Baalbek - Heliopolis lebanon

The Monumental Baalbek – The largest building blocks on Earth


In Lebanon, at an altitude of approximately 1,170 meters in Beqaa valley stands the famous Baalbek or known in Roman times as Heliopolis. Baalbek is an ancient site that has been used since the Bronze Age with a history of at least 9,000 years, according to evidence found during the German archaeological expedition in 1898.

Baalbek was an ancient Phoenician city that was named by the name of the sky God Baal. The name ‘Baal’ in the Phoenician language meant ‘lord’ or ‘god’. Legends abound around Baalbek with some of them mentioning that Baalbek was the place where Baal first arrived on Earth and thus ancient alien theorists suggest that the initial building was probably built as a platform to be used for sky God Baal to ‘land’ and ‘take off’.

Part of this suggestion is because Heliopolis was built on a massive platform that probably was built in pre-roman times for the initial temple or city of Baal - Baalbek. If you look at the picture it becomes obvious that different civilizations have built different parts of what is now known as Heliopolis. However beyond theories, the actual purpose of this structure as well as who has built it are completely unknown. Massive stone blocks have been used with the largest of the stones to be approximately 1,500 tons and a size of 68x14x14 feet. Those are the largest building blocks that have ever existed in the whole world.

The way that those stones were cut and moved has fascinated researchers for many years now. Because of the existence of ancient texts referring to Baalbek as a landing place the speculations about pre-existing advanced civilizations that we do not know about, as well as alien intervention, have flourished. We need to make clear that those stones are not made by the Romans as many debunkers try to propose. However even if we could hypothesize that it was Romans that did built the whole site including the platform, even Romans with their advanced technology while they could probably explain how the smaller stones of 2 to 3 tons could be cut and moved it WOULDN’T explain how they could cut and move 1,500 tons blocks.

It is possible that the platform below the Heliopolis was built as the base of another older temple that probably the Egyptians or the Romans destroyed to build Heliopolis (a name given by Alexander the Great when he conquered the area). The area was previously used also by the Egyptians to worship Ra. Which makes you wonder why they would build another temple on the same place and multiple civilizations use the same exact spot, unless that place was important for some reason. It is also interesting to mention that in Heliopolis Baal was also worshiped as well as other Greek and Roman Gods. Over the ruins of the pre-roman site a massive temple of Jupiter, the largest temple of its kind, as well as smaller temples for Venus and Mercury were built by the Romans.

The quarry that was used was situated about ¼ mile away from the area. So not only did they transfer those massive stones that distance but they also placed them together in such a precise way that not a sheet of paper can fit between the stones. That is another point that the debunkers fail to reply to - even if the stones were carried in the ways they suggest, how could they place rectangle stone blocks in such a precise way next to each other?

Another interesting point is that if the Romans/Greeks have built such a massive platform why there is no reference at all as to how that was built since it is the only place in the world (and consequently in the Roman Empire) that such a monumental work has been done.

In another context, biblical archaeologists have connected Baalbek to Baalgad that is mentioned in the Bible.

So Joshua took all that land, the hill country and all the Negeb and all the land of Goshen and the lowland and the Arabah and the hill country of Israel and its lowland from Mount Halak, which rises toward Seir, as far as Baal-gad in the Valley of Lebanon below Mount Hermon. And he captured all their kings and struck them and put them to death. Joshua 11:16-11:17

Although not all archaeologists agree with that theory, it is obvious that there are huge similarities between a) the Baal-gad, a sanctuary of Baal and b) Baalbek also a temple for Baal according to the legends (before it was named Heliopolis and new temples were built) and both in the same area in Lebanon.

In the Bible there is another name that appears related to Baal, which is Baalath, a town of the tribe of Dan, which was fortified by King Solomon in 970 BC where again Baal was worshiped with the permission of Solomon. It is worth mentioning here that even in the temple of Solomon, Baal was a deity that was allowed to be worshiped in the temple.

