The sand in the Ark - protecting the stone tablets?

Mickiana

Well-known member
Sorry if this has been discussed. I had a look for a discussion.

When it is seemingly apparent that the Ark contains only sand, one thought occurred to me: Belloq and Dietrich didn't really investigate too far as the powers of the Ark interrupted any further looking. They were indulging their initial disappointment very well.

Depending on how deep the sand was, perhaps the stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments were buried just beneath the sand and the sand provided a type of motion buffer to prevent the tablets from damage whenever the Ark was moved?

Just a thought on this Christmas Eve. Merry Christmas to all as well.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Mickiana said:
Depending on how deep the sand was, perhaps the stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments were buried just beneath the sand and the sand provided a type of motion buffer to prevent the tablets from damage whenever the Ark was moved?


Church History aside, this is how I rationalize the scene to little consequence. It's the best non-historical-yet-completely-plausible resolution.
 

S. Dakota Jones

New member
Mickiana said:
Sorry if this has been discussed. I had a look for a discussion.

When it is seemingly apparent that the Ark contains only sand, one thought occurred to me: Belloq and Dietrich didn't really investigate too far as the powers of the Ark interrupted any further looking. They were indulging their initial disappointment very well.

Depending on how deep the sand was, perhaps the stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments were buried just beneath the sand and the sand provided a type of motion buffer to prevent the tablets from damage whenever the Ark was moved?

Just a thought on this Christmas Eve. Merry Christmas to all as well.


Considering they were smashed against the idol that was created in Moses' absence, I could see that being used to prevent further damage to the original set. Great theory! :hat:

And a Merry Christmas to you as well!
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
An hour before I take off to do the family thing today...

The possibility of the tablets turning to sand was my first reaction too, but skepticism set in almost straight away as I could not be sure if stone tablets would disintegrate into such fine sand. Even if the tablets had been jostled around in the Ark's movements - and the truck chase would have been the main culprit in the Ark's whole history I imagine - the tablets would still surely have been broken only into fragments?

Weren't the tablets inscribed by "God's own hand" as per the bible telling? I think the stone tablets being in there under the sand might have added another dimension to the Ark's authenticity, as the Ark of Mose's tribe. There are theories of numerous Arks, but I suppose the movie doesn't need this depth of prying.

Plus, the non revealing of stone tablets leaves a certain open endedness which I see as a positive.
 

HenryJunior

New member
My initial reaction was that they had disintegrated apart over time, but now that you mention it, that really doesn't make sense. I kinda like the idea that the sand was protecting the tablets. My line of reasoning runs more like this: The only people to ever actually look into and touch the Ark died, so it doesn't really matter what was in there. I think Toht understood it best when laughing at the anti-climatic payoff, that after all their efforts the tablets can never be taken.
 

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
From a storytelling/dramatic point of view, having the tablets just out of sight under a layer of sand is f-ing stupid.

They're gone. (in the movie, at least.) Pulverized or just plain missing.


The whole point is of the ending is that, after all that fuss, the characters - all of the characters, heroes and villains alike - don't quite get what they're looking for.


To assume otherwise means the filmmakers are idiots who don't understand storytelling.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Lance Quazar said:
The whole point is of the ending is that, after all that fuss, the characters - all of the characters, heroes and villains alike - don't quite get what they're looking for.

And that's why Last Crusade is such a powerful movie.

Professor Henry Jones: Elsa never really believed in the grail. She thought she'd found a prize.

Indiana Jones: And what did you find, Dad?

Professor Henry Jones: Me? Illumination.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Lance Quazar said:
From a storytelling/dramatic point of view, having the tablets just out of sight under a layer of sand is f-ing stupid.

They're gone. (in the movie, at least.) Pulverized or just plain missing.


The whole point is of the ending is that, after all that fuss, the characters - all of the characters, heroes and villains alike - don't quite get what they're looking for.


To assume otherwise means the filmmakers are idiots who don't understand storytelling.

No one assumed the filmmakers are idiots because no one is suggesting that the movie be different.

I would have thought that the audience seeing the sand made them wonder, "What happened to the stone tablets?" Of course this remains a mystery, except for the Ark then proceeding to prove it pretty well is an instrument of a vengeful God.

And after all the hullabaloo, the Nazis being vanquished, Indy getting it back to Washington and losing it to the bureaucracy there, there is still that lingering question, "I wonder what happened to the stone tablets?" Of course not to be answered by any Lucas or Disney production.

Remember the thread about what might have been the mechanism that triggered the speared gated that caught out poor ol' Forrestal? Like how did breaking the light beam do that?!!! This thread is like that one. We know there's not an answer, but ruminating on these wonderful points is appreciation of the excellent story telling. They're little mysteries and I'm talking about it.

Merry Christmas.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
RKORadio said:
There's sand everywhere!

Splendid! Who's for a swim?

