English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have a problem with this happening. Its not that only 1 ancient wonder is left and that the others aren't there. Im fine with making a new list but some of the structures you can vote for on www.new7wonders.com aren't really that acient and its suppused to be the 7 wonders of the ANCIENT world. Some of the newer things are like the Sydney opera house, Eiffel Tower, statue of Liberty, Neuschwanstein Castle, Christ the Redeemer, the Hagia Sophia (i understand its old but i dont think it anywhere near ancient), I wouldn't really count the Taj Mahal either or the Kremlin.

Anicent History (as defined by Wikipedia) is the study of significant cultural and political events from the beginning of human history until the Early Middle Ages. (So i guess the Hagia Sophia could work).

I think if they want to make an honest and truthful new list of seven SURVIVING ANCIENT wonders then they need to refine the choices.

Please tell me what you think of this and go ahead and vote.

2006-10-17 15:30:44 · 7 answers · asked by chicka0002002 2 in Arts & Humanities History

O my list was:
1.Great Wall of China,
2.Pyramids of Giza,
3.Acropolis,
4.The Coloseum,
5.Machu Picchu,
6.Stonehenge,
7.The Statues on Easter Island

2006-10-17 16:01:22 · update #1

7 answers

but they're not calling them the seven wonders of the ancient world; that name is already taken. they are calling them the new seven wonders of the world.

Over the last couple of thousand years a lot of people have called a lot of different things wonders of the world. And it's no different than what Herodotus was doing when he invented that name for them . It's basically just a tourism promo. It always has been and that's exactly what it is now.

Only the 7 ancient wonders are really "officially" wonders as things stand right now, but it's hard to promote travel to something that's not there anymore. If they can come up with an official list that gives them some credibility when they claim they are a wonder, then it will increase the drawing power that these monuments have, bringing more tourists, more $$ to their economies, more government and research funding, etc.

there have been so many things called wonders of the world that they had to start calling the original 7 "ancient" to differentiate them from other things which are quite obviously wonders of this world. As you can probably ascertain, they were not originally called ancient, since they were all contemporary with Herodotus, and some of them were even quite new at the time.

I looked at their list and I'll tell you what gets my vote:

the pyramid at Giza (obviously)
the Acropolis
Angkor Wat
the Taj Mahal
the Great Wall of China
Machu Pichu
the Colosseum

I'd kinda like Stonehenge to be there but there's only room for seven, I guess. If I had to choose which of my original seven I would replace it would be the Taj Mahal.

as you can see I am a little partial to things that have stood the test of time.

I think it's kinda fun, to be quite honest. But it's not to be taken very seriously.

If you update and tell me what your list is I'd be curious to know.

2006-10-17 15:54:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

In my understanding, they are trying to make the 7 wonders of THIS world, not the world that has gone by. The old seven wonders list is still valid even if the structures don't exist.
It's not really a major issue, there's no need to get all upset about it.
I would want:
Machu Picchu
Teotihuacan
Stonehenge
Serpent Mounds of Ohio
if they are sticking with old. If new, well, I don't care.

2006-10-18 07:38:29 · answer #2 · answered by Gevera Bert 6 · 0 0

In Seven Wonders of Ancient World, the Pyramid of Giza was already one of it. Being the surviving one, i think it would be fair not to include it on selecting a new list. The Pyramid of Giza will always be part of the ancient Seven Wonders.

2006-10-17 17:12:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the super Pyramids The wonderful Gardens of Babylon The Colossus of Rhodes The Temple of Artemis The Maussoleum at Halicarnassus the super Pharos Lighthouse The Statue of Zeus

2016-10-02 10:02:33 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I think they should make stonehenge, the aztec and mayan temples and perhaps the rappa nui heads on easter island as part of the list. Personally I think that the ancient greeks and egyptians only need maybe two monuments each to be listed.

2006-10-17 15:45:59 · answer #5 · answered by West Coast Nomad 4 · 0 0

The truth is, that all of the seven ancient wonders, may not have existed at all. There is no archaeological evidence that the Colossus of Ephesus ever existed. The Hanging Gardens of Babylon, are bereft of archaeological evidence.

The other five "wonders," are pretty much for real. The two discounted "wonders" may have existed, but we have no definitive proof.

We can never abandon the wisdom of the ancients, they may prove us wrong, once again.

2006-10-17 15:52:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it isn't going to replace the 7 wonders of the ancient world. it is just the 7 wonders of the world. there is a difference.

read the link below. it explains it a little better... i think

2006-10-17 16:10:38 · answer #7 · answered by christy 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers