Jump to content

Talk:Antonia Fortress

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Arminden (talk | contribs) at 08:48, 13 June 2020. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconIsrael C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Fortifications / Middle East / Classical C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Fortifications task force
Taskforce icon
Middle Eastern military history task force
Taskforce icon
Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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


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)[reply]

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 20:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fringe theory

The fringe theory of the Base Institute is under discussion at WP:FTN. Zerotalk 14:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Davidbena, do you have access to the Burgoyne book? Huldra (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, but I would LOVE to see it! By the way, to further explain my rationale: According to Mishnah Middot 2:1, the original Temple Mount was 500 cubits x 500 cubits square (or 1 stadion x 1 stadion), which dimensions would lead us to the Golden Gate area at its furthest distance. The place of the northern-most colonnade of the Temple courts would have given a square shape to the Temple Mount, 500 x 500 cubits, with the Temple precincts enclosed by a wall in its center. In Josephus' Wars, he says that it was King Herod the Great who, in the 15th [18th] year of his reign, rebuilt the Temple sanctuary and expanded the Temple Mount at its north side around the older Temple courts, and "enclosed an area double the former size" (Wars 1.21.1). This explains why now the Temple Mount does not appear to be 500 x 500 cubits square.Davidbena (talk) 21:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Davidbena, Email me. And to be specific, Burgoyne says he found traces of the Antonia in User:Huldra/Mamluk Jerusalem in no. 14 Al-Jawiliyya 201 → Umariya Elementary School and no. 33 Al-Is‘ardiyya Commons cat, Huldra (talk) 21:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! That's amazing! I'll send you a private message with my e-mail address.Davidbena (talk) 22:03, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia server says that you have requested not to receive incoming mail. Still, my e-mail address is listed in my UserPage, under "Personal".Davidbena (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have just emailed you my email address (due to heavy abuse: please dont make it public. Some editors (like Bolter) know it, though), Huldra (talk) 22:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, please tell me when/if it has arrived ok, Huldra (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just now received your mail. I'll download it and take a look at it. Thanks!Davidbena (talk) 22:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't know if you ever are in Jerusalem, but if you are, I would very much appreciate a picture of how that Muazzamiyya Minaret looks today. It is located at the street leading from the Lions' Gate; on the north side of the street. Hint, hint! (There might be some on commons already, but the pictures there are one big mess: people just take pictures of what they don't know what is, and put it into the "Jerusalem" category, etc. I have been trying to sort them into their proper commons cat for ages.) Huldra (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I do occasionally visit Jerusalem. The next time I'm in the city, and if I'm in the Old City area, I'll try taking a photo/photos of the Muazzamiyya Minaret. Gosh! I used to go thru that gate all the time. Lol.Davidbena (talk) 00:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
the same arch, in the distance

It looks as if the arch (above the street) looks pretty much the same as for a 100 years ago, (if you zoom in on the picture) Huldra (talk) 20:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong arch, IMHO. Look closer at the modern photo, zoom in, and behind the first tunnel-like vault in the foreground there's a 2nd one: that's the one! Right behind that one the Lions Gate Street (not being called yet Via Dolorosa at that point) starts ascending a bit steeper. I'm quite sure it's also where the King Faisal lane branches off to the south (left) and leads onto the Haram/Temple Mount. Arminden (talk) 00:05, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Arminden: Actually, that was the one I meant: I did write “zoom in” -sorry if I wasn’t clear, Huldra (talk) 21:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Huldra:, I haven't forgotten your request to take a photograph of the minaret where this arch is located. Hopefully, the next time that I'm in Jerusalem, I can do this for you.Davidbena (talk) 21:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry Huldra, I misunderstood what you wrote. I looked it up a bit, as I was surprised to hear of a large minaret outside the Haram but so close to it, in a place with shops and a playground, but no obvious mosque. I found this: " The Mamluks tended to build the new minarets not only on mosques but also on madrasas (such as the Muazzamiyya Minaret)..." (from this excellent source you might know) and this: "Today, al-Muazzamiyya is known as Masjid al-Mujahidin" etc., with a very good description of what you can see today (here). All of Muslim Jerusalem apart from the Haram looks so dilapidated... Arminden (talk) 10:26, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That was two great sources you brought there, I have mostly used Burgoyne (do you have the book?), I intend to start an article on each of the places mentioned there, see this: Muazzamiyya Minaret is no.4, ......eventually! Huldra (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2020 (UTC) PS: feel free to add to the "Mamluk Jerusalem" :)[reply]

Huldra, hi. That's a great idea! I'm looking forward to see that page. My advice: a majority of the buildings surrounding the Haram and many on it are Mamluk. I would first concentrate on the important ones, which are better preserved and can maybe also be visited. Eliahu Wager has a selection, good (not just) from the tourist's point of view. Here a few suggestions.

Whereas this minaret is just a matter of inventory, it seems to me.
I don't think I have the Burgoyne book, so thanks, if you could... Cheeres,

second temple

No discussion of the possible location of the Second Temple or Wailing Wall being at Antonia Fortress? This has been discussed in Academia, although a minority opinion and I wanted to know more about this... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:7F4:5081:FD00:A022:3A0E:8B33:9FE9 (talk) 10:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fringe, but if you bring a reliable source we can consider it. Zerotalk 11:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

183-metre long "aerial bridges"? What's next, flying temples?

Friends, we need to keep an eye on this article. I've studied together with a very nice guy, who really knew a lot about archaeology and from time to time made some some very, VERY weird statements - presenting them as fact, not even theory. Then it came out that he's paranoid-schizophrenic and had stopped taking his meds. It's not his kind of topic, otherwise I could have sworn he's taken to Wikipedia to save the world from ignorance and started with this article. Be vigilant, the end is nigh (of the Age of Ration, at least). PS: With him, it's a tragedy. This here though is more of a bad joke. Arminden (talk) 23:57, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]