Had to google that one. Maybe Dr Who can help find the stone tablets? :roll eyes:

As for Windham's novel, I haven't read that one. Black's novel didn't even mention the sand. It went straight from the lid opening to immediate carnage to onlookers.
 

TheFedora

Active member
I thought maybe the sand is something a bit more...? Like obviously there was still power in the ark considering how the ark managed to eat through the Nazi symbol while being transported through the ship.
 

Goodeknight

New member
Let me say pretty definitively that stone tablets would not disintegrate into fine sand, no matter how long they sat in a box, even if the box was moved around, a lot. At worst, a few of the broken pieces would break into smaller pieces, and a little grinding would leave a bit of sand here and there.

And, also pretty definitively, sand would not be placed inside to protect the tablets from jostling. That would be like putting sand and rocks into a rock tumbler. The sand goes in to wear away and smooth out the rocks. Same with beach glass, worn smooth by the action of sandy waves.

If the tablets needed protection, they would have been wrapped in heavy cloth, which could survive more than 1,000 years in the right, desert, environment. It'd be brittle, but it would still be there.

Now, not as definitively, I think a plausible explanation is that the tablets themselves were hastily removed, and hidden when Shishak and his army raided Jerusalem. The sand was a quick addition of weight back into the ark to fool Shishak's men, who captured the Ark.

The power of God remained with the holy vessel.

That explanation would mean....the 10 Commandments are probably still in Jerusalem.

(Please note, there is an area known as the Well of Souls directly beneath the Dome of the Rock, which is the most likely site of the 2nd Temple Holy of Holies.)
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Goodeknight said:
Let me say pretty definitively that stone tablets would not disintegrate into fine sand, no matter how long they sat in a box, even if the box was moved around, a lot. At worst, a few of the broken pieces would break into smaller pieces, and a little grinding would leave a bit of sand here and there.

And, also pretty definitively, sand would not be placed inside to protect the tablets from jostling. That would be like putting sand and rocks into a rock tumbler. The sand goes in to wear away and smooth out the rocks. Same with beach glass, worn smooth by the action of sandy waves.

If the tablets needed protection, they would have been wrapped in heavy cloth, which could survive more than 1,000 years in the right, desert, environment. It'd be brittle, but it would still be there.

Now, not as definitively, I think a plausible explanation is that the tablets themselves were hastily removed, and hidden when Shishak and his army raided Jerusalem. The sand was a quick addition of weight back into the ark to fool Shishak's men, who captured the Ark.

The power of God remained with the holy vessel.

That explanation would mean....the 10 Commandments are probably still in Jerusalem.

(Please note, there is an area known as the Well of Souls directly beneath the Dome of the Rock, which is the most likely site of the 2nd Temple Holy of Holies.)

Thank you, Goodeknight. That is a well thought out response. It even provides for a side story that could be an adventure in itself: finding and retrieving the stone tablets - for a book version maybe.
 

TheFedora

Active member
Mickiana said:
Thank you, Goodeknight. That is a well thought out response. It even provides for a side story that could be an adventure in itself: finding and retrieving the stone tablets - for a book version maybe.

So I think of it now this way. The ark itself is one big booby trap, still has the power of god in it. From the looks of the end scene that sounded very much like an angel of death or something...but I agree that the tablets are probably somewhere else. Although I wonder if the tablets themselves would have as much power as the ark...but that may be a discussion for another thread.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
TheFedora said:
So I think of it now this way. The ark itself is one big booby trap, still has the power of god in it. From the looks of the end scene that sounded very much like an angel of death or something...but I agree that the tablets are probably somewhere else. Although I wonder if the tablets themselves would have as much power as the ark...but that may be a discussion for another thread.

A good extrapolation on Goodeknight's views. I don't see why the discussion about the tablets' power couldn't continue here. You have made a good connection for that to be so. There's lots of 'good' happening here. :D
 

Kooshmeister

New member
I always joke that it's Pixie Stix and Dietrich was mad 'cause he wanted Tootsie Rolls. :D

Or, as Rifftrax said, "It's full of Skittles!" :whip:
 

Goodeknight

New member
TheFedora said:
I wonder if the tablets themselves would have as much power as the ark...

The tablets would hold even more power than the ark. They were inscribed by the hand of God, while the ark was simply made by men to God's specifications.

The ark is only a vessel for carrying the tablets. The tablets are the word of God.

Though the ark is "a transmitter, a radio for speaking to God," that power was reserved for a very select few. (Not to mention the temple curtain being torn in two when Jesus died on the cross, and everyone gaining that power...but I digress to an real religious discussion)
 

Kooshmeister

New member
This came up in conversation with a friend last night, continuing on from the Pixie Stix idea:

Belloq: It's Pixie Stix!
Dietrich: This is unacceptable! I promised the Führer Tootsie Rolls!
God: Oh, so, Tootsie Rolls not good enough for you guys, huh? How 'bout this?!
Belloq, Dietrich and Toht: Oh no! SUGAR RUSH!
Belloq: IT'S DELICIOUS...!!!! *Explodes.*
 
Top