It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
As to why the stones are still in the bedrock, I would think that after failed attempts at moving massive blocks suh as the case of the pregnant women stone they just stopped before it was finished realising it was a fools errand.
originally posted by: Hanslune
originally posted by: Wifibrains
a reply to: Blackmarketeer
Nice! but that does not account for one block being on top of another at the site in the photos.
What if these blocks are the tip of the iceberg? Lol
There is one partially completed and still not detached and the outline of another at a lower level and next to the first one, the other partially completed stone is in another part of the quarry. So not quite understanding your 'being on top of another', comment.
s29.postimg.org...
originally posted by: JamesTB
Not sure if they are in the same quarry but they are closeby.
Here's a photo showing both monoliths pre 2014 excavation -
s29.postimg.org...
originally posted by: Sparta
Such a feat I imagine would not have just been written about in one or two documents, I would think they would have referenced it quite afew times(though my knowledge is limited if they have please enlighten me) considering the man power required to move the blocks (did they even have enough numbers around) of course Caesar had the legions with him which was probably significant man power but it's not like he was holidaying in Lebanon and whacking up Roman tourist resorts, wasn't he marching back to Rome at the time? (not entirely sure on Caesars time in Lebanon so this pure speculation ha) and the time it would have taken I can't understand why they would have gone to such lengths to build incredible foundations, unless the foundation stones were already in place, then not propagandized their achievements in moving such giant pieces of stone.
My other problem is that the Romans have never in my reading worked such megalithic blocks.
Though to blackmarketerr those images you posted were pretty damn good mate, that technique makes sense to me, and the fact the quarry was higher up than the temple means they never had to actually pull such stones up hill just down (I think)
They did some smaller ones but generally they were good enough engineers to avoid needing to do so, ie for a retaining wall, for large structures they used concrete (the dome of the Pantheon which is still the world's largest un-reinforced concrete dome at 43.25 meters (142 ft)). I suspect they did what they did because 'X' wanted a temple at that exact location, it may have also have been that the Roman's sub-contracted the job to a non-Roman who was more into moving heavy blocks, who knows?
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Hanslune
They did some smaller ones but generally they were good enough engineers to avoid needing to do so, ie for a retaining wall, for large structures they used concrete (the dome of the Pantheon which is still the world's largest un-reinforced concrete dome at 43.25 meters (142 ft)). I suspect they did what they did because 'X' wanted a temple at that exact location, it may have also have been that the Roman's sub-contracted the job to a non-Roman who was more into moving heavy blocks, who knows?
There may not have been a pressing engineering need for using blocks of those sizes - Herod's unfinished work there included a temple podium with blocks up to 400 tons, and in Judea the Western Stone weighing in at 500 tons. How would the Romans feel if they took over the site and were trumped by the engineering feats of Herod? Pride might have been a factor in the Romans moving and placing 800 ton blocks. Can't have the mighty Romans out-engineered by a deposed Jew, can we?
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Hanslune
During my correspondence with Lohmann and a Syrian engineer with the DAI (a Dr. Razzaq) he suggested that it was the quarry itself that provided the impetus to produce these massive blocks, with a greater than usual bedding plane in the limestone quarries. The same thing could be said about the Egyptians with their quarry in Aswan, which could also produce massive blocks which they took advantage of in making gigantic obelisks.
s14.postimg.org...
s28.postimg.org...
s29.postimg.org...
originally posted by: Tsurugi
a reply to: Blackmarketeer
The Romans had concrete. Why would they futz around with giant blocks?
The Romans had concrete. Why would they futz around with giant blocks?