Recently I've stumbled upon an article about the rebuilding of Gediminas castle which I thought it was a cool concept. I don't have a strong opinion on this so I would like to see what others think

by 2020badmemerEU2020

37 comments

  4. It’s cool, but not now. We need to invest that money into our safety first.

  6. The hill is made of solid rock with earth on top.

    Adding extra weight on top might create extra landslides.
    Currently when too much rain comes – it soaks down to the rock and flows down, thus making mudslides.

    It always had these mudslides and it might be the answer why the castle is not on top now 🙂

  9. būtų dar viena nacionalinė bėda (kaip ir stadionas)

  10. Would it be cool? Absolutely. Is it doable. No, and I fear any attempts would destroy the hill as a whole

  11. Jeigu piliakalnas išlaikytų, tai tik go. Bet nei piliakalnas išlaikytų nei tas projektas pavyktų po atkatų išsidalinimo.

  12. Čia Kaušpėdo sukurta vizualizacija, deja, nelabai patikima. Informacijos apie Gedimino pilį turim dar mažiau nei apie Valdovų rūmus. Tačiau galbūt galima butų atstatyti dalį pilies, pvz ketvirtą Gedimino bokšto aukštą, kuris tikrai ten buvo.

  14. How about shelters and overall defence budget? This would be a never ending money sink no one asked for.

  15. How about building bunkers and placing mines along the border instead?

  18. It would cost a billion and it would only take one orc missile to destroy.

  19. Nobody knows how the castle actually looked like. It would be like copying from a cookie box and claiming this is our history.

    Oh and also the hill is falling apart.

    All in all, I cannot believe we are actually having this conversation.

  20. Pirma sutvarkom kelius ir siaip infrastruktura ir tada gal galima bus uzsiimineti nice to have dalykais.

  21. I was so sad when they chopped off all the trees several years ago.

  23. Jeigu nuoširdžiai tai man visad patiko tokios galimos pilies vizualizacijos, tačiau pats klausimas restauruoti ar išsaugoti yra labai kompleksinis.

    **Pliusai:**

    * Kultūrinis ir istorinis prikėlimas
    * Turizmo skatinimas
    * Edukacinės galimybės
    * Stipri simbolinė reikšmė

    **Minusai:**

    * Neturime tikslių duomenų, kaip pilis atrodė – būtų istorinė netikslybė
    * Gali prieštarauti paveldo išsaugojimo principams
    * Labai brangu (jau stadiono nesugebam pastatyti – nenoriu, kad kalną 20 metų slėptų pastoliai)
    * Kalnas ir taip nestabilus – rizika jį pažeisti
    * Pasikeistų ikoniškas Vilniaus siluetas

    Aš ne architektas ir ne paveldosaugininkas, tačiau iš mano subjektyvios perspektyvos, minusai nusveria pliusus.

  24. If they cement all hill and dont forget to put ruberoid I think castle would be possible.

  27. I’d support it if the hill were to be reinforced, but at present I don’t think that’s possible

  29. 100% support if they actually fix the landslide problem long-term, build us a fuckin metro and figure out the stadium fiasco, which will likely happen before 2153, so why not.

  31. Kauspedas buvo uzsisvaiges su sita ideja. Karas pasonej, globalines ekonomines krizes gresme, o jus svaigstat apie pilies atstatyma ant slenkancio piliakalnio? Kam jums tai?

  32. Statom statom juk neidomu jei su kalnu tik vienas bokstas nuslinks reikia visos pilies.

  33. Leaving most of the discussion of “why” aside, considering how the hill is already falling apart despite there being nothing of a particular size on it, my first question would be “how?”.

  36. Definitely a better idea than rebuilding “Valdovu Rumai”.

    In principle, I am for it as long as we know exact plans etc. Like for example I would be for rebuilding Kaunas Castle as well, but the problem is – we don’t know it’s exact plans… there are sketches and that is all… so it would be historical fakery basically.

  37. Why not. Vis tiek jinai neseniai pastatyta, ne tai kad čia orginalas stovi🤷‍♂️

Comments are closed.