Skip to comments.Archaeological report: Razed ruins not Phoenician port
Posted on 07/03/2012 6:26:00 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
Beirut's Minet al-Hosn construction site does not contain the remains of a Phoenician port as maintained by the Directorate General of Antiquities and the former Culture Minister, according to an archaeological report obtained by The Daily Star.
The Archaeological Assessment Report on the Venus Towers Site states: "While the site ... is intriguing, it does not fit the known parameters for a port, shipyard, or shipshed facility."
The report, written by Dr. Ralph Pederson of Marburg University following an extensive investigation, maintains that there is nothing to connect the site to ships or shipbuilding.
"The trenches could not have functioned for sliding ships up and down, nor could they have functioned for ship storage or maintenance. There are no apparent features related to ships or things maritime within the site, nor do they fit current theoretical constructs and knowledge of ship facilities in the ancient world," it says.
Pederson conducted his investigation at the behest of the Venus Towers Real Estate Development Company, which wants to begin construction on the site. According to Lebanese law, it is mandatory for developers to notify the Directorate General of Antiquities before they embark on any construction work in Downtown Beirut.
The Venus construction firm's project was put on hold in April 2011, when then-Culture Minister Salim Wardy designated some 1,200 square meters of land owned by Venus as an archaeological site that should not be tampered with in any way.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailystar.com.lb ...
Protesters have described the Culture Ministry's decision to demolish the Phoenician port as "terrorism." (The Daily Star/Hasan Shaaban)Note: The caption continues the drumbeat about a Phoenician port, which didn't actually exist in the first place.
|GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach|
To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
I guess I don’t understand the reasoning behind going ahead with construction at this point. “We don’t know what it is or what historical or cultural importance it represents, but we definitely know it is not a port, so it should be paved over.”
I am curious to know what it is now.
It was three trenches from Roman times that got filled back in through erosion or because someone filled them back in.
The idiots who abuse words and terms such as terrorism, to name just one, should be introduced to the actual real meaning of the words they abuse.
A good beating with a clue x 4, or an iron spiked clue-bat, for example.
In that case, pave away. Thanks for the info.