The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Zennor Quoit |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
Topic View: Flat | Threaded |
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:05
|
||
How come that this 1769 drawing by Borlase does not show the facade as it is now in the photo below, albeit from a different angle? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zennorquoitborlase1.jpg https://picasaweb.google.com/100525707086862773355/ZennorFacade?authkey=Gv1sRgCP2M5YzE68H7Qg#5853743664694836930 More to say but let's deal with this first :-)
|
|||
harestonesdown 1067 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:17
|
||
Sanctuary wrote: How come that this 1769 drawing by Borlase does not show the facade as it is now in the photo below, albeit from a different angle? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zennorquoitborlase1.jpg https://picasaweb.google.com/100525707086862773355/ZennorFacade?authkey=Gv1sRgCP2M5YzE68H7Qg#5853743664694836930 More to say but let's deal with this first :-) Artistic license ? A mistake ? Someone moved the stones around ? Is there evidence to show he actually visited the site ?
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:28
|
||
harestonesdown wrote: Sanctuary wrote: How come that this 1769 drawing by Borlase does not show the facade as it is now in the photo below, albeit from a different angle? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zennorquoitborlase1.jpg https://picasaweb.google.com/100525707086862773355/ZennorFacade?authkey=Gv1sRgCP2M5YzE68H7Qg#5853743664694836930 More to say but let's deal with this first :-) Artistic license ? A mistake ? Someone moved the stones around ? Is there evidence to show he actually visited the site ? This one is more (only just) like the same angle as Borlases and again completely different. http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/img_fullsize/25996.jpg The 'artistic licence', if true, would concern me as what else could be wrong?
|
|||
Harryshill 510 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:28
|
||
It does look more like a artists impression, rather than a detailed drawing. http://www.pznow.co.uk/historic1/quoits.html
|
|||
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:28
|
||
It's history seems to have been unusually well documented http://ancient-cornwall.wikidot.com/hiac:zennor-quoit
|
|||
harestonesdown 1067 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:30
|
||
Sanctuary wrote: The 'artistic licence', if true, would concern me as what else could be wrong? That's why i wondered if there's actual evidence of him visiting. I don't know the answer but its pretty fundamental to any query.
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:33
|
||
nigelswift wrote: It's history seems to have been unusually well documented http://ancient-cornwall.wikidot.com/hiac:zennor-quoit They are quite clear in Willis' 1849 sketch....odd
|
|||
harestonesdown 1067 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:35
|
||
Just read Borlase was the vicar there, so i guess he must have visited at some point, surely.
|
|||
bladup 1986 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:37
|
||
Sanctuary wrote: nigelswift wrote: It's history seems to have been unusually well documented http://ancient-cornwall.wikidot.com/hiac:zennor-quoit They are quite clear in Willis' 1849 sketch....odd They are there Roy, it's drawn from the side, so are thin, as in real life, i can see what you mean though, i think it's just a case of they're hard to see and not drawn very clearly at all but the side of one is just there to see [only just though].
|
|||
Harryshill 510 posts |
Mar 10, 2013, 16:40
|
||
Mind you. ‘Cornish Antiquities’ was published in 1754, with a second edition released in 1769, complete with many plates based upon his sketches, including depictions of Zennor Quoit prior to it’s partial destruction and subsequent restoration, and Lanyon Quoit before it’s collapse in the early 1800?s. 'Many plates based upon his sketches' 'partial destruction and subsequent restoration'
|
Pages: 4 – [ 1 2 3 4 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index |