16 ms·

What It Was Like to Seek Asylum in Medieval England

106 points by Thevet 11y ago

benihana 11y ago
Before the content even loaded there was a light box that blacked out the content behind it asking for my email.
- qmalxp 11y ago
  There's a big 'X' in the upper right corner of the box you can click to make it go away.
  - phaemon 11y ago
    Sbepvat crbcyr gb gnxr rkgen fgrcf gb ernq jung lbh'ir jevggra vf fghcvq.
    - ryanlol 11y ago
      -----BEGIN PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK----- lQOsBFW1QD0BCACnrDvtorbgkoy7YlXSN5chiclbH/y+QsgB7Yb1NiNTRRo5aHlO nJegEjzbYbzfhgTNrQsmyi+4KLu0Ks4uaQYgbVIm+TMDFMMiKwZ0sIVsgPnmojKO ChhiGbbj+eaVddTv2I/tWIxDhi3LfeJgqEZA4QlxJy2zT1JSrZYoVr9Fbcmsx5R1 h/Sdl5hp7AahmuNZCwAKG20hCA1DHS5LOr40QrRT3fsM+gMQu66VP8ITQWFiJkrL q7mp84Z6yM7FVMbTeMffSyx5Jz45bV06OxAo198ZLv4g1g48xijJL/YRY/70scXZ zl0wJ0xaBvcJ0xQVyfFdcCZpT40eeZ5PK+jnABEBAAH/AwMC7ZPXt6pPG2FgYn3D k4TCOF8DV8jEuTaDQVgobECilIeBmqkzU35qcVO0nGr+hHGaZchM+UA99iSn0bl4 YA4d79oAI5DK6t4FRaL54POnho+eeucFovddnBs9XcAICjnL+XBchg1JFHeQNGEr vi+c7QMd0H2ipKU3M9KlCU7XsDej1DFI5D76hlAB+dwN/naOpjNGhGwp6DCnd+yv eXzjKkzLO6dRLjEqNI8y4kUFngG589Kodqyn0asyim7ldwaX37fzzqoCT2lYdAUo EWHiB4xB2rZOaU1AyPPCeCLfUIym5C09hifzhLLXqhAbywv31Rh9ULzP7yTzO7w2 Tm3yVMQ1Q0sWjp+5F+E0l/YdfbFBwfd+odLBJOD4fL80P1zpBT3EDXR9LwCtiwiB OaDv2n3XdfJFEMShd8ImrMKuiwtWrfOx+igM1g5s3wQMWW2WWJvr3ekZEUxlHZem 3bs0P+Cjdfk9uugSrCCRqu5u5aXTtXchv734XmXea4AaSe0Grf47r/rUpTtNK4Pp n8PmumaJxeZw5oBuBnFVUQNSixLrM0sGSESmq3daCDtmkL4UuEZuveUjEmV0zTak JtxI3r/UoaPLKKItJH+e0rCh2uYBpzB2T/KKSysYgnCLZB2cp+L3hX3STsa6mzsv EBLSPBVOUfTXBJquVf8KQ5klD+13BszVRlo/jzuPDZF7EfjWq3g5BhTrRkBx5Rde M1eWuxHdEDqG7FAch0UTsQcmK48fVk5EBtLEOfj6b+CCGvbNnWQMZAom0ChPU/Kt VZMeprASjTiFWZKHUsSvxUhUET8Ap7I3rICil29V6dQrdNQVdmiigMLqHldO2iST UK8oq/Rw7EDk3w13c/UgoLUUScF4bQ+EuIhLSMn0ALQAiQEbBBABAgAGBQJVtUA9 AAoJEGwvuUgATjhB8i4H9jJUULOMUk6XKj0OUeVV/sydxE71JwgWa9u/JzFvur5+ cGr3TsxMQTRufD1X1+Ghd9n3s26qHzIgvmLc6iL+O128RWs/zYWXwI/P0u8h9V/T +NtRyeoeD8lpp+g7TeoSQEzjSntmyv6dtgMRv19S7QNW+GpAM4K1EN1sgU9xHROp rz9+DIsR99g5VslMi6cItp0xiHX00ta07JCWLGsMy9NzGwjb/U8fan3pLZfEudL/ aOGl96bTeyPsyHbOHkJO8q7RH1PRW+ba77AOl/bqLKLE5VQpwi/zS4DfWQRHbo/O az8yTZDCBhWUvRmIEes/EvPlHuSOH+j7KGOFjWZtUg== =MAM1 -----END PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- hQEMA2wvuUgATjhBAQf/cRgwK4K/lXuIYFvHH5kqpVee11A1NjOBH1tbSOvMGWlR 7qSPSEt8p5Q8SDVPvEAmqNb/uz1Q7F6LaFQP4PITZO4L6Zyrle68NdAQQNkW7YBT 7PUXLr7Zxr7Ap0Y09qZEbfgJqSMzdiV+JSGlcRSvTd1lyFgXnBrRD5ABxhjf+RoS XDleb0aYwFzMridPggSJf0o84cKaWJwLMf8YJMK90gDLUUICDvyC3rPq75z1WgJa 5t0VT7KloNe3zq57pM4xoIEJqV6ND/bwXCZNa+twCbsWcieVl//Q0Sv9tJqIwtac 4wSz8hVbqJJgWMmrGzO3s6UgsLgtnYSvNH7+YEUKU8k3PsYhJgo4lmCWDYtZOPbf t8ygafGy2/EpFPG8myBZQ6jwqguPI6kL6GNXtWGxZ4rOIvu3Fnc43g== =6Cw3 -----END PGP MESSAGE-----
- pflanze 11y ago
  Do like me and turn off JavaScript by default. The more people we are, the greater the chances that the web remains usable without JavaScript.
  - EC1 11y ago
    I can't remember the last time the teams I've worked on ever mentioned making the site usable for people without JS and people with disabilities. "It's not in the scope!" Ugh.
    - yulaow 11y ago
      I work for a public university, so when we make new sites or webapps we are obliged to make them usable for people with disabilities and we have at least one person who focus only on testing this... but without javascript? That is not even considered. The web IS javascript driven
      - pflanze 11y ago
