Should we leave it in its current state, as a witness to the tragic events experienced by Palmyra and the Middle East at the beginning of the 21st century? The authors answer an emphatic “no,” and for two reasons. First, we have a duty to secure the upstanding remains of the monument, ensuring that the damage wrought by the explosion does not lead to further collapse. We need to make sure these surviving remnants are safe and secure. Second, we also need to record, gather, and conserve the fragments of the temple that were scattered by the blast. The risk of not doing so is to lose those pieces to robbery, to natural processes of erosion, or to unwitting damage.Cross-file under Palmyra Watch. For many PaleoJudaica posts on the ancient metropolis of Palmyra, its history and archaeology, the Aramaic dialect once spoken there (Palmyrene), and the city's tragic reversals of fortune, now trending for the better, follow the links collected here. For posts on the Temple of Bel in particular, see here, here, here, and here (sort of).
Visit PaleoJudaica daily for the latest news on ancient Judaism and the biblical world.
