First time visitor? Learn more.

Archaeologists bringing Jerusalem’s ancient Roman city back to life

by Speranza ( 125 Comments › )
Filed under History, Israel at February 22nd, 2012 - 12:00 pm

In 66 A.D. the first Jewish Revolt against Rome broke out. The war ended in the siege and fall of Jerusalem  in 70 A.D. The Romans  pretty much leveled the city and destroyed the Second Temple.  All that was left of First Century Jerusalem were three towers built by Herod the Great and the retaining or Western Wall (also Herodian) which still stands to this day. In 130 A.D. the Roman Emperor Hadrian (one of the more competent emperors)  visited Judea and decided to rebuild Jerusalem only this time as a Roman city with straight streets, a market (or forum) and where the Temple once stood would be a statue of Jupiter Capitolinus. The Jews naturally reacted with outrage and after years of delivering faulty weapons to the Romans which they knew would be rejected and returned, under the leadership of a charismatic leader called Simon Bar-Kochba (a man with messianic  inclinations) they launched another revolt (132 – 135 A.D.). This one was extremely brutal and deadly. After initial Judean successes  (they destroyed one and possibly two Roman legions),  the Romans were forced to bring legions into Judea from all over the Empire and waged a war of extermination.  Slowly under their best commander (brought all the way over from Britain) Julius Severus the Romans started to gain the upper hand.

 

The rebels did not dare try to risk open confrontation against the Romans, but occupied the advantageous positions in the country and strengthened them with mines and walls, so that they would have places of refuge when hard pressed and could communicate with one another unobserved underground; and they pierced these subterranean passages from above at intervals to let in air and light.

[Cassius Dio, Roman history 69.12.3]
The war was a demographic disaster for the Jews, a  Roman attempt at genocide which nearly succeeded. Yet Judaism survived  because it became decentralized. The center of Judaism shifted from Jerusalem to the north in Galilee and instead of the Temple the synagogues took on importance.
“If it were not pleonastic, one would call the war a disaster. The Romans experienced great difficulties when they tried to subdue Judaea, and they made some progress only after the emperor had personally come to Judaea. The Roman soldiers were used to fight full scale battles, but Simon evaded this kind of engagement. Hadrian’s generals were forced to form smaller units to intercept small groups of rebels. In this war, the highest ranking officers had to stand by doing nothing, while the under-officers had large responsibilities. Famine, disease and fire proved better weapons than swords and lances.
Severus did not venture to attack his opponents in the open at any one point, in view of their numbers and their fanaticism, but -by intercepting small groups, thanks to the number of his soldiers and under-officers, and by depriving them of food and shutting them up- he was able, rather slowly, to be sure, but with comparative little danger, to crush, exhaust and exterminate them. Very few Jews in fact survived. Fifty of their most important outposts and 985 better known villages were razed to the ground. 580,000 were killed in the various engagements or battles. As for the numbers who perished from starvation, disease or fire, that was impossible to establish.

The Romans too lost heavily, so heavy in fact that they never issued coins celebrating their triumph and built no arches as they had for the previous war (The Arch of Titus in Rome).  It was a war that frankly the Romans preferred to forget. Hadrian completed the building of Aelia Capitolina (Aelius being his family name) and to harm the growing Christian faith he built a temple to Venus on the sight of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus (where the Church of the Holy Sepulchre now is). Hadrian did not live long enough to celebrate his triumph, he died three years after the Bar-Kochba revolt was crushed. The irony of Aelia Capitolina was  that by building it  on the ruins of Jerusalem (destroyed in 70 A.D.), the Romans  wound up resurrecting Jerusalem.  After the end of the Bar-Kochba Rebellion of 132 – 135 A.D.,  Hadrian in an attempt to deny the Jewish connection to  Judea, renamed the province Syria-Palestina after the ancient Philistines.

Anyone visiting the Old City of Jerusalem today will in fact be seeing the remains of Aelia Capitolina.

by Nir Hasson

If you look at a map of the Old City of Jerusalem, you’ll notice something odd. While the vast majority of the Old City’s streets form a crowded casbah of winding alleyways, there are a few straight-as-a-ruler streets that bisect the city from north to south and east to west.

The best known of these straight roads are Beit Chabad and Hagai streets, exiting through the Damascus Gate; David Street, exiting the Jaffa Gate; and the Via Dolorosa.

Like the rest of the Old City’s streets, these straight roads are narrow but, unlike the others, they preserve a historical skeleton of sorts that forms the basis of the Old City we know today. This skeleton was created, most archaeologists agree, not during Jewish, Christian or Muslim rule, but during the Roman period, when the city of Aelia Capitolina was built on the ruins of Jerusalem following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD.

Ironically, it is actually the streets of this imperial and pagan city – which supposedly left behind no cultural or spiritual heritage for modern Jerusalem – that have bequeathed to the city the skeleton structure that has survived to this day.