        Unlike when serving people with disabilities, which you can't understand and test well if you're not disabled yourself (or specially trained), as a developer you should automatically be aware when you'd exclude people without JS. Nobody special needed for testing, just a resistance to implement navigation with JS only, or worse, JS-only content. Until now most content-heavy sites (like most university sites) are not problematic for the most part (1). Which I suppose is why there's no complaining till now. By having a healthy community of users with JS disabled, hopefully there will be enough complaints when it gets worse. (1) the static parts, which is most URLs used during the day. If I encounter a site that requires JS to log in, I'll open a separate browser with JS. If I encounter a page that only shows the content with JS, I just close it unread, unless in the very rare case that it's important to me (most important content is still not relying on JS).
      - elektromekatron 11y ago
        Web design should always include a graceful degradation spec.
- joosters 11y ago
  As well as being annoying, I just don't get the logic. Why on earth is anyone going to sign up for your mailing list when at this point, they haven't yet had a chance to read anything on your site? If you must insist on a sign up box, put it at the end of the article (and preferably after the article, not hiding the text).
jbuzbee 11y ago
>> [Church Asylum] surprisingly survived (in a much changed form) into the 17th century. Longer than that. There was a case this year in Denver where an illegal alien was given sanctuary in a church to prevent his deportation. After nine months, a deal was worked out and he was allowed to leave without fear of deportation. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26803443/man-facing-deportation-claims-sanctuary-denver-church-basement http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26803443/man-facing-deport... And of course the other big Asylum story is the recent case where a criminal was given "sanctuary" in San Francisco where he proceeded to randomly murder a tourist taking a stroll. Maybe there was reason that the practice was formally dropped in Europe centuries ago... [edit for typo]
- mtviewdave 11y ago
  "Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - jbuzbee 11y ago
    The point is that the article claims that practice petered out in the 17th century. I show otherwise. The article also states that one reason the practice was abolished was due to criminals leaving their sanctuary to commit more crimes. 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' George Santayana
    - DonQuixote1000 11y ago
      No. You are a troll. You mentioned that it was probably dropped for a reason after mentioning the murder. I can also mention of a person that was saved by a doctor and then went on to kill somebody. Maybe doctors should stop saving people. Again, you are a fucing troll.
      - gargarplex 11y ago
        I think what you are trying to express, in your own quixotic way, is that the phrase "murdered for taking a stroll" belies the complex causes of the murder. And he's a "troll" because he justified this conversation-prompt with a genuine value-add
pbhjpbhj 11y ago
reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aibx/how_historical_is_the_idea_that_a_church_could/ reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3e3etn/what_were_the_rules_for_claiming_sanctuary_in_a/ ... and probably many others from the same subreddit? Durham's sanctuary knocker is pictured and mentioned briefly in http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20191/20191-h/20191-h.htm#image09 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20191/20191-h/20191-h.htm#ima... (which disagrees factually with the OP). Which seems to be based on the Rites of Durham - https://ia802205.us.archive.org/2/items/ritesofdurhambei00cathrich/ritesofdurhambei00cathrich.pdf https://ia802205.us.archive.org/2/items/ritesofdurhambei00ca... (cf. pp 41-42).
