> Hi Origyptian,
The poster child is the Trilithon.
> The trilithon may be your poster child as spoilia
> but where is the evidence that it was used in
> another place for another purpose as per the
> "Spolia (Latin, 'spoils') is the re-use of
> earlier building material or decorative sculpture
> on new monuments."
> Judging from the still-to-be-used stones in the
> Baalbek quarry, it would appear that, at some
> time, construction was interrupted at this site
> and restarted, most probably, by the Romans. The
> trilithon served as a base for further work.
> Who were the original builders? Some say the
> Romans. Other say that Baalbek is a legacy of an
> earlier civilization.
> Just saying, "I believe there is evidence all
> around us," doesn't make it so.
> You need to provide this evidence or simply be
Funny. It wasn't used in another "place". It was used by another civilizations and reused by the Romans. The definition does not require spolia to move one inch from its original position. It only requires it to be part of another building, such as the Temple of Jupiter, the upper structure of which allegedly was built by the Romans.
I believe you are misinterpreting what lies up there on the higher ground. Those are not "still-to-be-used stones" in a so-called "quarry". Rather, they are part of an ancient infrastructure that was toppled by a catastrophe that included a violent mud-rock slide. Most of what we see there today supports this.
Why do you (or anyone else) believe they are "still-to-be-used stones"?
I've heard that interpretation and don't understand why it's still promoted.
You need to provide evidence or simply be dismissed.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 16-Nov-15 19:10 by Origyptian.