Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

The Baalbek Foundation stones.


  • Please log in to reply
236 replies to this topic

#1    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,765 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 22 February 2009 - 11:16 PM

linked-image

Quote

The massive foundation platform of Baal Hadad is like no other structure in the world. It is over 90 metres long and nearly 60 metres wide and stands some 10 metres proud of the underlying rock.

The Trilithon is composed of three stones each measuring 19 metres long x 4.2 metres wide x 3.6 metres broad. Hewn from natural crystalline limestone with a specific gravity of about 2.7, from a quarry 1 km mile away, they weigh 870 tons each.

They have been raised to a height of 10 metres and have been so accurately cut and placed that a razor's edge cannot be placed between them.

They have been laid upon a layer of 19 similar blocks weighing between 350 and 400 tons each.

linked-image

Quote

Why these stones are such an enigma to contemporary scientists, both engineers and archaeologists alike, is that their method of quarrying, transportation and precision placement is beyond the technological ability of any known ancient or modern builders. Various ‘scholars’, uncomfortable with the notion that ancient cultures might have developed knowledge superior to modern science, have decided that the massive Baalbek stones were laboriously dragged from the nearby quarries to the temple site. While carved images in the temples of Egypt and Mesopotamia do indeed give evidence of this method of block transportation - using ropes, wooden rollers and thousands of laborers - the dragged blocks are known to have been only 1/10th the size and weight of the Baalbek stones and to have been moved along flat surfaces with wide movement paths. The route to the site of Baalbek, however, is up hill, over rough and winding terrain, and there is no evidence whatsoever of a flat hauling surface having been created in ancient times.


Quite an impressive feat of engineering - the Baalbek foundation stones shown above are the largest pieces of hewn rock on the face of the Earth.
At the link below it is argued that the foundation stones are far older than previously thought and that Roman architects just simply added to an already existing structure.
The collosal stones (each weighing 800 tonnes) are situated in a wall of the great acropolis of Baalbek in Lebanon and it is said that:

"..they are so accurately placed in position and so carefully joined, that it is almost impossible to insert a needle between them.."
Michel Alouf,Former curator of the ruins.

Interesting stuff.  

Links:
http://www.vejprty.com/baalbek.htm
http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/baalbek.htm
http://www.geocities.com/zacherystaylor/cu...res.htm#Baalbek
http://www.eridu.co.uk/Author/Mysteries_of...6/baalbek6.html

Edited by karl 12, 22 February 2009 - 11:17 PM.


#2    crystal sage

crystal sage

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,418 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

Posted 22 February 2009 - 11:55 PM

very interesting stuff.. even the Romans couldn't pilfer them... or 'borrow' them and had to cut them up to transport them..







this is interesting...
http://www.sacredsites.com/middle_east/lebanon/baalbek.htm

Quote

The Great Court, begun during the reign of Trajan (98-117), measured 135 meters by 113 meters, contained various religious buildings and altars, and was surrounded by a splendid colonnade of 128 rose granite columns. These magnificent columns, 20 meters tall and of enormous weight, are known to have been quarried in Aswan, Egypt but how they were actually transported by land and sea to Baalbek remains an engineering mystery. Today, only six columns remain standing, the rest having been destroyed by earthquakes or taken to other sites (for example, Justinian appropriated eight of them for the basilica of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople).

Architects and construction engineers, however, not having any preconceived ideas of ancient history to uphold, will frankly state that there are no known lifting technologies even in current times that could raise and position the Baalbek stones given the amount of working space. The massive stones of the Grand Terrace of Baalbek are simply beyond the engineering abilities of any recognized ancient or contemporary builders.

There are several other matters about the Baalbek stones that further confound archaeologists and conventional theories of prehistoric civilization. There are no legends or folk tales from Roman times that link the Romans with the mammoth stones. There are absolutely no records in any Roman or other literary sources concerning the construction methods or the dates and names of the benefactors, designers, architects, engineers and builders of the Grand Terrace. The megalithic stones of the Trilithon bear no structural or ornamental resemblance to any of the Roman-era constructions above them, such as the previously described Temples of Jupiter, Bacchus or Venus. The limestone rocks of the Trilithon show extensive evidence of wind and sand erosion that is absent from the Roman temples, indicating that the megalithic construction dates from a far earlier age. Finally, the great stones of Baalbek show stylistic similarities to other cyclopean stone walls at verifiably pre-Roman sites such as the Acropolis foundation in Athens, the foundations of Myceneae, Tiryns, Delphi and even megalithic constructions in the ‘new world’ such as Ollyantaytambo in Peru and Tiahuanaco in Bolivia.