- gus_massa 11y ago
  [Remember to add the http://www http://www to trigger the URL link detector. Edit: for the lazy http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aibx/how_historical_is_the_idea_that_a_church_could/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aibx/how_hi... http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3e3etn/what_were_the_rules_for_claiming_sanctuary_in_a/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3e3etn/what_w... ]
lionhearted 11y ago
In his biography of Charlemagne, historian Richard Winston advanced the idea of sanctuary and similar privileges being granted to the clergy to give them a useful function to native Pagan populations (Frankish -- modern day France and Germany) that would otherwise be hostile to clergy. Charlemagne also used monks and priests in something that looks like a proto-civil service role... the registry of births, deaths, sacraments (marriage, etc) could be used for taxation, sorting out property, etc. It's an interesting book. Charlemagne comes across as very realpolitik-ish despite the outward shows of piety, and also an excellent administrator.
- agumonkey 11y ago
  Interesting, I'm very curious about the politics of structures (kingdoms and such) before the revolution/democracy era. Pardon the cynicism, but many times I end up doubting today's democracy is pragmatic enough, instead becomes a thin cult absolving the need for good sense by trusting the 'public choice every N years' system. Like believing the invisible hand of the free market will balance things out gracefully.
pointym5 11y ago
The first image in that article is labeled Notre Dame, but that's the title for lots of cathedrals in France. That particular one is Notre Dame de Reims. The reproduced old image towards the bottom is jokingly called "Notre Dame back in the notre day", but that is clearly Westminster Abbey.
- nsajko 11y ago
  To add to your comment: Notre Dame simply means Our Lady. I think it's clear that that by itself is quite ambiguous.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- chnx 11y ago
  There's even a source under the image that links to, "https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Westminster_Abbey_-_Thomas_Hosmer_Shepherd.png" https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Westminster_Abbey_-_...
ars 11y ago
The author clearly knows more about the Christian practice than the Hebrew (Jewish) one. > while Hebraic tradition went bigger, declaring six whole cities as places where criminals could take refuge This is not true. The only sanctuary offered in those cities was if someone accidentally or via negligence killed someone. The relatives were not able to extract blood vengeance in those cities. That's it. It was not for criminals. It was a way of discouraging blood vengeance, while also punishing the perpetrator. The perpetrator would also be required to be tried in court after claiming refuge. > These early asylums were established under the belief that the gods (or god) were inviolable, and thus their temples and holy sites shared this untouchable aspect. Absolutely not true. If someone committed murder he could be dragged away from the holy of holies if necessary.
- kijin 11y ago
  You're right. There was no sanctuary for cold-blooded killers and traitors. Example: In 1 Kings, Chapter 2, Joab flees to the tent of God and grabs the horn of the altar. He had participated in Adonijah's failed coup d'etat and killed two commanders of the Israeli army. King Solomon doesn't even bother to drag him away from the altar before killing him.
tempodox 11y ago
The article mentions “capitol crimes”. Do they need smarter spell checkers or have I missed something?

