Mystery on top of mystery! I missed Ghost of a Flea's post on recent discoveries in Nazareth, but thanks to the brilliant Reflections in d minor I found the important missing link.

Reflections in d minor, by the way, called Classical Values "a better blog than mine" and I am really honored, even if I don't think it's true. (In fact, I would call Reflections in d minor a better blog than mine, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that I am not productive enough. But thanks for the compliment, Lynn!)

I had not known that a large, 2000 year old Roman baths (which served a garrison-sized military clientele), had been found in Nazareth, with vast implications for students of the historical Jesus. Nor did I know how little anyone seems to care. It is located underneath a struggling Arab merchant's shop, and the find appears to be authentic. According to the report,

the discovery means that historians will have to rethink the place and significance of Nazareth in the Roman empire and consequently the formative experiences of Jesus. It has been assumed that the Nazareth of 2,000 years ago was a poor Jewish village on the periphery of the empire, where local families inhabited caves on the hillside that today contains the modern Israeli-Arab city. On this view, the young Jesus would have had little contact with the Romans until he left Nazareth as an adult; his father, Joseph, one of many craftsmen in the town, may have worked on a Roman palace at nearby Sephori.

But the huge scale of Shama's bathhouse suggests that Nazareth, rather than Sephori, was the local hub of military control from Rome. The giant bath could only have been built for a Roman city or to service a significant garrison town. That would mean Joseph and Mary, and their son Jesus, would have been living in the very heart of the occupying power. This is likely to have huge significance for New Testament scholars in their understanding of Jesus's later teachings.

What this means is that Jesus grew up among Roman soldiers near a Roman bathhouse.

In the old days that last sentence might have been considered blasphemous.

I have long believed that Jesus was not particularly anti-Roman, probably as understanding and tolerant of Roman Pagans as he was of Samaritans and others, and much more sophisticated in his thinking than some of his followers believe. His handling of the tribute penny showed an uncanny grasp of political reality, as well as an acceptance of Rome as the dominant culture which it would be foolhardy to oppose. If Jesus grew up in a Roman military center, he most likely spoke enough Latin (at least the Vulgate version in use by troops) to get by, and this could go far towards explaining Pontius Pilate's obvious sympathy for this street philosopher who was being bounced around like a political football. Jesus may have been fully versed in Roman customs and thus able to relate to Romans culturally as well as speak their language.

No wonder they don't want to explore the bathhouse issue.

There is much we don't know, and aren't supposed to know. Muslims do not want to acknowledge evidence of the Roman occupation of a Jewish land (amazingly ignorant because the evidence is also right there on the Roman coins), the Israelis are not happy about large-scale excavations in a troubled Arab city, and leading Christian sects are involved in bitter rivalry which a new site could worsen:

Further excavation of the site, however, is not yet assured: Shama's discovery is mired in financial difficulties and the sectarian acrimony that has blighted the Middle East for centuries. Given the find's significance, it is surprising to learn that Shama, a Christian Arab, is receiving no outside support, even from the state. Since he and his wife sank the last of their life savings in excavating and developing the site, the shop is close to collapse - and with it perhaps the bathhouse project.

The most powerful player in the Christian world, the Vatican, has so far refused to throw its weight behind the dig, possibly fearing that Shama's find threatens its own dominance where tourism in the city is concerned. Its Basilica of the Annunciation, the Middle East's largest church, is on the other side of town from Mary's Well. There has been a long-running dispute between the Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches about whose church is on the true site of the Annunciation.

The Catholics claim the Basilica is built over a grotto that was Mary's home; the Orthodox, basing their tradition on an alternative Gospel that Mary was drawing water from Nazareth's well when she was visited by Gabriel, say their Mary's Well church, half a kilometre away, is located over the original spring. Shama's bathhouse, next to Mary's Well church, poses a double threat to them: it strengthens the claim of the Orthodox church to be the true site of the Annunciation, and it will make the Mary's Well area the main tourist attraction in Nazareth.

So this news, while of enormous historical importance, does not suit the agenda of anyone in power anywhere, so I wouldn't expect to hear much more about it. (Considering that facts aren't even of interest in contemporary news accounts in the United States, to expect otherwise would be ludicrous.)

Such instances of suppression of historical facts are a major reason deconstructionist thinking has gained such inroads in academia and elsewhere. But this thinking is preposterous.

Suppression of truth -- however successful -- does not mean there is no truth!

The question of who has power to declare a thing to be true is more problematic, however. Should there be such, er, power? Am I allowed to assert that Jesus grew up among Roman soldiers near a Roman bathhouse? Or must that "fact" first be certified by historians? Who gets to decide these things, and why? If there is no way keep ego, politics, money, and religion out of it, then how trustworthy is the "process?"

UPDATE: It is not difficult to see how the Roman bathhouse discovery could change the meaning of certain Biblical passages. For starters, it casts new light on the story of the Roman Centurian who accosted Jesus on the street and asked him to heal his slave. The story becomes not quite as culturally startling when seen in the context of a man who grew up in the midst of Roman military personnel. Ditto for the understanding and respect Jesus showed (Pagan) Gentiles. People who like to portray Jesus as a bigot may not like any of this, but fortunately, in a free country their opinions are no more binding on anyone than are mine.