Biblical Hebrew Forum

["VC" <vadim_lv AT center-tv.net>]

> >Is11:11 lists the islands among all hostile nations
> In this context there is no mention of hostility, although I accept that
> several of these other nations were enemies of Israel. The point is
> rather that some Israelites had been exiled to the islands - probably
> not to Britain in this case. There is certainly no indication that the
> islands were a military threat to the Land as you seem to think.

Well, every other nation on the list is an enemy. In fact, Israel hardly had
any friends  (except for the US :)

> OK, the decisive battle was not fought at Jerusalem itself. But the
> point is that inhabitants of an island could set up land bases in
> countries around Israel, and from there invade the land, defeat the
> defenders of Jerusalem and capture the city. Early 20th century
> technology of course helped somewhat, but the Romans were also able to
> capture Jerusalem, and although they didn't come from an island they did
> not travel overland.

Ancient armies did not have large foreign bases. Even the Roman troops in
Egypt weren't sufficient to quash a minor rebellion in Judea. The army in
Gaul was limited to colonists except for the period of offensive.

>Romans were also able to
>capture Jerusalem, and although they didn't come from an island they did
>not travel overland.

What do you mean? Of course, they did. Besides, Romans passed through
friendly territories, which reinforced them, not drained their resources in
warfare.


Sincerely,

Vadim Cherny