106 points by Thevet 11y ago

benihana 11y ago

Before the content even loaded there was a light box that blacked out the content behind it asking for my email.

qmalxp 11y ago
There's a big 'X' in the upper right corner of the box you can click to make it go away.
- phaemon 11y ago
  Sbepvat crbcyr gb gnxr rkgen fgrcf gb ernq jung lbh'ir jevggra vf fghcvq.
  - ryanlol 11y ago
    -----BEGIN PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK----- lQOsBFW1QD0BCACnrDvtorbgkoy7YlXSN5chiclbH/y+QsgB7Yb1NiNTRRo5aHlO nJegEjzbYbzfhgTNrQsmyi+4KLu0Ks4uaQYgbVIm+TMDFMMiKwZ0sIVsgPnmojKO ChhiGbbj+eaVddTv2I/tWIxDhi3LfeJgqEZA4QlxJy2zT1JSrZYoVr9Fbcmsx5R1 h/Sdl5hp7AahmuNZCwAKG20hCA1DHS5LOr40QrRT3fsM+gMQu66VP8ITQWFiJkrL q7mp84Z6yM7FVMbTeMffSyx5Jz45bV06OxAo198ZLv4g1g48xijJL/YRY/70scXZ zl0wJ0xaBvcJ0xQVyfFdcCZpT40eeZ5PK+jnABEBAAH/AwMC7ZPXt6pPG2FgYn3D k4TCOF8DV8jEuTaDQVgobECilIeBmqkzU35qcVO0nGr+hHGaZchM+UA99iSn0bl4 YA4d79oAI5DK6t4FRaL54POnho+eeucFovddnBs9XcAICjnL+XBchg1JFHeQNGEr vi+c7QMd0H2ipKU3M9KlCU7XsDej1DFI5D76hlAB+dwN/naOpjNGhGwp6DCnd+yv eXzjKkzLO6dRLjEqNI8y4kUFngG589Kodqyn0asyim7ldwaX37fzzqoCT2lYdAUo EWHiB4xB2rZOaU1AyPPCeCLfUIym5C09hifzhLLXqhAbywv31Rh9ULzP7yTzO7w2 Tm3yVMQ1Q0sWjp+5F+E0l/YdfbFBwfd+odLBJOD4fL80P1zpBT3EDXR9LwCtiwiB OaDv2n3XdfJFEMShd8ImrMKuiwtWrfOx+igM1g5s3wQMWW2WWJvr3ekZEUxlHZem 3bs0P+Cjdfk9uugSrCCRqu5u5aXTtXchv734XmXea4AaSe0Grf47r/rUpTtNK4Pp n8PmumaJxeZw5oBuBnFVUQNSixLrM0sGSESmq3daCDtmkL4UuEZuveUjEmV0zTak JtxI3r/UoaPLKKItJH+e0rCh2uYBpzB2T/KKSysYgnCLZB2cp+L3hX3STsa6mzsv EBLSPBVOUfTXBJquVf8KQ5klD+13BszVRlo/jzuPDZF7EfjWq3g5BhTrRkBx5Rde M1eWuxHdEDqG7FAch0UTsQcmK48fVk5EBtLEOfj6b+CCGvbNnWQMZAom0ChPU/Kt VZMeprASjTiFWZKHUsSvxUhUET8Ap7I3rICil29V6dQrdNQVdmiigMLqHldO2iST UK8oq/Rw7EDk3w13c/UgoLUUScF4bQ+EuIhLSMn0ALQAiQEbBBABAgAGBQJVtUA9 AAoJEGwvuUgATjhB8i4H9jJUULOMUk6XKj0OUeVV/sydxE71JwgWa9u/JzFvur5+ cGr3TsxMQTRufD1X1+Ghd9n3s26qHzIgvmLc6iL+O128RWs/zYWXwI/P0u8h9V/T +NtRyeoeD8lpp+g7TeoSQEzjSntmyv6dtgMRv19S7QNW+GpAM4K1EN1sgU9xHROp rz9+DIsR99g5VslMi6cItp0xiHX00ta07JCWLGsMy9NzGwjb/U8fan3pLZfEudL/ aOGl96bTeyPsyHbOHkJO8q7RH1PRW+ba77AOl/bqLKLE5VQpwi/zS4DfWQRHbo/O az8yTZDCBhWUvRmIEes/EvPlHuSOH+j7KGOFjWZtUg== =MAM1 -----END PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- hQEMA2wvuUgATjhBAQf/cRgwK4K/lXuIYFvHH5kqpVee11A1NjOBH1tbSOvMGWlR 7qSPSEt8p5Q8SDVPvEAmqNb/uz1Q7F6LaFQP4PITZO4L6Zyrle68NdAQQNkW7YBT 7PUXLr7Zxr7Ap0Y09qZEbfgJqSMzdiV+JSGlcRSvTd1lyFgXnBrRD5ABxhjf+RoS XDleb0aYwFzMridPggSJf0o84cKaWJwLMf8YJMK90gDLUUICDvyC3rPq75z1WgJa 5t0VT7KloNe3zq57pM4xoIEJqV6ND/bwXCZNa+twCbsWcieVl//Q0Sv9tJqIwtac 4wSz8hVbqJJgWMmrGzO3s6UgsLgtnYSvNH7+YEUKU8k3PsYhJgo4lmCWDYtZOPbf t8ygafGy2/EpFPG8myBZQ6jwqguPI6kL6GNXtWGxZ4rOIvu3Fnc43g== =6Cw3 -----END PGP MESSAGE-----