And Baalath, and all the store cities that Solomon had, and all the chariot cities, and the cities of the horsemen, and all that Solomon desired to build in Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and throughout all the land of his dominion. Chronicles 8:6

It has become obvious that Baalbek is a mysterious ancient city, used for thousands of years by many different civilizations. The Phoenicians, the Egyptians, the Greeks and the Romans all of them used it and all of them worshiped Baal. The origins are unknown and why the site was so important is also unknown. What is for sure is that the initial site wasn’t constructed by Romans, and before the Romans there was no known civilization that would have the technology to build such a massive monument. It makes sense that somehow they got the technology to do it and somehow Baal is related to that. The debunkers have not provided sufficient answers and the possibility of advanced civilizations being responsible for it, as mentioned in myths and legends, seems closer to reality.

By John Black

Related Links

Baalbek – Lebanon’s Sacred Fortress

Baalbek – A Colossal Enigma

Baalbek – Sacred Sites

The Mystery of the Stones at Baalbek

Images of Baalbek

Related Books


Related Videos


Well, not so important are you now, eh, Baal?

The article says:
"Which makes you wonder why they would build another temple on the same place and multiple civilizations use the same exact spot, unless that place was important for some reason. It is also interesting to mention that in Heliopolis Baal was also worshiped as well as other Greek and Roman Gods."

It's long been very common throughout the world for a conquering civilization and/or religion to usurp and re-use the holy sites of the civilization/religion that it has conquered, often building new temples on top of the existing temples in its own architectural style, often even merging the new temple with elements of the old. This both asserts the authority of the conquerers, and provides the locals with at least some continuity of worship. It was common for the Romans, after they had conquered an area, to allow the locals to continue to worship the local gods, but the temples that the Romans took over would then include not only the local gods, but one or more of the Roman gods too.

Tsurugi's picture

I have read Sitchin, loved every word of his Earth Chronicles books. I read most of them while also going through Velikovsky's work. Together they pack a powerful punch, IMO.

In a broad sense, I view Sitchin's work similar to how I view the History Channel's "Ancient Aliens" series: I don't always agree with the "answers" they propose...but the questions they ask are spot on.
Also, my disagreement with the answers is based more on caution than opposition. I just don't think we can draw any conclusions yet.

Perhaps you should read some of Zecharia Sitchen books, start with The 12th Planet. He's done some ground breaking research of ancient civilizations, Sumer in particular.

I agree with what you're saying--the explanations offered by academia are less than adequate, and the tendency of so many people to immediately jump to "therefore aliens" is frustrating.

I also agree that ancient texts, myths, legends, and oral traditions contain many strange references that might be interpreted as descriptions of technology...and that such tech, if it existed, need not be assumed to have come from ET intervention, and could as easily be attributed to a previous advanced civilization of mankind that was decimated by some catastrophic event.

In pondering these two possibilities--I call it the A/A Question, meaning "Atlantis/Aliens"...though I acknowledge it could be both, or neither--I always wonder which of those two possibilities would be more palatable to mainstream academics. If it came down to one or the other, I personally believe most mainstream academics would prefer the ET hypothesis over the ancient advanced human civilization hypothesis...because alien intervention is far less disruptive of the overall worldview of mainstream academia than an ancient advanced human civilization, strange as that sounds.
(My tinfoil hat wonders, is this why the ET hypothesis is being given serious attention, even if only at the edges of mainstream(History Channel, etc.)? ...which is why I hardly ever wear the damn thing anymore. Too tiring.)

Anyway, I agree with what you said. But I wanted to add that we must also consider that nearly every ancient tradition, text, oral history, legend, and myth contain--above and beyond any references to what might be ancient lost technology--undeniable references to "those who from the heavens came". Star People. Sky Visitors. The Old Gods.

It is those references, more than any indication of ancient tech, that fuel the debate over "Paleocontact", in my opinion. Just my two cents.


Next article