Edited by crystal sage, 22 February 2009 - 11:58 PM.


#3    clubfoot O.M.G.

clubfoot O.M.G.

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 4,283 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:04 AM

crystal sage on Feb 23 2009, 12:55 AM, said:

very interesting stuff.. even the Romans couldn't pilfer them... or 'borrow' them and had to cut them up to transport them..







this is interesting...
http://www.sacredsites.com/middle_east/lebanon/baalbek.htm

Another enigma. A lot of people focus on space and UFO's when we still have 'unexplained mysteries' sitting on our own doorstep! Sometimes there seems to be an attitude of, "if its too hard to explain, don't!".
I wonder what lies beneath the oceans, or the polar caps for that matter?


#4    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,765 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:06 AM

crystal sage on Feb 22 2009, 11:55 PM, said:


Crystal Sage Thanks for the reply ,very interesting reading!
They're huge  ohmy.gif
linked-image


#5    crystal sage

crystal sage

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,418 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:07 AM

wink2.gif   Do you think that Rome 'claimed' that these buildings were theirs???

or maybe just 'refreshed' it.. then claimed it???



Quote

http://www.redicecreations.com/specialrepo...eb/baalbek.html
lavishing great architecture on Baalbek then seems totally out of character for the undeniably selfish Rome, which had at the very same time been stealing historic treasures from other countries, such as the obelisks from Egypt. It makes more sense that Baalbek had something no other place could offer, not even the city of Rome, the heart of the empire.


Note the Romans couldn't shift these blocks... so how could they have built these?



‘Dated graffito proves that the Romans could not have built or financed Baalbek.’

http://www.lebanonpostcard.com/en/phoenici...ook/index.shtml


#6    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,765 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:19 AM

crystal sage on Feb 23 2009, 12:07 AM, said:

wink2.gif   Do you think that Rome 'claimed' that these buildings were theirs???

or maybe just 'refreshed' it.. then claimed it???


Some great links there  thumbsup.gif
Apparently those cheeky Romans may have not been the first -as well as the graffiti they've found building stones on top of the megaliths which predate the Romans.
These two men in the photograph below put the foundation stones into scale:

Quote

These cyclopean stones are certainly not Roman. The square cut Roman stones are heaped on top of them by the Arabs or Crusaders, whoever turned the ruins into a medieval fortress. Look at how small the two men are compared to the cyclopean stonework, let alone the megaliths upon which they are built

linked-image

Quote

This wall is made up of many ill-fitted stones, many of them reused from the ruined Roman temple by the Arabs, Crusaders, and Turks when the ruins were used as a fort. Some pieces of the Roman entablature can be seen, as well as slits cut into the rock for firing positions in the wall.

Because all these stones are piled one upon the other, it is clear to see an evolution of stone working. This reveals some of the stones piled upon the megaliths to be even older than Roman. These are also huge stones. Yet despite their size, they are still dwarfed by the megalithic blocks.


More info on stonework:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/arqueolo...p_baalbek_1.htm

Edited by karl 12, 23 February 2009 - 01:56 AM.


#7    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    "If we would know, then we would be more wisdomed."

  • Member
  • 9,549 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:42 AM

I think I'll let Harte tackle this one, though I understand they he gets tired of pointing out the same basic facts time after time.

--Jaylemurph

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#8    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,803 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:05 AM

karl 12 on Feb 22 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Quite an impressive feat of engineering - the Baalbek foundation stones shown above are the largest pieces of hewn rock on the face of the Earth.
At the link below it is argued that the foundation stones are far older than previously thought and that Roman architects just simply added to an already existing structure.
The colossal stones (each weighing 800 tonnes) are situated in a wall of the great acropolis of Baalbek in Lebanon and it is said that:

"..they are so accurately placed in position and so carefully joined, that it is almost impossible to insert a needle between them.."
Michel Alouf, Former curator of the ruins.

Interesting stuff.

They certainly are amazing, and though really must have been an engineering task requiring years and thousands of men, it was not outside the abilities of the people of the times to create and move such stones.

crystal sage on Feb 22 2009, 04:07 PM, said:

Do you think that Rome 'claimed' that these buildings were theirs???

or maybe just 'refreshed' it.. then claimed it???

I believe they found them in place and built on top. The Greeks and the Mesopotamians were there first and could have built this.

Quote

Note the Romans couldn't shift these blocks... so how could they have built these?

I believe that if the Romans want to they could have cut up the blocks or moved them with great expense, but I believe that they simply did not see the need or have the desire. The blocks are huge, but the obelisks and other stones works they took from Egypt to Rome and Constantinople were decorated, which is probably what the emperors wanted, as they could erect their own monuments if they wished. It just displayed more power and influence to take monuments from other countries.


Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#9    legionromanes

legionromanes

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:28 AM

jaylemurph on Feb 23 2009, 12:42 AM, said:

I think I'll let Harte tackle this one, though I understand they he gets tired of pointing out the same basic facts time after time.

--Jaylemurph

lol
he's late
must be fighting off beagles
w00t.gif


#10    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:32 AM

legionromanes on Feb 22 2009, 07:28 PM, said:

lol
he's late
must be fighting off beagles
w00t.gif


More likely that he's consulting with his personal Ascended Master Bool Krappi. grin2.gif

cormac


The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#11    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,180 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:37 AM

Well, I'll do it for him then:

http://www.ramtops.co.uk/baalbek.html


#12    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:51 AM

Abramelin on Feb 22 2009, 07:37 PM, said:

Well, I'll do it for him then:

http://www.ramtops.co.uk/baalbek.html



Remember Abramelin, Duck and Jab! You know their coming. laugh.gif

cormac


The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#13    clubfoot O.M.G.

clubfoot O.M.G.

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 4,283 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 23 February 2009 - 02:13 AM

Abramelin on Feb 23 2009, 01:37 AM, said:

Well, I'll do it for him then:

http://www.ramtops.co.uk/baalbek.html

That was an interesting read. It highlights the tenacity of the human race.
Look out space, here we come, sooner or later! Maybe there is something to be said for that old "Tortoise and Hare" fable?


#14    karl 12

karl 12

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,765 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Europe

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:41 PM

Abramelin on Feb 23 2009, 01:37 AM, said:

Well, I'll do it for him then:

http://www.ramtops.co.uk/baalbek.html


Yes its interesting that Wiegand fails to address (or conveniently ignores) many pertinent points:

Quote

One  forms the bulk of the wall,  five layers of considerably eroded blocks. Several such blocks also survive in the sixth layer.  Sizes of these blocks vary from big to unbelievably big, the largest building blocks anywhere.  

The second part is a later Arab addition. Its blocks differ by being:  

   1) Uneroded, of a different color and texture  
   2) Much smaller  
   3) Uniform
  

linked-image

Quote

The top corner of the northern block of the Trilithon is well rounded by erosion,  and human abrasion. One of the newer, small blocks rests directly  on this eroded, round spot. So, when it was  lain into this position, the damage was much  like it is today.
It is evident that one block is  a lot older than the others, as the position of  the newer blocks marks the extent of erosion   in the older blocks at the time.


linked-image

Quote

If the big blocks were to be Roman then the newer Arab blocks would  mark the erosion of the older Roman blocks as it was after the first six or seven-hundred years. But, how could this erosion be a lot greater than the subsequent erosion of both the old and the new blocks in twice as much time?  This contrast is made bolder by the fact that earth' atmosphere has since become ever more corrosive.
                                                
In the details below, we can see that whoever had added the smaller blocks (presumably also limestone, and coming from the same quarry,  the nearest one to the  temple),  had made adjustments for erosion in the old ruin, which are visible as steps, or notches in the elsewhere straight line of the newer blocks. The eroded   blocks seem to have been hewn flat on top to facilitate the laying of additional  blocks.
  

Of the four blocks atop the eroded blocks, each is at a different horizontal level:

Time to Draw the Line:

Quote

A horizontal line was cut into the older block. It seems to continue the bottom line of the neighboring newer block quite exactly. The red  line you see is there to show this fact:

linked-image
http://www.vejprty.com/baalbek.htm


Older masonry:
QUOTE
This wall is made up of many ill-fitted stones, many of them reused from the ruined Roman temple by the Arabs, Crusaders, and Turks when the ruins were used as a fort. Some pieces of the Roman entablature can be seen, as well as slits cut into the rock for firing positions in the wall.

Because all these stones are piled one upon the other, it is clear to see an evolution of stone working. This reveals some of the stones piled upon the megaliths to be even older than Roman. These are also huge stones. Yet despite their size, they are still dwarfed by the megalithic blocks.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/arqueolo...p_baalbek_1.htm



Graffiti:
QUOTE
"To good Fortune! In the year 371, the second day of the month of Lôos (August 60 AD), the katochoi put off their beards".

http://www.lebanonpostcard.com/en/phoenici...ook/index.shtml


Diffferent tiers:
QUOTE
Below them at least 3 tiers of stones can be found, much smaller though still monumental in size.
Another example that they are separate to the Roman temple, is that while the Romans built the back of their temple wall flush with 3 of these stones, on one of the sides of the temple of Jupiter the perimeter clearly falls short of the width of the original megalithic structure, allowing a tier of megaliths to protrude obtrusively from the temple foundation— incongruous if they were simply foundation stones for the Roman temple.But it seems the Romans could not extend the building far enough to cover the layout of megaliths.