pflanze 11y ago
Do like me and turn off JavaScript by default. The more people we are, the greater the chances that the web remains usable without JavaScript.
- EC1 11y ago
  I can't remember the last time the teams I've worked on ever mentioned making the site usable for people without JS and people with disabilities. "It's not in the scope!" Ugh.
  - yulaow 11y ago
    I work for a public university, so when we make new sites or webapps we are obliged to make them usable for people with disabilities and we have at least one person who focus only on testing this... but without javascript? That is not even considered. The web IS javascript driven
    - pflanze 11y ago
      Unlike when serving people with disabilities, which you can't understand and test well if you're not disabled yourself (or specially trained), as a developer you should automatically be aware when you'd exclude people without JS. Nobody special needed for testing, just a resistance to implement navigation with JS only, or worse, JS-only content. Until now most content-heavy sites (like most university sites) are not problematic for the most part (1). Which I suppose is why there's no complaining till now. By having a healthy community of users with JS disabled, hopefully there will be enough complaints when it gets worse. (1) the static parts, which is most URLs used during the day. If I encounter a site that requires JS to log in, I'll open a separate browser with JS. If I encounter a page that only shows the content with JS, I just close it unread, unless in the very rare case that it's important to me (most important content is still not relying on JS).
    - elektromekatron 11y ago
      Web design should always include a graceful degradation spec.
joosters 11y ago
As well as being annoying, I just don't get the logic. Why on earth is anyone going to sign up for your mailing list when at this point, they haven't yet had a chance to read anything on your site? If you must insist on a sign up box, put it at the end of the article (and preferably after the article, not hiding the text).

