Instances of Giant humans on the early 17th century engravings

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
954
Likes
1,489
#1

humanoidlord

Active member
Messages
451
Likes
215
#2
very bizzare drawings! full of anomalous stuff, and its all presesnted as being mundane!
 

SeekingWis

New member
Messages
1
Likes
2
#3
Ran into a couple instances of what appears to be giant people depicted on two different engravings. Both are dated 1612.

1. Les Magnificences publiques du carrosel fait en la place royale de Paris (this ona has unicorns as well)

2. Dessein des pompes et magnificences du carousel faict en la place royalle a Paris



May be if @in cahoots could help out with translation... description to both engravings is in French. Wondering what the commotion in the images is all about.
From what I can tell, both seem to be engravings for the festivities, carousel, of the marriage of King Louis XIII of France and Anne of Austria in 1612 Paris. One is by Jan Ziarnko, a Polish engraver, and the other by Claude Chastillon, a topographer and architect.

The engravings being portrayed by two different people gives credence to the actual presence of any attractions that are shown across both.

I’m spotting, giants, dragons, unicorns, pegasi in one winged people in the other, elk, elephants, lions, rhinos, and several other animals I can’t directly identify.

I just want to note that some of those giants bear a striking resemblance to many representations I have seen of the Tartars.

It looks like each engraver numbered or lettered each group or attraction and I would love to see the key with each one named.

While I am by default a skeptic, these two engravings are certainly interesting to see. Thanks for the post.
 
Last edited:

humanoidlord

Active member
Messages
451
Likes
215
#4
From what I can tell, both seem to be engravings for the festivities, carousel, of the marriage of King Louis XIII of France and Anne of Austria in 1612 Paris. One is by Jan Ziarnko, a Polish engraver, and the other by Claude Chastillon, a topographer and architect.

The engravings being portrayed by two different people gives credence to the actual presence of any attractions that are shown across both.

I’m spotting, giants, dragons, unicorns, pegasi in one winged people in the other, elk, elephants, lions, rhinos, and several other animals I can’t directly identify.

I just want to note that some of those giants bear a striking resemblance to many representations I have seen of the Tartars.

It looks like each engraver numbered or lettered each group or attraction and I would love to see the key with each one named.

While I am by default a skeptic, these two engravings are certainly interesting to see. Thanks for the post.
yep indeed, they depict mythical stuff as being 100% normal and not paranormal just curiosities, very bizzare
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
954
Likes
1,489
#5
Simple logic suggests that they reflected on their observations. I assume this is the general idea.
 
Messages
100
Likes
91
#9
I don't understand why the history of giants is being kept secret. It seems to be accepted that there were a lot of giant things in the past like centipedes and cats (known as sabre-toothed tigers), megaladons, wooly mammoths, etc. Even if homosapiens sapiens did wipe out a race of giants, it's not as though we didn't wipe out the Neanderthals too. I don't think anyone alive today is consumed with guilt over that. I think we could handle the truth.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas
Messages
954
Likes
1,489
#10
Well, first of all it would probably crush the entire structure of the contemporary human related science making generations of “scholars” look like a bunch of bafoons.

Simultaneously it would probably do the same with a whole bunch of dominant religions.

And most important of them all. I think there is a very serious reason for them to hide the existence of giants. And this reason directly connected to all the other shenanigans.
 
Messages
7
Likes
9
#11
There are many examples of their being huge versions of many animals we have today. Its quite confusing because why did the smaller of us survive? Is there something purely physical that enables smaller species to survive? Is there conditions that we can handle?

For example I remember seeing a TV Documentary on Dinosaurs (which now most of those facts are pretty much null now) but one of the explanations they gave for the dinosaurs huge size is that there was a lot more oxygen on the planet '65 million' years ago. Earth was completely filled with trees, life and ever changing species. If we are to believe that the basics of science are correct, more oxygen in our atmospheres does promote growth and prosperity for anything living.

A quote from an article about over-oxygenization
"One way to decrease the risk of oxygen toxicity would have been to grow bigger" Why Giant Bugs Once Roamed the Earth

They say this only matters for insects and bugs but I'd like to think it somewhat matters for other species too.

Was there once a large supply of oxygen that enabled humans to grow to such heights, possibly think smarter and operate smarter?
Did lack of oxygen due to natural or man-made disaster weaken these large humans in order for the smaller more accustom humans to take control?

In @KorbenDallas post about Siberian Forest there was discussion on how a large majority of our forests spanning the earth that are only a few hundred years old in dating.

"Trees renew our air supply by absorbing carbon dioxide and producing oxygen. The amount of oxygen produced by an acre of trees per year equals the amount consumed by 18 people annually. One tree produces nearly 260 pounds of oxygen each year. "

That number adds up to ALOT if you think about just how many trees there are on earth.

We have an estimated 400 billion to 3 Trillion trees (thats a huge range but I guess I could understand its hard to measure the amount of trees but really 400b to 3 trillion?)

I'm no oxygen scientist so I don't know how much 'pounds' really validates to oxygen output but
3(t) x 260 pounds = 780000000000000 (780 Trillion) and these are only from our new forests

We don't have any way to account for the number of trees in the past but just imagine the difference in oxygen ouput?
How much would that effect an eco system if suddenly millions maybe even billions, trillions? of pounds of oxygen disappeared from the atmosphere.

Random Quote - "Large active animals require abundant oxygen together with effective means of distributing it throughout the body. This truism led to the hypothesis that gigantism in Late Paleozoic arthropods on land was made possible by oxygen levels in the atmosphere that were 20% to perhaps 33% higher than today's "
 
Last edited:
Top