Talk:Antonia Fortress

What bridges ?

The article leaves the impression that Josephus mentions some bridges "Josephus' description of the siege of Jerusalem suggests that it was separated from the temple enclosure itself and probably connected by two colonnades with a narrow space between them. Josephus' measurements suggest about a 600-foot separation between the two complexes" and "there are ten references in Josephus to these bridges" I was not able to find one !?--Brkic (talk) 16:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

How many towers

The article leaves the impression that gives no hint of more than one tower. In fact, in B.J. v. 238, Josephus wrote, "The general appearance of the whole was that of a tower with other towers at each of the four corners; three of these turrets were fifty cubits high, while that at the south-east angle rose to seventy cubits and so commanded a view of the whole area of the temple." It's been so long since I've edited anything in wikipedia or made comments on a discussion page that I've forgotten how to sign a comment. I see that I should put 4 tildes, but then what? My initials in the parentheses? I'll try it. (96.245.10.33 (talk) 03:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)js)

St. Paul

The book of Acts says that when Paul was arrested at Jerusalem he was taken into a castle. Could it have been talking about Antonia?Leo-Isaurus-Rex (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Which version are you using?--Degen Earthfast (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Does this look big enough to house 10000 soldiers + 6000 support personnel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.213.31 (talk) 03:36, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Antonia Fortress

Cyberbot II has detected links on Antonia Fortress which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.bible-history.com/antonia-fortress/

  Triggered by \bbible\-history\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Fringe theory

The fringe theory of the Base Institute is under discussion at WP:FTN. Zero^talk 14:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Concur. This also fails quite simply the WP:RS test as http://www.baseinstitute.org would not qualify as a RS for history or archaeology. If one would want to add this theory - one should find a reputable book or journal article.Icewhiz (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Heh, the history of the man behind the Base Institute, Bob Cornuke is.....colourful, to say the least..Huldra (talk) 21:50, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

This picture:

A tower of the Antonia Fortress in 1906

is actually the minaret of Muazzamiyya Madrasa.

Yes, many fanciful writers in the late 19th century wrote that it was a tower of the Antonia Fortress...but it was actually a Mamluk minaret, at least according to Burgoyne, "Mamluk Jerusalem", p. 127, Huldra (talk) 21:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

PS: Burgoyne also found possibly remains of the Antonia Fortress further south of the Muazzamiyya minaret, inside two other Mamluk madrasas, Huldra (talk) 21:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I have noticed that there is a lot of confusion when it comes to the "Antonia Fortress." When I lived in Jerusalem in the late 1970s, I remember visiting the "Sisters of Zion Ecce Homo Convent," on Via Dolorosa Street, in Jerusalem's Old City. There, the nuns were teaching the visiting tourists that their site rests on the old "Antonia Fortress," which, later, has shown to be inaccurate. The Hebrew Wikipedia points out this fact, that it could not have been there at all. The Antonia Fortress was actually closer to the unseen extension of the Western Wall, as it continues to run in the general northern direction, opposite to (if we were to draw a straight line towards the east) the Golden Gate which is now closed.Davidbena (talk) 00:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Burgoyne said he found remains of what he thinks was from the Antonia Fortress inside two of the Mamluk madrassas (mentioned here: User:Huldra/Mamluk Jerusalem) just north of the Dome of the Rock. I'm getting to it.....eventually.......Huldra (talk) 21:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Also, about the the minaret of Muazzamiyya Madrasa, newer pictures show that the wall on the right is more or less rebuilt, Huldra (talk) 21:30, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Huldra. I trust Burgoyne's findings 100%. The reasons for this is because of what Josephus states (Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War 5.5.8 [5.238]): "Now as to the tower of Antonia, it was situated at the corner of two cloisters of the court of the Temple; of that on the west, and that on the north; it was erected upon a rock of fifty cubits in height, and was on a great precipice; it was the work of king Herod, wherein he demonstrated his natural magnanimity."

Elsewhere (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 15.424) we read: "There was also an occult passage built for the king; it led from Antonia to the inner Temple, at its eastern gate; over which he also erected for himself a tower, that he might have the opportunity of a subterraneous ascent to the Temple, in order to guard against any sedition which might be made by the people against their kings."

Assuming that the "eastern gate" mentioned here is where the Golden Gate now stands, and is mentioned in Mishnah (Middot), and that its position was at the corner of the colonnade on the Temple precincts' far northeastern side (before its expansion by King Herod to accommodate the pilgrims), we can assume then that the colonnade ran in a straight line from east to west with the peristyle (cloisters) concluding at Antonia on its northwestern corner. This would make today's identification misleading. Indeed, according to the Heb. Wikipedia, the claim of the Sisters of Zion Convent being the place of Antonia is an erroneous claim.Davidbena (talk) 21:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, do you have access to the Burgoyne book? Huldra (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)