Talk:Church of the Flagellation

There is a lot of unimportant information in the article (Is it a must to mention all the works of Barluzzi?). I recommend to shorten the unneeded sentences, even if it makes the stub shorter. Tamarah (talk) 11:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC) ~I agree Tamarah, and have corrected some of the issues you had with the article. Spool 26 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC).

Argument against Antonia flagstones doesn't stand up to scrutiny
"According to tradition, the church enshrines the spot where Jesus Christ was flogged by Roman soldiers before his journey down the Via Dolorosa to Calvary. However, this tradition is based on the mistaken assumption that an area of Roman flagstones, discovered beneath the adjacent Church of the Condemnation and Imposition of the Cross and the Convent of the Sisters of Zion, was the pavement (Greek: lithostrotos, Aramaic: gabbatha) which the Bible describes as the location of Pontius Pilate's judgment of Jesus; archaeological investigation now indicates that these slabs are the paving of the eastern of two 2nd-century forums, built by Hadrian as part of the construction of Aelia Capitolina. The site of the eastern forum had previously been a large open-air pool, the Struthion Pool, which was built by the Hasmoneans, mentioned by Josephus as being adjacent to the Antonia Fortress in the first century, and is still present beneath Hadrian's flagstones."

My problem is: this doesn't contradict the Lithostrotos assumption, as the flagstones from Antonia's courtyard might well have been reused by Hadrian. This is precisely how the site is presented to pilgrims. Needs better arguments! Arminden (talk) 11:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)