No. Somebody is mamzer only if he’s the child of mamzerin or has parents who can’t possibly marry each other. In this case, the rapist could marry his victim, so the child isn’t mamzer.
Which is exactly why the following advice
is not liable to be useful. General recommendations like “go to the library and ask” are not helpful for answers to questions like this; if you can’t give a suggestion relevant to the topic at hand (since “go to the library and ask” could be applied to pretty much any question, don’t you think?) it’s not helpful to give irrelevant suggestions instead.
I don’t know if I agree with that, and I’d join Bosda in suggesting a library might be helpful. Questions like, “How did the Roman tax system work?” and “What was the status of women in first century Palestine” are questions with complicated answers…probably too complicated to answer in a message board post. And while {b]Dio**, Sampiro and myself, as well as some others have all attempted answers to these questions, they’re bound to be inaccurate and incomplete, and as far as I know, none of us are experts in the field.
In fact, entire books have been written in the attempt to answer questions like I posed above, and a good research library is the place to find them.
Sure, but giving advice that could be applied to any question at all is completely unhelpful in GQ (as with those who helpfully suggest the questioner try Google) and in this case, Bosda didn’t seem to have any recommendations as far as authors to check out. If you know about a field, it’s easy to use a library to find good results. However, if you don’t know where to begin - what books to look for or what authors, for instance, it’s not all that easy.
Not quite. According to halakha, a Jewish woman cannot wed a non-Jewish man, but their offspring would not be a mamzer, at least by the Amoraic period. It seems that in the time of the Mishnah, the law was different, Jewish woman and non-Jewish man produced a mamzer, but the law did not stay that way.
Come on Excalibre, everyone is only trying to help. 
I did find a book on the history context of Jesus in the local library. So this advice actually worked for me.
I would like to thank everyone here again for your tireless efforts and assistances.
Was 1st-century Palestine/Judea all that valuable to the Roman Empire? I mean the fact that at least a legion of soldiers had to be permanently stationed there probably cost the Empire a lot of money. Did Judea supply anything of value? in contrast, Egypt was extremely valuable to the Romans-they basically exported the gtain to Rome that fed the people of Italy. Likewise Gaul and Spain-but Judea? Why was it worth holding on to? ;j
Strategic position mostly - it linked very important Egypt to Syria and Rome’s other Near Eastern possesions and client states.
- Tamerlane
And part of the line against the Parthian and Sassanid (Iranian) empires.
May I suggest that you track down a copy of Stewart Perowne’s Herod the Great? Reading it will give you a fairly thorough - and reasonably accurate - overview of Palestine at that time. It’s a “popular account”, but Perowne was a good student. In addition, he spent a number of years specifically in the Middle East as an agent of the British government. Further, there’s a bibliography in it - a useful one. Cheap copies come up on eBay fairly often, and Barnes & Noble sponsored a reprint a few years back.
He also wrote a number of other books on the early Christian era, as well as a couple about the Roman Empire of the era. His writing was extremely accessible, and he wasn’t remotely near as partisan as most other sources are. The only thing that would be better would be a copy of A.H.M. Jones’s Herods of Judea, but copies are nearly impossible to come by, unless you’re prepared to drop $100 or more. OTOH, you might be able to find a copy in a university library. Almost certainly any long-established Protestant seminary would have a copy in their library.
Thank you, tygerbryght I will see if I can find a copy.
According to what I read, tax revenue from Judea was only third-rated.
So mostly for its position I guess.
Exactly, and their fears were well reasoned. Shapur I (reigned 241-272) scored many victories against Rome, and even captured the Roman emporer, Valerian.