THE PARTHENON A Post-Hellenistic Fabrication New Insights by THE MAD REVISIONIST

For centuries, history books and the popular media have been bombarding us with stories of the richness and majesty of ancient Greek civilization. We are taught of the contribution of the ancient Greeks to politics and philosophy, art and architecture. We are told of their vast empire, and of the complexities of their religious beliefs. Most of these stories focus on the alleged capital of this great empire, Athens. To this day, the Acropolis brings millions in tourist dollars to modern Greece every year, billed as the throne of the great Greek Empire, the birthplace of Western civilization, the gem of the ancient world. And everyone knows that the crown of the Acropolis is the Parthenon – supposedly the temple that served as the focal point of Athenian state religion.

How many have had the courage to question how much of this story is true, and how much is false? As a revisionist, I know better than to take the claims of the establishment propagandists at face value. On a recent visit to Athens, I was shocked to discover how little actual evidence was apparent to prove the establishment’s claims regarding the Acropolis. After all, what does one see when one visits the Parthenon today?  The roof is simply gone, and there is little more than a few rows of dilapidated columns, implying a structure that could have been anything – a storeroom, a schoolhouse, government offices, or a stable. Who knows? There is no apparent evidence that this was the majestic temple which the authorities claim. Once again, we are asked to rely on the opinions of self-appointed "experts", and, like sheep, blindly trust that they would never lie to us.

But the lack of evidence for the establishment’s position on the Parthenon is glaring. For example, it is well known that the ancient Greeks built statues as representations of their gods. Therefore, if this was indeed a Greek temple, one would expect for it to have a statue of a god, right? The authorities claim that the Parthenon housed a ten-meter high (!) statue of the goddess Athena, made of wood, ivory and gold, armed and holding a two-meter high ivory statue of Nike (Victory) in her right hand.

But if you visit the site today, you will see no such thing. Where is that statue now? Well, apparently it was "lost" in the first years of the Byzantine period, after the Roman Empire conveniently converted to Christianity. What a flippant excuse to explain away such glaring lack of evidence. Revisionists are not so easily fooled. Sure, its possible that a statue of this size was simply "lost" as they say, but that’s just too bad for the establishment’s story. They try to gloss over this inconsistency by claiming that there were "copies" made of the statue, from which archeologists could determine how the original must have looked. But that is not sufficient to prove to any critical mind that such a statue once stood in the Parthenon. If they cannot find this original statue, and prove that it had once stood where they claim, they have no concrete, physical evidence that this building was a temple. No statue, no temple. Its that simple.

However, the most conclusive proof of the fraudulent nature of the establishment's claims was revealed to me during a recent visit to a local museum, where I goaded one of the museum guides to reluctantly admit, on tape, that the Parthenon in their museum was, in fact, a post-Hellenistic fabrication:^*

Museum Guide:  (pretending not to have understood) Excuse me, sir?

TMR:   I said that the building is much smaller than I would have imagined it.

MG:  Well, um… it has been scaled down to fit the display.

TMR:  Scaled down? How is that possible? How do you shrink a building?

MG:  Um, well… I don’t understand, sir. What do you mean?

TMR:  I mean that this isn’t the way the Parthenon was found. Something fishy must have been done to it between the time it was built and when it was carried over here.

MG:  Carried over where?

TMR:  Well, this is the original Parthenon, isn’t it? You can’t expect to prove that the Parthenon existed without having an original to show us, can you?

MG:  But we’re not trying to prove that the Parthenon existed. We’re just trying to show what it looked like.

TMR:  Don’t insult our intelligence. How can you attempt to show what it looked like beforeyou’ve even proved that it existed?

MG:  But everyone knows that it existed. This is just an approximate representation of…

TMR:  Oh, really? An "approximate representation" is it? Just answer the question. Is this, or is it not, the authentic, original Parthenon?

MG:  (laughs nervously under her breath). Um, well, no actually.

TMR:  But that sign on the wall says that this is the Parthenon. And now you tell me that it is not?

MG:  It is... um... a reconstruction of how archeologists believe the Parthenon would have.. er... appeared.

TMR:  Oh, very clever. First you say it’s the Parthenon, and then when the fraud is exposed, you weasel-word it by saying that it’s actually a "reconstruction". I came here to see proof of the so-called "Hellenistic civilization" and all you can show me is a museum piece.

MG:  Well sir, this is a museum.

TMR:  A "reconstruction" is not proof. Just how do we know that this "reconstruction" is an accurate depiction of the original?

MG:  Uh, well, archeologists determined…

TMR:  Archeologists? Is that all? More, so-called "experts". What was their evidence? Where are the original construction documents relating to this building? What gives them the right to pass their biased speculations off as gospel truth?

MG:  Please calm down, sir. I don’t want to have to call security.

Once confronted with the lie, this guide reluctantly admitted that the display, which claimed to present evidence of an "ancient civilization", had in fact been built in 1984!  Further research later revealed that several of the sponsors of this exhibition had suspiciously Greek-sounding names.  The question we must all ask ourselves is this: if the existence of the Parthenon were as certain as the establishment claims, why would museums such as this one feel the need to produce such obvious fabrications for the purpose of fooling the public?

It was also instructive to observe that when faced with irrefutable revisionist arguments, this guide’s only recourse was to call for security. The establishment will never debate the revisionist, only attack him - proof of the weakness of their case. It should be further noted, that while ejecting me from the museum, one of the security guards bruised my arm! Can you imagine such a thing in our allegedly "democratic" society?  Such repression has not been experienced since Galileo was persecuted by the Church.

One would think that the facts revealed in this account would put an end to the fantastic myth of the Greek Empire. But one should not underestimate the depths of intellectual dishonesty to which the establishment is willing to sink. Like all lies exposed by revisionist scholarship, this myth will not die easily. Too many hundreds of millions of honest, intelligent people have been duped by the well-financed and brilliantly successful post-Hellenistic publicity campaign. There will always be incorrigible historians, statesmen, and publicists who are content to believe, or have no economically viable alternative but to believe, that the Parthenon was indeed this majestic temple which the hysterical propagandists continue to claim it was.

THE MAD REVISIONIST: We do not recruit; we convince. Truth has no need of coercion. We invite your support and submissions.

For relentless Parthenon pushing, on the other hand, contact The Perseus Project

For another Hellenistic point of view, visit InfoXenios: The Greek National Tourism Organization

Or click here for more of the standard Acropolis lies...
 

An alleged "copy" of the statue of Athena, as seen at the Pergammon museum in (formerly communist East) Berlin.  But where are the arms?...  Hmm...

The famous Varvakeion Athena, another alleged "copy" of the original.  But note the significant differences from the German version.  These Parthenon hoaxers can't even keep their own story straight.

Back to THE MAD REVISIONIST
 

DISCLAIMER: All editorial content on this website is strictly not the writer’s/author’s opinion. THE MAD REVISIONIST, located on the moon, is owned and operated by accident. The content of this page is the copyrighted property of THE MAD REVISIONIST. Any illegal copying or circulating of this page, in whole or in part, without the expressed permission of THE MAD REVISIONIST will be taken as a compliment.  Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father.  Kevin Spacey is Kaiser Soze.  And the chick in "The Crying Game" is a guy...  Can you believe that?  A guy!  You sure could have fooled me...