In the history of Jewish Jerusalem, Aelia Capitolina is the very embodiment of defeat and destruction – a reminder of the humiliation of the Second Temple’s destruction, which erected a pagan temple in its place. This image has distanced Aelia Capitolina from the fathers of Israeli archaeology, who were naturally drawn to the ornate, Jewish city that preceded it. “No one concealed Aelia Capitolina, but we wanted to talk about the Second Temple,” says Dr. Ofer Sion, of the Antiquities Authority. “Aelia Capitolina was an accursed city, a city from which we were banished. It was more idealistic to excavate the Second Temple.”

Almost all of the archaeologists who study Aelia Capitolina call it “an elusive city.” As opposed to the Jerusalem of Second Temple times that preceded it, Aelia Capitolina has not been entirely unearthed during the many excavations that have been performed in the city since 1967. The residents of Aelia Capitolina did not leave written texts like the works of Flavius Josephus during the Second Temple era or of Christian travelers in the following period.

It is known that the Roman city was established by Emperor Hadrian between 130 and 140 AD. After the Bar Kochba revolt of 135, Jews were forbidden to enter the city. Its most important inhabitants were the soldiers of the 10th Legion, who would remain encamped in Jerusalem for 200 years.

Salvage operations

Following the latest wave of excavations, which began in the mid-1990s, more and more archaeologists have become convinced that Aelia Capitolina was a much larger and more important city than was once thought, and its influence on the later development of modern Jerusalem was dramatic.

Aelia Capitolina has sprung to life in a significant way through no less than four extensive excavations that have taken place in the Old City area, and in a number of other digs in other parts of Jerusalem. Most of these digs have been rescue excavations by the Antiquities Authority, salvage digs carried out before new construction and development goes ahead. In a few more years, Aelia Capitolina could again be covered over by new buildings.

In the rear section of the Western Wall plaza, in the spot where the Western Wall Heritage Foundation intends to erect a large building that it calls “the Core House,” Antiquities Authority researcher Shlomit Wexler-Bedolah discovered an ornate and broad Roman street, complete with shops on each side. This is the eastern cardo, along whose path Hagai Street would later be paved.

Three hundred meters to the south, another Antiquities Authority researcher, Dr. Doron Ben-Ami, discovered the place where the Roman street apparently ended. The corner of the street is adjacent to the Givati parking lot at the top of the Silwan valley – the spot where the Elad organization intends to build a large visitors center. In a large rescue excavation at this location in recent years, Ben-Ami exposed a large, fancy Roman villa unlike any other structure from its time in the entire country. He estimates that the villa he uncovered was the home of the regional governor or some other central authority.

In another excavation, in the tunnel under the Western Wall, Wexler-Bedolah and archaeologist Alexander Onn re-estimated the dating of a large bridge leading to the Temple Mount. As with other ancient monuments this too turned out to be of Roman origin and not from the Second Temple period. Another example is the Roman bathhouse and swimming pool discovered by Sion a year and a half ago. “It’s a tremendous spa, a country club,” Sion says, comparing the bathhouse to similar facilities found in other parts of the Roman Empire.

This increasing number of Roman-era discoveries strengthens the notion that the Temple Mount, even after its destruction, did not lie totally barren, but was used for pagan worship rites.

[.....]

The latest excavations give archaeologists much greater insight into Aelia Capitolina than was possible even a decade earlier. Experts agree the city was planned extraordinarily well, based as it was on designs of other cities in the empire and according to orders that came directly from the emperor. It included broad streets, numerous and magnificent entrance gates, temples and infrastructure, and it even housed a new elite of army officers and free soldiers who turned Aelia Capitolina into a thriving city.

“When I began to study the history of the Roman city, it was a barren field,” says Prof. Yoram Zafrir, one of Israel’s most veteran archaeologists. “Today, it is clear that the basic structure of Jerusalem is that of Aelia Capitolina.” Zafrir describes the process by which, after the Roman period, beasts of burden replaced wagons, the central government became weak and streets became “privatized.” This process led to the city that we know today.

“Similarly to the British Mandate, which lasted just 31 years but had a significant impact on modern Jerusalem, from the perspective of architecture, the Roman period established a whole new, imperial language that still holds sway today,” archaeologist Dr. Guy Stiebel concludes. Stiebel even notes the irony of history: “Aelia Capitolina effectively saved Jerusalem. It raised her once again onto the stage of history. She returned like a phoenix from the ashes.”

Read the rest – Archaeologist bringing Jerusalem’s ancient Roman city to life

Tags: , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

125 Responses to “Archaeologists bringing Jerusalem’s ancient Roman city back to life”
( jump to bottom )

  1. Speranza
    1 | February 22, 2012 12:07 pm

    A non political thread.


  2. m
    2 | February 22, 2012 12:09 pm

    Cool thread Speranza! Thanks!!


  3. buzzsawmonkey
    3 | February 22, 2012 12:25 pm

    Saw this when it went up yesterday. Fabulous stuff.


  4. 4 | February 22, 2012 12:29 pm

    Does this mean we can talk about Russell Crowe?


  5. Speranza
    5 | February 22, 2012 12:31 pm

    m wrote:

    Cool thread Speranza! Thanks!!

    :)


  6. Bumr50
    6 | February 22, 2012 12:52 pm

    Wasn’t Severus a pretty big persecutor of Christians?

    (Not disrespecting his leadership abilities, just asking)


  7. Speranza
    7 | February 22, 2012 1:03 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    Wasn’t Severus a pretty big persecutor of Christians?
    (Not disrespecting his leadership abilities, just asking)

    I think you mean the Roman Emperor Septimius Severus who ruled from 193 -- 211 A.D.


  8. Speranza
    8 | February 22, 2012 1:04 pm

    father_of_10 wrote:

    Does this mean we can talk about Russell Crowe?

    If we must.


  9. Bumr50
    9 | February 22, 2012 1:09 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Yes.

    My bad.

    Thanks for the post! I enjoy learning about history.


  10. 10 | February 22, 2012 1:09 pm

    @ Speranza:

    He was a terrible Emperor. From his reign, the Empire begins to decline.

    Marcus Aurelius was the last good Roman Emperor until Aurelian, who reunited the Empire in the 270′s.


  11. 11 | February 22, 2012 1:10 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Yeah, a relief!


  12. Speranza
    12 | February 22, 2012 1:24 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    He was a terrible Emperor. From his reign, the Empire begins to decline.
    Marcus Aurelius was the last good Roman Emperor until Aurelian, who reunited the Empire in the 270′s.

    Septimius Severus came from North Africa. His son Caracalla was a 3rd century version of Caligula.


  13. Speranza
    13 | February 22, 2012 1:25 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    He was a terrible Emperor. From his reign, the Empire begins to decline.
    Marcus Aurelius was the last good Roman Emperor until Aurelian, who reunited the Empire in the 270′s.

    Actually Diocletian (who actually abdicated instead of being murdered) was the last great Roman Emperor.


  14. Speranza
    14 | February 22, 2012 1:27 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Marcus Aurelius was the last good Roman Emperor until Aurelian, who reunited the Empire in the 270′s.

    The five good emperors who followed one another (98 -- 180 A.D.)
    1. Nerva
    2. Trajan
    3. Hadrian
    4. Antoninus Pius
    5. Marcus Aurelius


  15. 15 | February 22, 2012 1:28 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Although one can argue Justinian who reconquered North Africa, Italy and vassalized Spain fits the bill. Heracles had he died after the Persian wars would have been considered great, but at the end of his life, he lost Syria to the Muslims.


  16. Bumr50
    16 | February 22, 2012 1:29 pm

    OT -- OK I’m listening to Rush, and he just played a soundbite from THIS MORNING where Mitt Romney said that he wants to make sure the top “one percent” (quote) pays their fair share of taxes.


  17. 17 | February 22, 2012 1:29 pm

    @ Speranza:

    The last 3 out of 4 were Spaniards!
    I have to brag!!!!!!!

    :lol:


  18. 18 | February 22, 2012 1:30 pm

    @ Bumr50:

    No shock there, he has supported OWS before.


  19. Speranza
    19 | February 22, 2012 1:30 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Although one can argue Justinian who reconquered North Africa, Italy and vassalized Spain fits the bill. Heracles had he died after the Persian wars would have been considered great, but at the end of his life, he lost Syria to the Muslims.

    Byzantine Emperors I separate from Roman ones. By that time the Western Empire was gone and the Eastern Empire was more Greek then Roman.


  20. Speranza
    20 | February 22, 2012 1:31 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    The last 3 out of 4 were Spaniards!
    I have to brag!!!!!!!

    I figured you would.


  21. 21 | February 22, 2012 1:32 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    A non political thread.

    This is where you really shine as a blogger and writer. It’s the article like this that you write that remind me why despite our sometimes bitter political disagreement why I both like you and enjoy your writing.


  22. buzzsawmonkey
    22 | February 22, 2012 1:33 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    OT – OK I’m listening to Rush, and he just played a soundbite from THIS MORNING where Mitt Romney said that he wants to make sure the top “one percent” (quote) pays their fair share of taxes.

    So, Romney’s reaching out to OWS instead of the Tea Party?

    Sounds like a winning strategy to me.
    //////


  23. 23 | February 22, 2012 1:35 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    Marcus Aurelius was the last good Roman Emperor until Aurelian, who reunited the Empire in the 270′s.
    The five good emperors who followed one another (98 – 180 A.D.)
    1. Nerva
    2. Trajan
    3. Hadrian
    4. Antoninus Pius
    5. Marcus Aurelius

    Hadrian may have been good for the Empire, but as an individual of Scot-Irish heritage I can’t say I like ole Hadrian all that much.


  24. 24 | February 22, 2012 1:35 pm

    @ Speranza:

    It’s a historical perspective. In the Anglo and French Spheres, some separate Byzantine from Roman Empire. In The Latinsphere, historians tend to view the Byzantines and One thing, the Byzantines never called themselves that. They called themselves Romaoi and their Empire Romania. Visigothic Spain as continuations of the Roman Empire.

    So its a matter of perspective.

    One thing, the Byzantines never called themselves that. They called themselves Romaoi and their Empire Romania.


  25. waldensianspirit
    25 | February 22, 2012 1:36 pm

    Waldensians ruled no one


  26. Speranza
    26 | February 22, 2012 1:36 pm

    doriangrey wrote:

    Hadrian may have been good for the Empire, but as an individual of Scot-Irish heritage I can’t say I like ole Hadrian all that much.

    Well he did keep the Roman soldiers employed (and not planning rebellions) by building that wall to keep the Picts (the forerunners of the Scots) out of England.


  27. 27 | February 22, 2012 1:36 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    He built that wall to keep you guys out of the province Britannia.


  28. buzzsawmonkey
    28 | February 22, 2012 1:37 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    One thing, the Byzantines never called themselves that.

    Hey, come on—the Byzant Teens were the hottest pop-music group of the Eastern Roman Empire!


  29. Bumr50
    29 | February 22, 2012 1:37 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Positively unacceptable.


  30. Speranza
    30 | February 22, 2012 1:37 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    One thing, the Byzantines never called themselves that. They called themselves Romaoi and their Empire Romania.

    They lasted until 1453 when Constantinople fell to the Turks. That year (1453) is also significant because the last battle of the Hundred Years War was fought when the French crushed the English at Castillon.


  31. 31 | February 22, 2012 1:37 pm

    @ Speranza:

    building that wall to keep the Picts (the forerunners of the Scots) out of England Britannia.

    FIFY!


  32. 32 | February 22, 2012 1:38 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    It’s a historical perspective. In the ANglo and French Spheres, some separate Byzantine from Roman Empire. In The Latinsphere, historians tend to view the Byzantines and Visigothic Spain as continuations of the Roman Empire.
    So its a matter of perspective.
    One thing, the Byzantines never called themselves that. They called themselves Romaoi and their Empire Romania.

    Yea, I’ve never quite understood that. In truth, the Roman Empire survived until the Fall of Imperial Russia, mostly through a slow process of retreat, but it survived none the less.


  33. buzzsawmonkey
    33 | February 22, 2012 1:38 pm

    doriangrey wrote:

    Hadrian may have been good for the Empire, but as an individual of Scot-Irish heritage I can’t say I like ole Hadrian all that much.

    Feeling a little Pict-on, are we?


  34. 34 | February 22, 2012 1:38 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Most people don’t know that the final 10 years, the French thoroughly kicked England’s ass in the 100 years war.


  35. 35 | February 22, 2012 1:39 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    The Spanish Empire claimed to the be Roman Empire and they had the most legit claim. Spanish were Latin like the Romans.

    Although the Russians do have a claim because one of the Czars married the daughter of the last Byzantine Empress.


  36. Speranza
    36 | February 22, 2012 1:40 pm

    @ doriangrey:
    :)
    Believe me I much prefer historical threads to political ones.


  37. 37 | February 22, 2012 1:41 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Same here. Although Chucky threads are a life of their own.


  38. 38 | February 22, 2012 1:41 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    doriangrey wrote:
    Hadrian may have been good for the Empire, but as an individual of Scot-Irish heritage I can’t say I like ole Hadrian all that much.
    Feeling a little Pict-on, are we?

    Actually I think it was Hadrian who was feeling a little Pict-on after what my ancestors did to his much vaunted Ninth Legion… :twisted:


  39. Speranza
    39 | February 22, 2012 1:43 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Most people don’t know that the final 10 years, the French thoroughly kicked England’s ass in the 100 years war.

    That’s because the French King Charles VI (Joan of Arc’s Dauphin) came up with a professional full time army and his master gunner Jean Bureau developed “cannons” actually culverins to offset the English advantage of the longbows. The English like to talk about Crecy (1346), Poitiers (1358) and Agincourt (1415), but never about Formigny (1450) and Castillon (1453).


  40. 40 | February 22, 2012 1:43 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    It was lucky win. My ancestors didn’t bother with that area. It wasn’t worth much and you guys were nuts.

    Have you seen the movie, The Eagle?


  41. 41 | February 22, 2012 1:44 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    OT – OK I’m listening to Rush, and he just played a soundbite from THIS MORNING where Mitt Romney said that he wants to make sure the top “one percent” (quote) pays their fair share of taxes.

    What’s with these bozos? The 1% are not already paying their fair share of taxes . . I swear, the GOP hase no balls.


  42. Speranza
    42 | February 22, 2012 1:44 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Same here. Although Chucky threads are a life of their own.

    Chuckles is always good for creating some cameraderie.


  43. Speranza
    43 | February 22, 2012 1:46 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    The Spanish Empire claimed to the be Roman Empire and they had the most legit claim. Spanish were Latin like the Romans.
    Although the Russians do have a claim because one of the Czars married the daughter of the last Byzantine Empress.

    Towards the end it was German Roman legionaires fighting German barbarians.


  44. 44 | February 22, 2012 1:46 pm

    @ Speranza:

    That final 10 years, the French broke the back of the English. The irony was that at the start of the war, the Kings of England viewed themselves as France. Then by the end of the war, the national identities of both France and England were developed.

    Had the English won, England would have been the backwater of a large French speaking nation. The Kings of England wanted to be Kings of France more than anything else.


  45. 45 | February 22, 2012 1:47 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Yes, even in the Byzantine Empire, I read Justinian was actually a Goth.

    The Army that reconquered Italy and North Africa, was actually Balkan Goths. Irony of history.


  46. 46 | February 22, 2012 1:48 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    It was lucky win. My ancestors didn’t bother with that area. It wasn’t worth much and you guys were nuts.
    Have you seen the movie, The Eagle?

    ROTFLMAO… It wasn’t luck, and my ancestors weren’t nuts, they were full bore crazy on steroids… No, I haven’t seen “The Eagle”. What happened to the Ninth Legion, BTW is pretty much where redheaded Scottish and Irish women got their reputation for being bat shit crazy… :lol: :lol: :lol: Oh, and Yes my Grandfather and my Father were both redheads. :razz:


  47. Alberta Oil Peon
    47 | February 22, 2012 1:48 pm

    @ Rodan:
    Chucky threads are hysterical threads. Hysteria on his part, hysterical laughter on ours.


  48. 48 | February 22, 2012 1:48 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    The Eagle is about the destruction of the 9th Legion.


  49. Speranza
    49 | February 22, 2012 1:49 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    That final 10 years, the French broke the back of the English. The irony was that at the start of the war, the Kings of England viewed themselves as France. Then by the end of the war, the national identities of both France and England were developed.
    Had the English own, England would have been the backwater of a large French speaking nation. The Kings of England wanted to be Kings of France more than anything else.

    The effects of The Hundred Years War are felt to this day in the distrust and dislike between the UK and France. Also The Hundred Years War lead directly to the Wars of the Roses in England.


  50. 50 | February 22, 2012 1:49 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    @ Speranza:
    Same here. Although Chucky threads are a life of their own.
    Chuckles is always good for creating some cameraderie.

    I even stand side by side with Doriangrey in an anti-chuckie thread. Shoulder to shoulder even (actually, my elbow to his shoulder).


  51. 51 | February 22, 2012 1:50 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    The Kings of England wanted to be Kings of France more than anything else.

    Yea, Saxons and Normans…


  52. Speranza
    52 | February 22, 2012 1:50 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Yes, even in the Byzantine Empire, I read Justinian was actually a Goth.
    The Army that reconquered Italy and North Africa, was actually Balkan Goths. Irony of history.

    The Roman Legions at the height of the empire were comprised of Germans, Gauls, and Thracians.


  53. 53 | February 22, 2012 1:51 pm

    father_of_10 wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    Rodan wrote:
    @ Speranza:
    Same here. Although Chucky threads are a life of their own.
    Chuckles is always good for creating some cameraderie.
    I even stand side by side with Doriangrey in an anti-chuckie thread. Shoulder to shoulder even (actually, my elbow to his shoulder).

    Well since I’m 6’1″ I guess that makes you what 10 feet tall… :razz:


  54. 54 | February 22, 2012 1:51 pm

    @ Speranza:

    It defined two nations. One of the biggest what if I have is, if the French govermmnet in WWII had accepted Churchill’s offer of a Union between The UK and France.


  55. Speranza
    55 | February 22, 2012 1:52 pm

    @ Rodan:
    It was only in the 15th century when English Kings first language was not French but English. They kept the title Kings of England and France until 1802.


  56. Speranza
    56 | February 22, 2012 1:52 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    It defined two nations. One of the biggest what if I have is, if the French government in WWII had accepted Churchill’s offer of a Union between The UK and France.

    I doubt that would have lasted. France was a Republic and Britain a constitutional monarchy.


  57. 57 | February 22, 2012 1:54 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    It was only in the 15th century when English Kings first language was not French but English. They kept the title Kings of England and France until 1802.

    Scottish King’s on the other hand spoke gobbledygook, err I mean Gaelic… :oops:


  58. 58 | February 22, 2012 1:54 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    I read a book called Rules Britannia and it was about Parma’s Army taking over England. The Spanish rename England, Britannia after the Roman Province. Then 20 years after the conquest, they try to invade Scotland with a mostly Irish mercanary force. Man it didn’t end well for the Spanish Tercios in this book.


  59. 59 | February 22, 2012 1:55 pm

    @ Speranza:

    You should do a thread on the 100 years war. Its really a fascinating conflict and there are so many urban legends.


  60. Speranza
    61 | February 22, 2012 1:56 pm

    doriangrey wrote:

    Scottish King’s on the other hand spoke gobbledygook, err I mean Gaelic…

    You mean they did not sound like Mel Gibson er William Wallace in Braveheart?


  61. 62 | February 22, 2012 1:57 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:

    He built that wall to keep you guys out of the province Britannia.

    Wave, Britannia! Britannia waves the rules….


  62. 63 | February 22, 2012 1:57 pm

    @ Speranza:

    That movie had so many historical holes in it.


  63. Speranza
    64 | February 22, 2012 1:57 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    Wife of Assassinated Iranian Nuke Scientist: “His Ultimate Goal Was Annihilation of Israel”…

    Shocker…I never would have thought that. Someone tell Hillary and Obama.


  64. 65 | February 22, 2012 1:57 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:

    I read a book called Rules Britannia and it was about Parma’s Army taking over England. The Spanish rename England, Britannia after the Roman Province. Then 20 years after the conquest, they try to invade Scotland with a mostly Irish mercanary force. Man it didn’t end well for the Spanish Tercios in this book.

    Alternate History?


  65. Bumr50
    66 | February 22, 2012 1:58 pm

    I made a political comment backthread.

    I don’t have time to write a post, but I believe that it deserves some attention as some sites will BURY it.


  66. Speranza
    67 | February 22, 2012 1:58 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    That movie had so many historical holes in it.

    You could have driven a Challenger tank right through it. It was well made though.

    The French “princess” (the future Queen Isabel) was 6-years old at the time that the movie took place.


  67. Bumr50
    68 | February 22, 2012 1:59 pm

    @ Macker:

    Watchmen!!


  68. Speranza
    69 | February 22, 2012 1:59 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    You should do a thread on the 100 years war. Its really a fascinating conflict and there are so many urban legends.

    I would need at least three separate threads.


  69. 70 | February 22, 2012 1:59 pm

    father_of_10 wrote:

    I even stand side by side with Doriangrey in an anti-chuckie thread. Shoulder to shoulder even (actually, my elbow to his shoulder).

    You’re not a Nephilim, are you? 8)


  70. 71 | February 22, 2012 1:59 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    doriangrey wrote:
    Scottish King’s on the other hand spoke gobbledygook, err I mean Gaelic…
    You mean they did not sound like Mel Gibson er William Wallace in Braveheart?

    Have you ever heard anyone speaking Gaelic??? It’s almost enough to make you believe in space aliens… Hell, try understanding what a Scot speaking English is saying sometime… :oops:


  71. waldensianspirit
    72 | February 22, 2012 2:01 pm

    @ Speranza:
    And Oliver Stone’s hatching. Who says Ahmadinejad is only referring to the West Bank when he talks about pushing the Jews into the sea


  72. 73 | February 22, 2012 2:01 pm

    @ Speranza:

    They aren’t listening! They aren’t listening! (Hillary probably has her hands over her ears. They are at that level of discourse with the Israelis)


  73. Speranza
    74 | February 22, 2012 2:02 pm

    doriangrey wrote:

    Have you ever heard anyone speaking Gaelic??? It’s almost enough to make you believe in space aliens… Hell, try understanding what a Scot speaking English is saying sometime…

    It is not very friendly to the ears. (I am trying to be diplomatic about it).


  74. Speranza
    75 | February 22, 2012 2:02 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    They aren’t listening! They aren’t listening! (Hillary probably has her hands over her ears. They are at that level of discourse with the Israelis)

    She has been a God awful Sec. of State.


  75. Speranza
    76 | February 22, 2012 2:03 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    And Oliver Stone’s hatching. Who says Ahmadinejad is only referring to the West Bank when he talks about pushing the Jews into the sea

    He is as dumb as his gap toothed daddy.


  76. 77 | February 22, 2012 2:03 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Well at least it isn’t Klingon… 8)


  77. 78 | February 22, 2012 2:04 pm

    @ Bumr50:

    Who is surprised? Romney would rather cultivate the Occupests than the Tea PArty. That is why defeating him is job one this year. Only after he is defeated can we wage political war on Obama.


  78. 79 | February 22, 2012 2:05 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    they try to invade Scotland with a mostly Irish mercanary force. Man it didn’t end well for the Spanish Tercios in this book.

    It took the English something like 300 years to conquer Scotland, and when they finally did succeed it was more through intermarriage than combat. Robert the Bruce damn near conquered England and would have if he hadn’t listened to his advisers who told him he would be unable to feed his army if he continued his attack.


  79. 80 | February 22, 2012 2:07 pm

    @ Macker:

    Yup.


  80. 81 | February 22, 2012 2:09 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    If you think about it, after Queen Elizabeth 1st died, James Stuart united England and Scotland. SO technically, Scotland took over England.


  81. 82 | February 22, 2012 2:11 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    doriangrey wrote:
    Have you ever heard anyone speaking Gaelic??? It’s almost enough to make you believe in space aliens… Hell, try understanding what a Scot speaking English is saying sometime…
    It is not very friendly to the ears. (I am trying to be diplomatic about it).

    I literally laughed out loud at that. One of my little brothers learned to speak Gaelic, it isn’t just hard on the ears it’s torture on the throat and tongue as well. There is an old Pict/Irish legend that the Pict’s/Irish are the descendants of a race that came from the Stars and crash landed on earth, hearing people speak Gaelic is almost enough to make you wonder if it isn’t more truth than legend… :lol: :lol: :lol:


  82. 84 | February 22, 2012 2:15 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    If you think about it, after Queen Elizabeth 1st died, James Stuart united England and Scotland. SO technically, Scotland took over England.

    Shhhhh, Don’t let the English know that… :lol: :lol: :lol:


  83. 85 | February 22, 2012 2:15 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    I saw that on ancient aliens.

    Many other people have that legend as well.


  84. 86 | February 22, 2012 2:15 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    My Bad!


  85. 87 | February 22, 2012 2:16 pm

    OK, off to work on the race car drink some beer… :grin:


  86. 88 | February 22, 2012 2:17 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    I saw that on ancient aliens.
    Many other people have that legend as well.

    Yea, but how many other people have a language as supportive of it as the Scot-Irish? :razz: :lol: :lol: :lol:


  87. Speranza
    89 | February 22, 2012 2:18 pm

    James I of England was already James VI of Scotland. The union of the Crowns (of England and Scotland) did not take place until 1707.


  88. 90 | February 22, 2012 2:22 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Weren’t they unofficially united though from James Stuart on? Kind of like, there was no Kingdom of Spain, but instead a Union of Castile and Aragon.


  89. The Osprey
    91 | February 22, 2012 2:38 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    Several Species Of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together In A Cave And Grooving With A Pict…

    Some say it is Pink Floyd’s weirdest song ever. Dig the Gaelic/Scots ranting at the end.


  90. Speranza
    92 | February 22, 2012 2:43 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Weren’t they unofficially united though from James Stuart on? Kind of like, there was no Kingdom of Spain, but instead a Union of Castile and Aragon.

    Unofficially yes but Scotland and England had separate parliaments.


  91. 93 | February 22, 2012 2:46 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Wasn’t there supposed to be something done this year on secession for the Scots? I can see why they’d want to. Maybe rebuild Hadrian’s Wall to keep the Muzz out of Scotland…


  92. The Osprey
    94 | February 22, 2012 2:47 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    Weren’t they unofficially united though from James Stuart on? Kind of like, there was no Kingdom of Spain, but instead a Union of Castile and Aragon.

    “The Union was a personal or dynastic union, with the Crowns remaining both distinct and separate—despite James’s best efforts to create a new “imperial” throne of “Great Britain”. England and Scotland continued to be sovereign states, despite sharing a monarch, until the Acts of Union in 1707 during the reign of the last Stuart monarch, Queen Anne.[2]”

    Of course the Acts of Union were bitterly contested by the Scots Jacobites after the Hanoverians assumed the throne with the appointment of Anne’s cousin, George 1 of Hanover as King, which led to the Jacobite rebellions in Scotland of 1715 and the more famous one in 1745 led by Bonnie Prince Charlie. The defeat of the Jacobite Clans by the Duke of Cumberland led to the Highland Clearances, and the mass immigration of Scots to Canada and the American Colonies…


  93. 95 | February 22, 2012 2:49 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Seems like they are debating it, though I don’t know if it has anything to do with the Muslim character that England is taking on…


  94. The Osprey
    96 | February 22, 2012 2:50 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    Wasn’t there supposed to be something done this year on secession for the Scots? I can see why they’d want to. Maybe rebuild Hadrian’s Wall to keep the Muzz out of Scotland…

    Unfortunately modern Scotland is plagued with Leftism, especially in the Glasgow region, a legacy of the “Red Clydeside”…communist and socialist dockworkers unions in the ‘Teens, 20′s and 30′s. The “Scottish Nationalist Party” is more leftwing than the British Labor Party. Most Scots Conservatives are against devolution for this reason.


  95. 97 | February 22, 2012 2:53 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    Lovely. Leftism is a disease of dogs…


  96. The Osprey
    98 | February 22, 2012 2:54 pm

    The militant labor unions destroyed the once proud Scottish shipbuilding industry. Sound familiar?


  97. The Osprey
    99 | February 22, 2012 2:58 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    Wasn’t there supposed to be something done this year on secession for the Scots? I can see why they’d want to. Maybe rebuild Hadrian’s Wall to keep the Muzz out of Scotland…

    Sadly, the Muzz are already there, doing what the Muzz do.

    Maybe we need to raise an army of Diaspora Scots to liberate the homeland.


  98. Bumr50
    100 | February 22, 2012 2:59 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    On that side of the album, each band member was allowed free reign on one piece. That was Roger Waters’ contribution.

    The live pieces on the other side alone make it worth buying.


  99. 101 | February 22, 2012 3:00 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    The reduction of mankind to slaves of the State, living in destitution and filth, is the real goal of the Left. They destroy thriving industries, stifle innovation, and generally make life miserable for the people that they are perporting to be trying to help. It is all a scam to amass total power in the hands of a few ruthless men. Stalin and Hitler were the ultimate expressions of the Left. They were the natural result of Leftism, not some abberration.


  100. 102 | February 22, 2012 3:01 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    End the Muslim Occupation of Scotland! Free the Hagia Sofia!


  101. 103 | February 22, 2012 3:06 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    Thanks for that.


  102. 104 | February 22, 2012 3:08 pm

    New Thread.


  103. buzzsawmonkey
    105 | February 22, 2012 3:08 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    End the Muslim Occupation of Scotland! Free the Hagia Sofia!

    Who leaves haggis on the sofa?


  104. 106 | February 22, 2012 3:09 pm

    @ Rodan:

    Where? 8O


  105. 107 | February 22, 2012 3:09 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    It is better than eating it… :P


  106. buzzsawmonkey
    108 | February 22, 2012 3:15 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Speaking of haggis—well, of hags—Cindy Sheehan is being sued by the feds for back taxes.


  107. 109 | February 22, 2012 3:17 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    Is that the “song” which has “Oooh, Fuck Me” in it? That’s what it sounds like to me!


  108. 110 | February 22, 2012 3:20 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    I saw that! She thinks she’s special! Doesn’t she know that you have to have a cabinet level position or be a Congresscritter to get away with not paying your taxes? Too funny!


  109. 111 | February 22, 2012 3:22 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Perhaps if she used TimmyTax?


  110. waldensianspirit
    112 | February 22, 2012 3:33 pm

    Roemer to launch independent bid for President

    He can debate Rosanne Barr


  111. 113 | February 22, 2012 3:39 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Sorry at 4!


  112. 114 | February 22, 2012 3:45 pm

    @ waldensianspirit:

    I didn’t have a clue who that was until I read that. I’m sure he’ll make a big splash! As Bugs says, What a Maroon!


  113. citizen_q
    115 | February 22, 2012 3:48 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:
    @ Iron Fist:

    Sheehan said she’s always been up front with the IRS and has no intention of paying her taxes. She says the government has already taken enough from her.

    “If they (federal government), can give me my son back, I’ll pay my taxes, but that’s not going to happen,” Sheehan said.

    I hope she represents herself and tries to use that argument in court.


  114. Speranza
    116 | February 22, 2012 3:50 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    Speaking of haggis—well, of hags—Cindy Sheehan is being sued by the feds for back taxes.

    The fascist fish-wife is still around?


  115. Speranza
    117 | February 22, 2012 3:52 pm

    The Osprey wrote:

    Unfortunately modern Scotland is plagued with Leftism, especially in the Glasgow region, a legacy of the “Red Clydeside”…communist and socialist dockworkers unions in the ‘Teens, 20′s and 30′s. The “Scottish Nationalist Party” is more leftwing than the British Labor Party. Most Scots Conservatives are against devolution for this reason.

    George Galloway is Scots -- there’s exhibit 1.


  116. 118 | February 22, 2012 3:55 pm

    @ The Osprey:
    @ Speranza:

    Where does Sean “The Rapists for $200, Alex” Connery fall along this matrix?


  117. coldwarrior
    119 | February 22, 2012 4:25 pm

    doriangrey wrote:

    One of my little brothers learned to speak Gaelic, it isn’t just hard on the ears it’s torture on the throat and tongue as well.

    my ex wife is from ireland…went to school in one of the gaeltachts…Béal Átha an Ghaorthaidh


  118. coldwarrior
    120 | February 22, 2012 4:28 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    Speaking of haggis—well, of hags—Cindy Sheehan is being sued by the feds for back taxes.

    hey, i dont bad mouth matzo balls and gefilte fish, so dont bad mouth the glorious haggis!

    ;)


  119. The Osprey
    121 | February 22, 2012 5:10 pm

    Macker wrote:

    @ The Osprey:
    @ Speranza:

    Where does Sean “The Rapists for $200, Alex” Connery fall along this matrix?

    He’s from Edinburgh. Edinburgh is the banking and law capital of Scotland and tends to be somewhat more Conservative than Glasgow.

    Sean Connery’s voice is the epitome of the Edinburgh accent.


  120. The Osprey
    122 | February 22, 2012 5:12 pm

    coldwarrior wrote:

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    Speaking of haggis—well, of hags—Cindy Sheehan is being sued by the feds for back taxes.

    hey, i dont bad mouth matzo balls and gefilte fish, so dont bad mouth the glorious haggis!

    Great Chieftain o’ the puddin’ race!


  121. The Osprey
    123 | February 22, 2012 5:19 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    The Osprey wrote:

    Unfortunately modern Scotland is plagued with Leftism, especially in the Glasgow region, a legacy of the “Red Clydeside”…communist and socialist dockworkers unions in the ‘Teens, 20′s and 30′s. The “Scottish Nationalist Party” is more leftwing than the British Labor Party. Most Scots Conservatives are against devolution for this reason.

    George Galloway is Scots – there’s exhibit 1.

    On the other hand, John Smeaton is also a Glaswegian.


  122. Speranza
    124 | February 22, 2012 7:23 pm

    @ The Osprey:
    Jack Bruce the bass player and lead singer from the 1960′s group CREAM is from Glasgow.


  123. Speranza
    125 | February 22, 2012 7:23 pm

    @ Speranza:
    and so is Sheena Easton.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David