How was it determined that it was the most likely site of Christ’s birth? Anybody know? I keep thinking that it might be like that old saw of the priest showing what he claims is a martyr’s skull, when it’s pointed out that the skull is too small to be an adult’s, the priest replies, “Ah yes, this is his skull when he was a young boy!” IOW, someone said, “Psst! Hey buddy, ya wanna buy the place where Christ was born?” And the church bought it. Sort of like people have “bought” the Brooklyn Bridge over the years. (Yes, I know the bridge is now up for sale. Let’s avoid that little hijack, shall we?)
Hey, Googling “history church nativity Bethlehem” sends you, first, to a church in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and then to the Chamber of Commerce in Bethlehem, Connecticut, and THEN, finally, do you get some hits on “the” Bethlehem.
Weird.
Anyway, it’s basically just a combination of “tradition” and “tourism”. As I read it (with a trained Doper skeptic’s Urban Legend-debunking mind), nobody really cared much about the actual birth site until 334 A.D., when a woman named Helena, who just happened to be the Christian mom of the Christian Roman emperor Constantine, arrived in the Holy Land specifically on a pilgrimage to find holy relics, and especially, holy sites, like the actual birthplace of Jesus.
So the Bethlehem locals very helpfully pointed her in the right direction (wasn’t that nice of them? ), and she built a church there.
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/vie/Bethlehem.html
http://www.bethlehem2000.org/bethlehem.htm
From this site (second paragraph).
While this site mentions the following:
Not that this proves anything, but it demonstrates the persistance of the legend…
Gp
DDG is faster off the mark again!!!
But I get bonus points for better quotes…
Gp