Re: Ancient village outside Jerusalem rises questions
- From: greymaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 10 Jan 2006 14:07:26 GMT
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:10:36 GMT, prd wrote:
> In sci.archaeology message
> news:k9swf.153703$dP1.511956@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx by "Alan Crozier"
><name1.name2@xxxxxxxxx> . . . :
>
>> "Peter Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:43c24c24$1$40908$dbd4d001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Alan Crozier wrote: Fkrwf.153697$dP1.511993@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>>>
>>> > "Peter Alaca" wrote
>>> >> I E_Johansson wrote:
>>>
>>> >>> "The discovery of stone vessels indicate Jews in the
>>> >>> village continued to live by religious purity laws after
>>> >>> A.D. 70, said Debbie Sklar-Parnes of the Israel Antiquities
>>> >>> Authority, who is overseeing the dig."
>>> >>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10713177/
Why does this sound peculiar?.. Jerusalem was taken by the Romans, but
AFAIread, they didn't intefere with parts of the country not in
revolt. Even after the Bar-Kochba (sp?) revolt later (135?ce), Jews
were forbidden to live in Jerusalem itself, but allowed to remain
elsewhere, and when the Crusaders captured the City in 1099 or so,
Jews are mentioned as a significent part of the population that was
massacred.
--
greymaus
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Kensington Runestone - Nielsen and Wolters.
- Next by Date: Re: Ancient ´German´ can´t have been Indoeuropean
- Previous by thread: anyone know anything about this?
- Next by thread: Re: Ancient village outside Jerusalem rises questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|