1
that at least the inner edge & possibly everything within the
ellipse has been carefully levelled so as to make all the steps &
other architectural features stand out as cleanly & clearly as
possible & as evenly & symmetrically as possible
2
that the main portal slopes downward from piazza level to street
level
where
3
all manner of additional &or countervailing slopes are likely to
occur in all directions

> I note that
> the plinths in Fig. 3b sit on about a foot of the wide marble top

step, which is

> also equal in width to each of the three lower steps. In Fig. 11,

however,

> there is a narrower marble strip that does not extend beyond

the plinths.

it is most peculiar that these cobblestones seem to trump &or
obliterate the outermost several inches of colonnade floor here
as if part of the top marble step had to be jackhammered out so
the sides of the cobbles could be fitted against the columnar
bases with their tops flush to the floor

but perhaps this preposterous appearance only means the
original builders were cutting costs in the hidden back corners

> Where
> there are several steps, they would extend beyond the cornice,

and where there

> are few or none, they would not. This, combined with the

statement by the

> Italian author (Tullio Aebischer) that they were all paved over as

of 1929,

> causes him to see the plinth line as the boundary. Even if that

point were

> granted, the plinth lines jog outward at the propylaea. The

alignment of the

> travertine strip with the plinth lines of the narrower colonnades

is his only

> justification for exclusion of the outer propylaea from the

Vatican City State.

i see
right
& perhaps even more to our point
in fig03a
the critical photo for seeing exactly which feature the presumably
correct travertine edge actually aligns with
it seems one can distinguish the edge of the columnar base
from the edge of the underlying plinth
at least on the left side of the corner column

for the critical right side is a bit harder to see

but it looks like there is about an inch of difference on all edges
between the square base & the square plinth underlying it

yet once the transition point is reached by the travertine edge
i believe all bets are then off on any further precise geometrical
figuration because i believe itva then necessarily follows at
ground level the presumably irregular line formed wherever
visible cobblestones meet visible marble

that is
i believe
beyond the ends of the travertine sector of itva
marble is vatican & cobblestones is italy
for both entire colonnade sectors

granted this is an original & perhaps arbitrary view
but i havent yet thought of a better or truer one

& i believe any marble that may be found to exist anywhere
beneath the cobblestones would have no effect on itva
but that any marble overhanging the ground level itva would
enjoy full vatican sovereignty by vertical differentiation

but dont ask me where i believe the vertical differentiations occur
because i believe that aspect of itva is actually just as indefinite
as any mxus bridge
notwithstanding the several vertical red lines in the photos

which i dont believe in

> I think we must classify some of the finer points of the

colonnade boundaries as

> indefinite. They are likely to remain so until someone commits

a felony on the

> steps or within an outer propylaeum on one of those rare days

when the Vatican

> closes St. Peter's Square to the public, thereby pushing Italian

police

> jurisdiction beyond the poorly defined outer edge of Bernini's

Colonnade.

>
> There is another delicious article on the curiosities of the

Vatican boundary,

> this one by Vitto La Colla, on the same web site. Its two parts

begin at

> http://tinyurl.com/yvb86 . I have only begun to try to de-Italianize

it.

hahaha
nicely put
& another interesting site
especially with regard to that incredible sickle shaped proruption
between the colonnade & passetto

i had no idea that that was what we were actually looking at here

truly fantastic
yet relatively real

but based on all the above known difficulty in determining the
concave edge of this sickle plus all the unknown difficulty of
determining its convex edge
i rather doubt its true outlines & point convergency will ever
actually be known
but only deliciously guessed at ad infinitum