linked-image



No historical Roman records,different architecture:
QUOTE
There are several other matters about the Baalbek stones that further confound archaeologists and conventional theories of prehistoric civilization. There are no legends or folk tales from Roman times that link the Romans with the mammoth stones. There are absolutely no records in any Roman or other literary sources concerning the construction methods or the dates and names of the benefactors, designers, architects, engineers and builders of the Grand Terrace. The megalithic stones of the Trilithon bear no structural or ornamental resemblance to any of the Roman-era constructions above them, such as the previously described Temples of Jupiter, Bacchus or Venus. The limestone rocks of the Trilithon show extensive evidence of wind and sand erosion that is absent from the Roman temples, indicating that the megalithic construction dates from a far earlier age. Finally, the great stones of Baalbek show stylistic similarities to other cyclopean stone walls at verifiably pre-Roman sites such as the Acropolis foundation in Athens, the foundations of Myceneae, Tiryns, Delphi and even megalithic constructions in the ‘new world’ such as Ollyantaytambo in Peru and Tiahuanaco in Bolivia.

http://www.sacredsites.com/middle_east/lebanon/baalbek.htm



Weathering:
QUOTE
The much greater erosion of the big Baalbek blocks qualifies as material proof of their much greater age. The issue reeally seems rather simple. This is how the stone looks (see below, left) when it is almost like new after having been recently sanded. However, sanding did not get rid of the deep pits, signs of either considerable previous erosion, or the product of drilling, if not both:

linked-image
QUOTE
This is how the giant stones look when old. The stone's surface is pitted and cracked. (Above, right)




Out of character:
QUOTE
lavishing great architecture on Baalbek then seems totally out of character for the undeniably selfish Rome, which had at the very same time been stealing historic treasures from other countries, such as the obelisks from Egypt. It makes more sense that Baalbek had something no other place could offer, not even the city of Rome, the heart of the empire.




Circumstantial:
QUOTE
One also finds plenty of circumstantial evidence undermining the official version of Trilithon's origins:

a) Absence of Baalbek records
Above all, Rome records no claim to the incredible retaining wall.

b ) Presence of other records of actual Roman transport capabilities
Elsewhere in the Roman empire, just a little over 300 metric tons seemed to be the limit for the transport of big blocks, achievable only with the greatest difficulty. Transport of the 323 ton Laterano obelisk to Rome spanned the reigns of three emperors. Clearly, the record setting engineers from Baalbek, had they existed, could have also managed the task of transporting the relatively light Lateran Obelisk. The fact that they were nowhere to be found, no matter, how crucial the task, indicates that they simply did not exist.

c) Baalbek was an important holy place
The Ptolemys conferred the title of Heliopolis upon Baalbek. Therefore, like the other Heliopolis (Sun City) under Ptolemys' domain in Egypt, it had to be an ancient holy place, it must have had some notable architecture, and the two places had to have some connection. I suggest it was the titanic blocks that instilled awe in everybody. In Phoenician times, Baalbek had supposedly been a religious centre devoted to Baal. Local Arab legends place the cyclopean walls (the Baalbek Terrace) into the time of Cain and Abel.

d) Roman and Megalithic styles of building
Orthodox scholars of today scoff at all suggestions that Romans had not brought the great blocks to the temple site, despite the fact that building with megalithic blocks was not at all in the Roman style, and was no longer practised in those days.Romans knew and used concrete. The Colosseum still standing in Rome is a good example of a classic Roman concrete structure.


Cheers.


#15    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence. He whose k

  • Member
  • 11,475 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:59 PM

legionromanes on Feb 22 2009, 07:28 PM, said:

lol
he's late
must be fighting off beagles
w00t.gif

You should know by now that I usually take weekends off to reboot my sanity after a week of reading the loopy things written in this crazy forum by people with no knowledge concerning the "mysterious" things on which they pontificate.

Since nobody has said it, and people who "want to believe" won't read it, I should point out that Roman artifacts were found (in the very first excavation, almost a hundred years ago) at the site at levels below these "mysterious" stones, and that the stones required no lifting at all to place them.

And the link stating that this is not typical Roman architecture is simply lying.  It certainly is typical.

Harte

Edited by Harte, 23 February 2009 - 01:03 PM.

Posted Image
See the new Harte Mark III
And the Mayan panoramas on my pyramid pajamas haven't helped my little problem. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Anybody like Coleridge?




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users