jbuzbee 11y ago

>> [Church Asylum] surprisingly survived (in a much changed form) into the 17th century. Longer than that. There was a case this year in Denver where an illegal alien was given sanctuary in a church to prevent his deportation. After nine months, a deal was worked out and he was allowed to leave without fear of deportation. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26803443/man-facing-deportation-claims-sanctuary-denver-church-basement http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26803443/man-facing-deport... And of course the other big Asylum story is the recent case where a criminal was given "sanctuary" in San Francisco where he proceeded to randomly murder a tourist taking a stroll. Maybe there was reason that the practice was formally dropped in Europe centuries ago... [edit for typo]

mtviewdave 11y ago
"Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- jbuzbee 11y ago
  The point is that the article claims that practice petered out in the 17th century. I show otherwise. The article also states that one reason the practice was abolished was due to criminals leaving their sanctuary to commit more crimes. 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' George Santayana
  - DonQuixote1000 11y ago
    No. You are a troll. You mentioned that it was probably dropped for a reason after mentioning the murder. I can also mention of a person that was saved by a doctor and then went on to kill somebody. Maybe doctors should stop saving people. Again, you are a fucing troll.
    - gargarplex 11y ago
      I think what you are trying to express, in your own quixotic way, is that the phrase "murdered for taking a stroll" belies the complex causes of the murder. And he's a "troll" because he justified this conversation-prompt with a genuine value-add

pbhjpbhj 11y ago

reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aibx/how_historical_is_the_idea_that_a_church_could/ reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3e3etn/what_were_the_rules_for_claiming_sanctuary_in_a/ ... and probably many others from the same subreddit? Durham's sanctuary knocker is pictured and mentioned briefly in http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20191/20191-h/20191-h.htm#image09 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20191/20191-h/20191-h.htm#ima... (which disagrees factually with the OP). Which seems to be based on the Rites of Durham - https://ia802205.us.archive.org/2/items/ritesofdurhambei00cathrich/ritesofdurhambei00cathrich.pdf https://ia802205.us.archive.org/2/items/ritesofdurhambei00ca... (cf. pp 41-42).

gus_massa 11y ago
[Remember to add the http://www http://www to trigger the URL link detector. Edit: for the lazy http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aibx/how_historical_is_the_idea_that_a_church_could/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/24aibx/how_hi... http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3e3etn/what_were_the_rules_for_claiming_sanctuary_in_a/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3e3etn/what_w... ]

lionhearted 11y ago

In his biography of Charlemagne, historian Richard Winston advanced the idea of sanctuary and similar privileges being granted to the clergy to give them a useful function to native Pagan populations (Frankish -- modern day France and Germany) that would otherwise be hostile to clergy. Charlemagne also used monks and priests in something that looks like a proto-civil service role... the registry of births, deaths, sacraments (marriage, etc) could be used for taxation, sorting out property, etc. It's an interesting book. Charlemagne comes across as very realpolitik-ish despite the outward shows of piety, and also an excellent administrator.

agumonkey 11y ago
Interesting, I'm very curious about the politics of structures (kingdoms and such) before the revolution/democracy era. Pardon the cynicism, but many times I end up doubting today's democracy is pragmatic enough, instead becomes a thin cult absolving the need for good sense by trusting the 'public choice every N years' system. Like believing the invisible hand of the free market will balance things out gracefully.

pointym5 11y ago

The first image in that article is labeled Notre Dame, but that's the title for lots of cathedrals in France. That particular one is Notre Dame de Reims. The reproduced old image towards the bottom is jokingly called "Notre Dame back in the notre day", but that is clearly Westminster Abbey.

nsajko 11y ago
To add to your comment: Notre Dame simply means Our Lady. I think it's clear that that by itself is quite ambiguous.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
chnx 11y ago
There's even a source under the image that links to, "https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Westminster_Abbey_-_Thomas_Hosmer_Shepherd.png" https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Westminster_Abbey_-_...

ars 11y ago

The author clearly knows more about the Christian practice than the Hebrew (Jewish) one. > while Hebraic tradition went bigger, declaring six whole cities as places where criminals could take refuge This is not true. The only sanctuary offered in those cities was if someone accidentally or via negligence killed someone. The relatives were not able to extract blood vengeance in those cities. That's it. It was not for criminals. It was a way of discouraging blood vengeance, while also punishing the perpetrator. The perpetrator would also be required to be tried in court after claiming refuge. > These early asylums were established under the belief that the gods (or god) were inviolable, and thus their temples and holy sites shared this untouchable aspect. Absolutely not true. If someone committed murder he could be dragged away from the holy of holies if necessary.

kijin 11y ago
You're right. There was no sanctuary for cold-blooded killers and traitors. Example: In 1 Kings, Chapter 2, Joab flees to the tent of God and grabs the horn of the altar. He had participated in Adonijah's failed coup d'etat and killed two commanders of the Israeli army. King Solomon doesn't even bother to drag him away from the altar before killing him.

tempodox 11y ago

The article mentions “capitol crimes”. Do they need smarter spell checkers or have I missed something?