end insertions

> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "m06079" <barbaria_longa@h...>
> To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 3:10 AM
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] 2 vatican footnotes
>
>
> > first
> > just to tie down a tangential loose end
> > some pix i previously overlooked
> > clearly showing that the outer steps of the basic colonnade
> > if ever there were any
> > as distinct from the outer steps of the propylaea
> > have indeed been entirely paved over
> > right up to the floor level of the colonnade
> > in at least 2 different areas
> > if not everywhere
> > http://www.globalgeografia.com/europa/vaticano/fig11.jpg
> > http://www.globalgeografia.com/europa/vaticano/fig14.jpg
> >
> > which tends to confirm that the full flight of steps in
> > http://www.globalgeografia.com/europa/vaticano/fig03b.jpg
> > are probably the steps of the propylaea
> >
> > but having written this
> > i also just received message 13991
> > for which thanx lowell
> > tho i wont be able to see the attachment til tomorrow
> > but happily we clearly still have somewhere to go on this
> > intriguing if otherwise irrelevant detail
> >
> >
> > & following with translations & elucidations are some more

> > the data & reasoning behind the questionable conclusion by

the

> > same author that the propylaea are in italy
> >
> > qui
> > piu che in altri punti
> > il passaggio de sovranita non e minimamente segnalado.
> >
> > here in the open portal more than anywhere else the

transition of

> > sovereignty isnt clearly indicated at all
> >
> > lo si puo solo dedurre dalla presenza dei tombini con la

scritta

> > scv
> > fig 9
> > della citta del vaticano
> > anche se sono presenti altri con spqr
> > fig 10
> >
> > but it can only be inferred from the presence of metal plates

> > the pavement inscribed scv for vatican city state
> > http://www.globalgeografia.com/europa/vaticano/fig09.jpg
> > & also others in the area that are inscribed spqr
> > an acronym for the ancient roman senate & people
> > & thus presumably somehow standing for the vatican too
> > http://www.globalgeografia.com/europa/vaticano/fig10.jpg
> >
> > il lastricato di travertino che segna il confine
> > largo circa 60cm
> > e in corrispondenza del filare dei plinti delle colonne esterne

del

> > colonnato
> > fig 3a
> > mentre la planimetria firmata in commissione con evidenzia
> > nemmeno i due propilei confermandone lesclusione per

quelli

> > verso l italia
> >
> > the 2 foot wide travertine pavement strip that marks the

border is

> > in alignment with the edge of the plinths of the outer row of
> > columns of the basic colonnade
> > http://www.globalgeografia.com/europa/vaticano/fig03a.jpg
> > while the map or plan signed by the commissioners shows

> > evidence of the 2 propylaea
> > & thus confirms that they are excluded from the vatican &

belong

> > to italy
> >
> > durante la 4a adunanza della commission fu respinta
> > senza una precisa motivazione
> > la richiesta di momo di posizionare il cordolo di travertino al

di la

> > delle colonne del colonnato per comprendervi i suddetti

propilei

> >
> > during the 4th meeting of the commission
> > a request was made by a certain momo
> > presumably a name or acronym explained elsewhere but

which

> > has eluded this reader
> > that the outer edge of the travertine be aligned with that of the
> > columns of the colonnade in such a way as to include the
> > mentioned propylaea within its outline
> > but this request was rejected without any clear or definite
> > justification
> >
> >
> > so
> > the author
> > who is obviously otherwise a first rate researcher & thinker
> > having already allowed himself to be misled by the

sketchiness

> > of the treaty map
> > now evidently also mistakenly presumes for some reason

that

> > itva had to follow the outer edge of either the basic

colonnades

> > or the propylaea & for some reason couldnt possibly follow

both

> > alternately
> >
> > & when he finds that one edge has necessarily been

rejected &

> > the other accepted for the travertine prolongation
> > he again erroneously presumes that the edge which has

been

> > accepted for that purpose must also necessarily delimit itva
> > everywhere along the full length of the outer portico
> > regardless of the existence of the propylaea
> > & even at the expense of sacrificing them to italy in his mind
> >
> > & desacralizing the symbolic gates of heaven in the process
> >
> >
> > so in sum
> > i would say
> > discounting the passetto gate for being an inevitability
> > & the audience hall for being a possible misrepresentation
> > & the propylaea for being a misunderstanding
> > the number of actually divided actual buildings on itva could

still

> > prove to be as few as zero
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >