← catalogue

Jerusalem Explored, Volume 1—Text

by Ermete Pierotti · English · Gutenberg #41569 · 1,152,289 chars · public domain (US)

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Jerusalem Explored, Volume 1—Text
    
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: Jerusalem Explored, Volume 1—Text

Author: Ermete Pierotti

Translator: T. G. Bonney


        
Release date: December 6, 2012 [eBook #41569]
                Most recently updated: October 23, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/41569

Credits: E-text prepared by Sigal Alon, Gary Rees, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made available by the Jewish National and University Library Digitized Book Repository (http://jnul.huji.ac.il/eng/digibook.html)


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK JERUSALEM EXPLORED, VOLUME 1—TEXT ***

Note: Images of the original pages are available through
      the Jewish National and University Library Digitized
      Book Repository. See
      http://aleph.nli.org.il/nnl/dig/books/bk001202937.html


Transcriber's note:

      Greek words and phrases in the Greek alphabet have been
      transliterated and are surrounded by plus signs (+) in
      this transcription (example: +spêlaiôn+).

      Footnotes in the original publication were numbered at the
      page level. E.g., if a page had three footnotes, they were
      numbered 1, 2 & 3, and footnote numbering began with 1 on
      each page on which notes appeared. For this transcription,
      all 903 footnotes have been renumbered sequentially, from 1
      to 903, and footnotes for a given chapter have been placed
      at the end of the chapter.





JERUSALEM EXPLORED

Being a Description of the Ancient and Modern City.


[Illustration: University Press Logo]


Cambridge:
Printed by C. J. Clay, M.A.
At the University Press.


JERUSALEM EXPLORED

Being a Description of the Ancient and Modern City,

With Numerous Illustrations
Consisting of Views, Ground Plans, and Sections,

by

ERMETE PIEROTTI,

Doctor of Mathematics, and Architect-Engineer, Civil and Military, to
His Excellency Surraya Pasha of Jerusalem.

Translated by Thomas George Bonney, M.A., F.G.S.

Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge.

VOLUME I.--TEXT.







[Illustration: Printer's Logo]

London: Bell and Daldy, Fleet Street.
Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, and Co.
M.DCCC.LXIV.

[The right of Translation is reserved.]




TO HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY

NAPOLEON III.

Emperor of the French,

PROTECTOR OF THE HOLY PLACES,



THIS CONTRIBUTION

TO ARCHÆOLOGICAL SCIENCE,

IN WHICH HE IS HIMSELF A PROFICIENT,

IS BY HIS MAJESTY'S AUGUST PERMISSION INSCRIBED,

BY HIS OBEDIENT SERVANT,



ERMETE PIEROTTI.




_PALAIS DES TUILERIES, LE 26 NOV. 1861._

_CABINET DE L'EMPEREUR._


_MONSIEUR,_

_L'EMPEREUR ME CHARGE D'AVOIR L'HONNEUR DE VOUS INFORMER QUE, SELON VOS
DÉSIRS, SA MAJESTÉ VEUT BIEN ACCEPTER LA DÉDICACE DE VOTRE OUVRAGE SUR
LES MONUMENTS ET LES LOCALITÉS DE LA PALESTINE[1]._

_AGRÉEZ, MONSIEUR, L'ASSURANCE DE MA CONSIDÉRATION DISTINGUÉE._

_POUR LE SECRÉTAIRE DE L'EMPEREUR, CHEF DU CABINET ET PAR AUTORISATION._

_LE Ss. CHEF._

_JACALEY._



_LE DR. E. PIEROTTI._

_11 RUE DES DEUX BOULES, PARIS._


[1] Of which Work this is intended as the first part.




PREFACE.


On the subject of Jerusalem many books in various languages have already
been published; but I venture to think that there is still room for
another, as most of them are open to objections of different kinds. Some
authors have erred in being carried away by their subject, and
disappoint the reader by substituting their own reflexions for the
information that he desires to acquire. Some, with the eye of fancy,
seem to behold the shades of Kings, of Prophets, and of Heroes,
wandering among their tombs, or haunting the ruins of Sion; others,
after a short stay in Jerusalem, return to their own homes and publish
books, composed of fragments of classic lore, and the traditions they
have gathered from the guides who have accompanied them in the visits to
the Holy Places; some indeed going so far as to denounce as heretics and
infidels all who do not lend a ready belief to these tales. Lastly,
there are some who, without visiting Jerusalem, and consequently without
a minute knowledge of its topography, rely upon the information they
have gathered from the accounts of others, to reconstruct the ancient
walls, the Temple, and other buildings, and endeavour to overthrow the
conclusions which have been formed after a prolonged residence in the
country and much careful observation.

In the works of all these authors there is much that is interesting, but
the description of what is really to be seen is always more or less
defective. I have accordingly endeavoured to supply this want during my
residence in the Holy City, and now present to my readers the fruits of
eight years of continual labour, devoted to a study of the topography of
Jerusalem upon the spot, in which I have been constantly occupied in
excavating and removing the rubbish accumulated over the place during so
many centuries, in retracing the walls, in examining the monuments and
ancient remains, and in penetrating and traversing the conduits and
vaults; so that I trust I am in a position to throw some fresh light
upon the subject of Jewish Archæology. In arranging the plan of my work,
I have rested chiefly upon the Bible, the traditions of the Rabbis, and
the works of Josephus, and have made but little use of any other
authorities upon the ancient topography of the city; but, to compensate
for this, I have made excavations and watched those made by others, have
formed intimacies with the inhabitants of the country, have sought for
information on the spot, regardless of personal risk, have worked with
my own hands under the ground, and so have obtained much knowledge of
that which lies below the surface of the soil in Jerusalem; and have
pursued my purpose, at one time with bribes, at another with force, and
always with patience, perseverance, and courage.

But my efforts would have been of little avail had it not been for the
constant protection and assistance of His Excellency Surraya Pasha, of
M. de Barrère, the French Consul, and his Chancellor, M. Aimé Dequié,
who lost no opportunity of publicly testifying their esteem and regard
for me. I must not forget to express my gratitude to the Ecclesiastical
authorities, who have also shewn me great kindness.

That I have been able to publish my book in England is due to the Rev.
George Williams, Fellow of King's College, Cambridge, who, when he had
heard of my discoveries in the Holy City,--a place so dear and so full
of interest to him,--invited me to this University, gave me a truly
English welcome, and aided me to the utmost of his power in
accomplishing my desire.

For the translation of my Italian manuscript into English, I am indebted
to the Rev. T. G. Bonney, Fellow of St John's College, whom I have also
to thank for several useful suggestions and corrections. I must also
express my obligations to Mr R. W. Taylor, Fellow of the same College,
who, in order to expedite the publication of the book, kindly undertook
to assist his friend by translating the Notes.

The proof-sheets have been corrected by Mr Bonney, and revised by Mr
Williams, and by the Rev. John E. B. Mayor, Fellow of S. John's College,
who has not only been at the pains to collate them with my manuscript,
but has also aided me with his great learning and experience. I cannot
find terms adequate to express my gratitude to these three gentlemen for
their constant kindness and friendly care. Nor can I refrain from
thanking my numerous friends in this University, who have contributed to
render my sojourn among them at once pleasant and profitable; with whom
I have spent many happy hours, the memory of which will not leave me
during the rest of my life.

And now I present my book to the reader, apologizing for its many
deficiencies, and trusting that he will be an indulgent critic. It does
not profess to be more than a simple and strict record of facts, and
therefore I must ask him to pardon me if it be sometimes rather dull and
dry. I have purposely avoided, as much as possible, all that would
interfere with the main end of the work, such as personal reminiscences
and unimportant details; wishing rather to put forward facts than
theories, to rely upon sight rather than imagination. Most thankfully
shall I receive friendly correction and criticism, or suggestions and
advice for my conduct in the new investigations which I hope to make in
Palestine. As regards those which I have described in the following
pages, I can honestly say that I have spared no pains to make them as
complete as possible; and though they have cost me much time and money,
much anxiety and fatigue, still, if I succeed in throwing any additional
light upon Jewish antiquities, or in exciting a more general interest
upon such an important subject, I shall feel that I have not laboured in
vain.

ERMETE PIEROTTI.

CAMBRIDGE, _December 15th, 1863_.




CONTENTS.


  CHAPTER I.                                                      PAGE

  ORIGIN OF THE NAME JERUSALEM--HISTORY--TOPOGRAPHY AND GENERAL
  ASPECT--CLIMATE--POPULATION--WATERS                                1


  CHAPTER II.

  ANCIENT TOPOGRAPHY OF JERUSALEM--IDENTIFICATION OF THE
  MOUNTAINS, HILLS AND VALLEYS--JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF THE
  JEBUSITES, DAVID, SOLOMON, JOTHAM, HEZEKIAH, MANASSEH,
  NEHEMIAH, HEROD--THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS EXAMINED--THE
  SIEGE BY TITUS--FORMER EXTENT OF THE CITY--JERUSALEM IN THE
  TIME OF HADRIAN, THE CRUSADERS AND SOLYMAN                        16


  CHAPTER III.

  MOUNT MORIAH AND ITS ENVIRONS--HISTORY IN THE TIME OF
  ABRAHAM, JACOB, DAVID, SOLOMON, ZERUBBABEL, ALEXANDER THE
  GREAT, ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES, THE MACCABEES, POMPEIUS, CRASSUS,
  THE HERODS, TITUS, HADRIAN, CONSTANTINE, JULIAN THE APOSTATE,
  OMAR, ABD-EL-MALEK, VALID OR ELULID, THE CRUSADERS, SALADIN,
  SELIM I., SOLYMAN I.--GENERAL EXAMINATION OF MORIAH, WITH
  DETAILS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS                                     45


  CHAPTER IV.

  THE CHURCH OF THE RESURRECTION, AND THE HOSPITAL OF S. JOHN,
  WITH THEIR ENVIRONS--HISTORY OF THE HOLY SEPULCHRE FROM THE
  DEATH OF CHRIST TO THE PRESENT TIME--GENUINENESS OF THE
  SEPULCHRE--GOLGOTHA--EXAMINATION OF THE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR
  OF THE CHURCH--RUINS OF THE HOSPITAL                             102


  CHAPTER V.

  INVESTIGATIONS IN THE VIA DOLOROSA (OR THE WAY OF THE CROSS).
  THE RELIGIOUS AND OTHER REMARKABLE BUILDINGS IN IT OR IN ITS
  NEIGHBOURHOOD AND IN THE REST OF THE CITY, TOGETHER WITH ALL
  THE CONVENTS OF THE DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES              135


  CHAPTER VI.

  EXCURSIONS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF THE CITY ON THE EAST,
  SOUTH, AND SOUTH-WEST--THE VALLEY OF KIDRON, CALLED ALSO THE
  VALLEY OF JEHOSHAPHAT, WITH ITS MONUMENTS AND REMARKABLE
  PLACES--THE MOUNT OF OLIVES--BETHPHAGE--BETHANY--THE VALLEY
  OF HINNOM--THE MOUNT OF EVIL COUNSEL--SOUTH-WESTERN PART OF
  THE VALLEY OF GIHON--MOUNT SION--CHRISTIAN CEMETERIES--TOMB
  OF DAVID, AND SUBTERRANEAN VAULTS--THE COENACULUM--THE HOUSE
  OF CAIAPHAS--THE GROTTO OF S. PETER--THE LEPERS                  167


  CHAPTER VII.

  EXCURSIONS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF THE CITY ON THE NORTH AND
  WEST--THE MONUMENT OF HELENA OF ADIABENE, AND THE CHURCH
  DEDICATED TO S. STEPHEN--ROYAL CAVERNS--GROTTO OF
  JEREMIAH--HOUSE OF THE VINE--TOMBS OF THE KINGS--SHEIKH
  JERRAH--ANCIENT SYNAGOGUE--TOMB OF SIMON THE JUST--TOMBS AT
  THE HEAD OF THE KIDRON VALLEY--KIDRON POOL--VARIOUS TOMBS ON
  THE NORTH-WEST--TOMBS OF THE JUDGES--SHEIKH AYMAR--RUSSIAN
  BUILDINGS--VALLEY OF GIHON--BIRKET MAMILLAH--MONUMENT OF
  HEROD, AND RUINS OF THE CHURCH OF S. BABYLAS--GREEK CONVENT
  OF THE HOLY CROSS--PROPERTY OF THE ARCHIMANDRITE NICOFORUS       223


  CHAPTER VIII.

  ON THE WATERS, FIT OR UNFIT FOR DRINKING, IN JERUSALEM AND
  ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD                                                245


  CHAPTER IX.

  GENERAL REMARKS UPON THE PRESENT STATE OF THE CITY OF
  JERUSALEM                                                        262

       *       *       *       *       *

  NOTES                                                            281


  CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY                                            311


  PRINCIPAL PASSAGES FROM THE HOLY BIBLE                           315


  PASSAGES FROM JOSEPHUS'S ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS                 323


  PASSAGES FROM JOSEPHUS'S HISTORY OF THE JEWISH WAR               327


  INDEX                                                            333




CORRIGENDA ET ADDENDA.


  Page 7, line 30, _for_ Hulda _read_ Huldah
  Page 10, line 33, _for_ and in 1859 _read_ and in 1861
  Page 14, line 2, and page 15, lines 6 and 13, _for_ Sherif _read_
    Sherîf
  Page 37, line 8, _for_ Barrére _read_ Barrère
  Page 43, line 28, _for_ Willebrand _read_ Willibrand
  Page 106, line 5, and page 117, line 14, _for_ Abbot _read_ Abbé
  Page 145, line 23, _for_ then _read_ be thou
  Page 155, head line, _for_ Greek Synagogue _read_ Great Synagogue
  Page 207, line 18, _for_ 260 _read_ 270
  Page 210, last line, _for_ Note XXII. _read_ Note XVI.

Chapter 1. The numbers of the different nations and sects that inhabit
Jerusalem were taken by the Author, in the service of Surraya Pasha, in
the year 1861.

Vols. I. and II. of the Gesta Dei per Francos, referred to in the body
of the work, form 'Tomus Primus Orientalis Historiæ.' The pages are
numbered continuously, and, according to Dr Robinson, the book usually
forms only one volume. This, however, was not observed by the translator
in verifying the references until the earlier sheets were struck off.
Sanutus' Liber Secretorum fidelium Crucis forms 'Tomus Secundus
Orientalis Historiæ.' An account of most of the earlier books referred
to in this work will be found in Dr Robinson's Biblical Researches, Vol.
III. First Appendix, pp. 3-27 (1st Edition). La Citez de Jherusalem,
contained in M. de Vogüé's work, Les Églises de la Terre Sainte, is also
printed in the Rev. G. Williams' Holy City, Vol. 1. Appendix II. pp.
134--142 (2nd Edition).




JERUSALEM EXPLORED.




CHAPTER I.

     ORIGIN OF THE NAME JERUSALEM--HISTORY--TOPOGRAPHY AND GENERAL
     ASPECT--CLIMATE--POPULATION--WATERS.


Most authors agree in identifying the Salem of Melchizedek[2] with
Jerusalem. S. Jerome[3] however asserts that the residence of the King
of Righteousness was in the east of Judea, three leagues to the south of
the city of Scythopolis, and not far from the Jordan, supporting his
opinion by the fact that in his time a town still existed there called
Salim (_Salumias_), not far from which was Ænon[4], where S. John
Baptist baptized. The Arabs of the Jordan guided me to Salumias and to a
neighbouring valley, which I identify with "the valley of Shaveh[5]
(_the plain_), which is the king's dale." We are told that Abraham met
Melchizedek and the king of Sodom on his return from the successful
attack on the invaders, and it seems incredible that he should have gone
by Jerusalem to Hebron, thus uselessly prolonging his journey by passing
through a strange country. Nor would it be said that the king of Sodom
went out "_to meet him in the valley of the plain_," but rather "_to
seek him in the king's dale in the mountains_," nor would Melchizedek
have been received by Abraham, but they would have met in Salem[6]. For
these reasons I believe Salem and Jerusalem to be two distinct places.
There is, however, no doubt that Jerusalem was the city of the
Jebusites, a nation descended and named from Jebus, son of Canaan.

It is difficult to fix the period when it acquired the name of Jerusalem
(_Yerush-shalom_, Inheritance of Peace,) for the use of the word in
Joshua x. 1, xii. 10, Judges i. 21, does not prove that it was older
than the period of the conquest. The Emperor Hadrian called it _Ælia
Capitolina_. The City is named _El Kuds_, or _Beit el Makdus_ (the Holy
House), by the Arabic writers of the middle ages. It is possible that it
may have borne this name at a much earlier period, as Cadytis[7], a
great city of Syria, taken by Necho, king of Egypt, may be Jerusalem;
Cadytis being only a corruption of the Aramaic _Kadishtha_ (the Holy).
Some suppose that _Jerusalem_ has been formed by the union of _Jebus_
and _Salem_, the _b_ being changed into _r_, but the Hebrew form of the
word does not admit of this transformation. The derivation given by
Lysimachus[8] is amusing from its absurdity. He asserts that in the time
of Bocchoris, king of Egypt, the Jews were expelled from that country by
the order of the Sun-god, who was disgusted at the diseased and leprous
condition of the race, and visited the land with a famine; that being
led by Moses, they travelled over the desert; and "the difficulties of
the journey being over, they came to a country inhabited; and there they
abused the men, and plundered and burnt their temples; and then came
into that land which is called Judea, and there they built a city and
dwelt therein; and that their city was named _Hierosyla_, from this
robbing of the temples; but that still, upon the success they had
afterwards, they in time changed its denomination, that it might not be
a reproach to them, and called the city _Hierosolyma_, and themselves
_Hierosolymites_."

Adonizedek was king of Jerusalem at the time of the conquest under
Joshua[9]. He fell in battle against the Jews, near Gibeon, and some
time after the lower town was taken by them. The Jebusites[10], however,
still remained in it, among the descendants of Judah and Benjamin, and
were not driven from the upper town till the eighth year of David's
reign, when their stronghold was taken by storm[11], and the place
became the capital of his kingdom. Jerusalem attained to its highest
pitch of grandeur under the government of Solomon, being the centre of
commerce, civilization, and religion. After the division of the Tribes,
it continued to be the capital of the kingdom of Judah. In the fifth
year of Rehoboam it was taken and sacked by Shishak[12], king of Egypt.
In the reign of Jehoram[13] bands of Philistines and Arabs entered the
city, plundered the king's palace, and carried his wives and sons into
captivity. In the reign of Amaziah[14] it was sacked by Joash king of
Israel. It was unsuccessfully threatened by the Assyrians in the days of
Hezekiah[15]. Manasseh[16] fortified the western side of the city and
Ophel, but it was laid waste by the Chaldeans under Nebuchadnezzar[17].

After a captivity of half a century, the Jews were permitted by Cyrus to
rebuild it, but, owing to the opposition of their enemies, the work was
not completed till the time of Nehemiah. Jerusalem was involved in the
troubles caused by the fall of the Persian Empire. The city opened its
gates to Alexander, who not only treated it with humanity, but also
conferred upon it several privileges. After his death it was taken by
Ptolemy, son of Lagus, king of Egypt. Under the Ptolemies, and for a
while under the Seleucidæ, it on the whole enjoyed peace and honour,
until the barbarity of the tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes renewed the
sorrows of the unhappy city. The heroic sons of the house of Mattathias
delivered their country from this yoke, and it remained under the
princes of the Asmonean family until Palestine was conquered by the
Romans. Pompeius the Great, who entered Jerusalem as a conqueror 63
B.C., respected the lives and property of the inhabitants. The temple
was protected by him, only to be plundered by Crassus. The liberality of
Herod the Great added much to the splendour of Jerusalem; but after his
death the spirit of sedition spread more and more every day among the
Jews, producing frequent revolts against the Romans, which were
terminated by the destruction of the city by Titus, A.D. 71. Thus were
the predictions of the prophets fulfilled.

After lying in ruins for sixty years it was rebuilt by the Emperor
Hadrian upon a part of its former site, and called Ælia Capitolina[18];
but the Jews were forbidden to enter it under pain of death. When
Christianity triumphed in the reign of Constantine, the heathen temples
were replaced by churches in honour of every memorial of the Saviour's
life and death.

Chosroes II., king of the Persians, took the city by assault, A.D. 614;
it was regained by the Emperor Heraclius A.D. 629, and again taken by
the Khalif Omar A.D. 636. After this it was successively under the
dominion of the Persian Khalifs, of the Fatimites of Egypt, and of the
Seljukians, in whose time the Crusades were commenced, owing to the
preaching of Peter the Hermit. The Christian army, led by Godfrey of
Bouillon, entered the Holy City A.D. 1099. The Latin kingdom was brought
to an end by the victories of Saladin A.D. 1187. Sultan Malek el-Kamel
ceded the city to Frederick II. of Germany, but it was recovered by the
Mohammedans under Jenghiz Khan, A.D. 1244. It then remained subject to
the different dynasties of the Sultans of Egypt and Syria, until it was
conquered by the Turks under Selim I. A.D. 1517. Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt
took possession of it A.D. 1832, but the Great Powers restored it to the
Porte A.D. 1840[19]. The spirit of the present Turkish government,
influenced as it is by the nations of Europe, induces us to think that a
happier and more peaceful future is in store for Jerusalem, and that
under their protection the furious contests, so common among the rival
sects of Christians, who struggle for the possession of the Holy
Places, will be appeased. By these quarrels only will the soil of
Jerusalem be stained with blood, not by the fanaticism of the
Mohammedan; he is, and will be, restrained by the power of the local
authorities, the energy of the Consuls, and the bribes paid by the
Convents to pacify the more restless spirits. We may also hope that
European civilization will speedily penetrate into Palestine, and that
Jerusalem will become an inviolable asylum, open to every devout man;
for all, without distinction of creed, are entitled to mourn, to hope,
and to pray, on the spot consecrated by the sacrifice of our Divine
Master.

The city of Jerusalem[20] is situated about 31° 47' north latitude and
33° east longitude (Paris) in the highest part of the mountains of
Judea, and upon the ancient boundaries of the tribes of Judah and
Benjamin (Joshua xviii. 6). It is surrounded on every side by rising
ground, and therefore cannot be seen by the traveller until he
approaches near it. The most distant view of it is obtained from the
village of _Neby Samwîl_[21] (Prophet Samuel), three hours (about twelve
miles) distant on the north-west; and it was from this height that the
first Crusaders, under Godfrey of Bouillon, saluted Jerusalem with
shouts of exultation.

On the north the city is overshadowed by the mountain of _Shafat_ (fair
prospect), the ancient Scopus. It was from this position that Titus made
his first general survey of the city, which at that time he had no
intention of destroying[22]. On the east rises Mount Olivet; on the
south, an eminence known as the Hill of Evil Counsel, and also as the
Mount of the Sepulchres, from the great number of tombs existing there.
To the west are the summits of Mount Gihon. Valleys separate all these
mountains from the city and the high table-land to the north, entirely
surrounding it except on the north-west and a small portion of the north
side, where the ground is so nearly level as to admit of an easy
approach.

On the north commences the valley of Kidron, at first not deep but
sinking as it approaches the east, and continuing to do so along the
whole of that side, until it reaches the lower extremity of the gardens
of Siloam. Here it unites with the valley of Hinnom, which runs parallel
to the south of the city. On the west is the valley of Gihon, which is
very deep at the point where it takes the name of Hinnom, on the
south-west. From this conformation of the ground, it is obvious that, in
times when only the weapons and military engines of ancient warfare were
employed, the city was an important stronghold, well defended by nature,
except on the north-west and a small portion of the north side, where
the almost level ground exposed it to an attack. From the most remote
periods of antiquity until the time of the Crusades and Saladin,
Jerusalem was invariably assaulted at these points by those who made
themselves masters of the city.

A few olive-trees, a bare argillaceous soil scattered over with stones
and flints, some ruins of ancient sepulchres, four water-tanks, some
cisterns almost entirely dilapidated, and bare rocks, some of which
exhibit traces of chiselling, are the only objects that meet the eye
throughout the whole region of the north and north-west.

On the east, along the course of the valley of Kidron, nothing is seen
but rocks and accumulations of earth and rubbish: these continue
likewise along the south, but the desolate effect is somewhat concealed
by the growth of vegetation, and by the gardens of the peasants of
Siloam. The ruins still existing, and the nature of the soil, which is
mostly grey in colour and full of lime, shew that the ground on this
side was once occupied by houses. Finally, on the west are seen the
reservoir of Mamillah, accumulations of earth and rubbish, argillaceous
soil, bare rocks, and a few recent plantations,--the work of the
improver of cultivation in Palestine, the Greek Archimandrite,
Nicoferus.

As may be inferred from this description, the environs of Jerusalem
present an appearance of wretchedness and desolation, that cannot fail
to strike the eye of the traveller: and the feeling of melancholy is
further increased by the thought that the Holy City itself is surrounded
by tombs which are daily being opened, and that the inhabitants have
only cemeteries for their public promenades. The memories of the past
alone are able to attract the traveller and the pilgrim to
Jerusalem,--not its present condition; for the miserable spectacle
presented by the monuments still existing above ground would certainly
not repay the trouble and fatigue of so long a journey. But those
memories, together with the subterranean remains, afford ample
recompense to any one possessing imagination and religious feeling, who
wishes to study the Bible in its own peculiar country, where its use
will inevitably lead him to the truth.

During the past few years several buildings have been erected in the
neighbourhood of Jerusalem, more especially on the north-west. Of these,
the most remarkable, both for their extent and for their site, which
commands the city on every side, are those belonging to Russia. This
great nation, though the last to establish a mission here, has been the
first to choose a fine situation and erect suitable buildings upon it.
The occupants have also the advantage of escaping from the bad smells of
the city. I was the first to offer this site to Cyril, Bishop of
Melitopolis, and head of the Mission, but it was declined. I renewed the
offer to His Excellency M. de Mansouroff, who at first refused it, but
afterwards gave orders that the purchase should be made.

We will now proceed to a survey of the city itself. The whole _terrain_
slopes sensibly in an easterly direction; its highest point is at the
north-western angle of the walls; but between this position and the
highest part of Sion to the south the difference of level is not so
great as to forbid us to conjecture that it was originally one hill. The
accumulations of soil have so much altered the surface of the ground
that it is impossible to recognize ancient localities in the modern city
without making excavations: this I have done to an extent that enables
me to speak confidently on the point. Believing that in an undertaking
of this kind it is useless to form an opinion without an accurate
investigation of the soil and a careful study of the subject, I could
not be content to remain merely a few days in the country.

Modern Jerusalem does not occupy the whole of the space covered by the
ancient city in the days of Herod; the greater part of Mount Sion (to
the south) being excluded, as it has been since the time when Hadrian
rebuilt the city under the name of _Ælia Capitolina_. The agreement
between the descriptions of the town, given by William of Tyre, James of
Vitri, Brocardus and many others in the middle ages, and those of modern
writers, shews that its limits have not since undergone any changes. The
wall, which now surrounds the city, was built from the foundations at
that time, and only restored in some parts by order of Sultan Solyman
the Magnificent, son of Selim I. in 1534, as declared by the
inscriptions over the gates[23]. This wall is not of uniform height, but
varies from thirty-six to forty-two feet. Its thickness also varies in
different parts, from four to five and five and a half feet. The whole
wall is crowned by battlements, and makes a great number of angles; of
these there are more on the south than on the north; while on the east
it forms nearly a straight line, and on the west, two segments, meeting
in a very obtuse angle at the Jaffa gate. Here rise some towers[24], and
the old fortress, called the Castle of David[25]. This constitutes the
feeble nucleus of the fortification of the city, and is of no importance
whatever in the present state of military science. The form of the city
is an irregular trapezium, the longest side of which is the north, the
next the south; the east is shorter than either of the former, the west
the shortest of all.

The walls contain eleven gateways[26], five of which are closed up.

1st. On the north, the gate of Damascus, called by the Arabs
_Bâb-el-'Amud_, or The Gate of the Column[27]. Through this is the road
to the ancient land of Ephraim, and so to Nablûs and Damascus. It is
also the gate of honour by which all the Mohammedan authorities who
arrive as governors or as visitors to the Holy City make their first
entry. This gate is better built than any of the others, and presents a
fine appearance; its Saracenic architecture is magnificent; the few
arabesques and ornaments are of excellent workmanship. Inside, on the
right-hand wall on entering, is a Cufic inscription.

2nd. Proceeding eastwards, about 780 feet from the gate just described,
is the gate, commonly called that of Herod, which has been walled up for
some few years, to save the expense of a guard. The Arabs call it
_Bâb-ez-Zaheri_, which some translate as Gate of Gardens. Close to this
gate is a small reservoir, called the Pilgrim's Pool, in memory of a
maiden who made a vow to walk to Jerusalem barefoot and fasting, and
died of exhaustion on reaching this spot.

3rd. Continuing along the eastern side and turning to the south, after
passing by a ditch excavated in the rock, we come to a pool and to the
Gate of Saint Mary, _Bâb-Sitti-Mariam_ of the Arabs, called by many S.
Stephen's Gate. Over the gateway are four lions in _bas relief_, said
traditionally to have been placed there by the Khalif Omar[28]. The pool
is called _Birket-Hammam-Sitti-Mariam_, or the Pool of the Bath of our
Lady Mary. This gate leads to the valley of Kidron, commonly called the
valley of Jehoshaphat, to Bethany, and to Jericho.

4th. At a short distance, towards the south, is the Golden Gate[29],
which would open upon the area of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_. This is the
most richly ornamented of all, and is remarkable for its architecture,
of which I shall presently speak at greater length. It has long been
closed up, doubtless on account of a legend, to which much importance is
attached by the natives, which states that through this gate a sovereign
from the west will enter, on a Friday, and make himself master of the
city. In consequence, many resort to the gate every Friday to offer
their mid-day prayer and to entreat God to deliver them from foreign
invasions.

5th. Within a short distance is a very small gate, also built up, which
M. de Saulcy was the first to recognize, (in my opinion wrongly,) as the
gate of Jehoshaphat of the period of the Crusades.

6th. Passing the south-east corner of the wall, and proceeding westward,
we observe a gate with a pointed arch, also walled up.

7th. Continuing in the same direction we find a triple gate, also closed
with masonry.

8th. The southern gate, called by the Mohammedans _Bâb-el-Huldah_, Gate
of Huldah[30]. This gate, now disused, is under the Mosque _el-Aksa_. Of
its ornamentation I shall speak more fully in another place.

9th. Still keeping along the southern wall in a westerly direction we
find the small Dung Gate, called by the Arabs _Bâb-el-Mogharibeh_, Gate
of the western Africans. It is not kept open throughout the year; but
when there is a scarcity of water in the city, it is used by the
water-carriers.

10th. Ascending towards Sion, we reach the Sion Gate, _Bâb-Neby-Daûd_,
(The Gate of the prophet David,) so called because it leads to the
Sepulchre of David, which is at a short distance. Through it too is the
way to the Christian and Jewish cemeteries.

11th. Lastly, on the west is the Jaffa Gate[31], or in Arabic,
_Bâb-el-Khalíl_, (Gate of Hebron,) because through this gate is the best
and shortest road to Hebron.

The appearance of Jerusalem within the walls is sombre and sad, offering
no attraction to the eye, and filling the mind with deep melancholy.
With the exception of the esplanade of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_, the city
presents but a mass of buildings without order or design, very few of
which deserve special attention. The cupolas of the Church of the
Resurrection, that of the new Jewish Synagogue, and some minarets, are
the only edifices which tower above the others, and the forms even of
these are not pleasing. The panorama of Jerusalem, as seen from
Olivet[32], is striking from the feelings it awakens and the
reminiscences it calls up; but it conveys no idea of life. It is in
truth the panorama of a Deicide city. The streets and lanes entangled in
the labyrinth of houses are irregular, narrow, dirty, and ill-paved;
through many of them flow open sewers, receiving the drainage from the
houses, and filth of all kinds abounds. There was a period when it was
even thought desirable to leave the gates of the city open at night, in
order that hyenas and jackals might enter and purify the streets by
devouring the carcases of animals that were lying about.

The vaulted bazaars, which in many cities of the East are so full of
life and activity, at Jerusalem look rather like caves containing
sepulchral cells, and the visitor must be careful where he stands, lest
some portion of the ruinous wall fall upon him, where he sets his foot,
or against whom he brushes in the street. With few exceptions, the
fronts of the houses present nothing but rows of windows with iron-bars,
or heavy wooden _jalousies_, that give them the appearance of
prisons--weeds and hyssop are growing upon many--others are fast falling
to decay--the whole is a sad picture of neglect and indifference.

There are three great divisions of the city. A central valley,
commencing at the N.W., outside the Damascus gate, and terminating at
the S.E., below the Pool of Siloam, separates it into two parts, of
which that on the west of the valley may be considered as the first
division, being larger than both the others together. These are
separated one from another by a street, now called (for the greater part
of its length) the Via Dolorosa, which begins at the Gate of Saint Mary,
whence it rises westward until it meets the central valley. The hill to
the north of this street forms the second division, and the platform on
the south, occupied by the _Haram-es-Sherîf_ and its precincts, the
third division.

The first division is traversed from north to south by a street[33]
extending from the Damascus Gate to the Gate of Sion. The part to the
west of this is chiefly inhabited by Christians, and may therefore be
considered as the Christian Quarter; the part to the east, as far as the
central valley, is occupied by people of various creeds. From the Jaffa
Gate as far as the western side of the _Haram_, the city is traversed by
another street, called in the time of the Crusaders the Street of David.
The district, then, east of the street leading to the Gate of Sion, and
S.E. of the Street of David, is the Jewish Quarter; and that north of
the Street of David, together with the western side of the central
valley, the Mohammedan Quarter, although many Christians and Jews also
dwell in it.

The second division may be considered as partly a Christian and partly a
Mohammedan Quarter, because in the last few years the Christians have
become possessed of much of it, especially along the northern side of
the Via Dolorosa.

The third division is entirely a Mohammedan Quarter, except that the
Armenian Catholics possess a small plot of ground in the angle formed by
the junction of the Via Dolorosa with the central valley.

Of all these quarters, the dirtiest, most fetid, and wretched, is that
of the Jews, and this not on account of its topographical position,
which is undoubtedly the best of any, but entirely from the habits of
the people, who pay no attention to cleanliness either in their houses
or dress; they wallow in the mire, so to speak, and carry it on their
persons as though fearing to be robbed of it. They dwell in small
houses, huddled together in great numbers, like moving heaps of filth,
and seem only to use their reason for the purpose of plunging more
deeply into the dirt. I have repeatedly entered their habitations, and
observed that in the courts masses of filth were accumulating year by
year and producing various physical evils, simply because the occupants
would not spend the few _piastres_ necessary for its removal. It is
impossible to persuade them of the unhealthiness of their way of living,
because they would themselves have to pay for any improvements in it;
while, if they fall ill, the hospitals are chargeable with the expense.
Moreover, in two rooms, measuring from twelve to fourteen feet square,
it is by no means rare to find a whole family of six or eight persons.
The mere sight of these things enables one to understand, in some
measure, the statements of Josephus in his "Wars of the Jews," both as
to the number of deaths during the siege by the Romans, and the causes
which produced such mortality. In visiting this quarter, it is
impossible to forget the curse that hangs over the children of Israel,
and the words of Deuteronomy ix. 6: "Understand, therefore, that the
Lord thy God giveth thee not this good land to possess it for thy
righteousness; for thou art a stiffnecked people." Alas! no longer can
any one exclaim at sight of Jerusalem: "Beautiful for situation, the joy
of the whole earth, is mount Sion, on the sides of the north, the city
of the great King[34]."

The climate of Jerusalem would not be unhealthy, if the streets were
kept cleaner, if the heaps of refuse were deposited further from the
walls, and if the lazy agriculturists would avail themselves of it for
manuring the ground; if the houses were kept in a more cleanly state,
and the drains were better attended to; if the rain-water, by which the
cisterns are fed, passed through filters which were themselves free from
impurity; if the dead, especially among the Mohammedans, were interred
at a greater depth; if all the cemeteries were at a distance from human
habitations, and so situated, that the prevalent winds of the country
would not carry their exhalations over the city; if the carrion and
offal, now often found in the city itself, and always abounding in the
immediate vicinity, were buried; if, in short, there existed a board for
the maintenance of sanitary regulations. His Excellency Surraya Pasha
has made every effort to remedy all these evils, and something has been
done to promote the healthiness of the place since he removed the
slaughter-houses and tannery from the centre of the city. But he has
stood alone in his endeavours. His subordinates, not being animated by
the same spirit, according to their custom, have neglected to see his
commands carried into execution. Hence the result of his measures,
though very perceptible, has not yet been proportionate to just
expectation.

Although the climate is not subject to the frequent and sudden changes
that occur in western countries, yet it is necessary to guard against
the variation of temperature in the morning and evening, which is very
great, and an ordinary cause of violent attacks of fever, not
unfrequently fatal. Affections of the eyes are common among the lower
classes, who so seldom wash their faces. Those of cleanly habits rarely
suffer.

From the month of October until the end of March the temperature is much
lowered by the rains. In December and January snow occasionally falls.
From the beginning of April to the month of October there is great heat
during the day and much dew by night. At this season the greatest care
must be taken of the health.

The ordinary population of Jerusalem comprises about 20,453 souls, but
at the Easter season this number is more or less increased, according to
the concourse of pilgrims, and it is impossible to fix the numbers, even
approximately. In 1856 about 12,800 pilgrims arrived in the Holy City;
in 1859, 7000; and in 1859 not more than 1200. The following are the
religious communities in Jerusalem:--

1st. The Jews, whose numbers amount to 7,738: of these, 5,200 are called
_Sephardim_, and derive their origin from the Jews driven out of Spain
A.D. 1497, under the reign of Ferdinand the Catholic and Isabella. Their
Spanish tongue, mixed with many expressions from the Arabic and other
languages, is the sole trace they have preserved of their former
temporary home. The second branch is composed of 2,500 _Ashkenazim_,
from the countries of the north and west of Europe, who have taken up
their abode at Jerusalem: some moved solely by the desire to die in the
land of their patriarchs, others to exercise their industry, the greater
number to profit, with the _Sephardim_, by the abundant alms sent
thither by their co-religionists of Europe, and badly distributed by a
wretched administration. Finally, the _Karaites_,--a sect which sprang
up about the decline of the Jewish kingdom, and admits no human
interpretation of the Old Testament, nor any Rabbinical book--number
about 38, and are superior to all the rest in intelligence, education,
cleanliness, and probity. They belong to the country, though they may
have occasionally abandoned it for a short time during periods of
trouble.

The head of the whole Jewish community is the Grand Rabbi
(_Khakam-bashi_), to whom all look up, both as the head of their
religion, and as the one to whom the distribution of the alms chiefly
belongs. He it is who gives civil protection to the _Sephardim_ and
_Karaites_, and supports their interests with the local government;
while the _Ashkenazim_ are protected by the Consuls of the different
nations whose subjects they are. Their synagogues are numerous but
unimportant[35]; a hospital, a dispensary, and a house of refuge,
outside the Jaffa gate, are due to the kindness of their co-religionists
in Europe, among the most distinguished of whom are the Messrs.
Rothschild and Sir Moses Montefiore. It is to be hoped that their public
schools for both sexes will for the future be better managed and more
effective than they have hitherto been.

The Mohammedans number 7,598; thus divided, Arabs 6,854, Turks 680,
Lepers (a separate class) 64. The first are the proprietors of the
country, and govern it with moderation; less, however, from natural
inclination, than from the advantages resulting to themselves from this
course. They are aware that any excesses committed by them at Jerusalem
would not only entail severe punishment, but involve them in the
greatest distress, for but few of them live on their property or by
commerce. Many are employed in public offices or under the civil and
ecclesiastical authorities; others derive the means of subsistence from
the influx of pilgrims and travellers; and the rest subsist upon the
alms distributed by the convents, and in some cases by the Consuls. From
all these sources the Mohammedan prospers in Jerusalem, and consequently
is generally not averse to the Christian. Even at the time of the late
disasters in the Lebanon and the massacres of Damascus, His Excellency
Surraya Pasha by his activity and force of character was able to prevent
any outbreak in Palestine, thus earning the gratitude of every
Christian.

The Lepers are separated from all, and inhabit a very filthy quarter,
near the gate of Sion. The reader must not believe that they live in
abject misery; they have property of their own and beasts of burden to
fetch and carry their provisions, and each one has his special duty
assigned to him by the head of their community (chosen from among
themselves); either to provide in some way for the common wants, or, in
the case of the most diseased, to solicit alms incessantly, which is
done with so much success that no one of them would submit to be cured,
for fear of losing so profitable a profession.

The orthodox Greeks are in number about 2,700; they are chiefly subjects
of the Sublime Porte, and acknowledge as their religious head the
Patriarch of Jerusalem, who also, in virtue of his high position,
directs and counsels them in their civil affairs. The great Greek
convent of Saint Constantine at Jerusalem is the light-tower that sheds
its beneficent rays not only over the city but through the whole
country: being very rich, it exercises the greatest influence; modifies
the policy of the government; curbs fanaticism; rouses the idle; finds
work for the poor; acquires very large landed possessions, and
encourages an enlightened system of cultivation; in a word, it greatly
fosters the small amount of prosperity visible in the country.

The Greek Church has many convents, hospices, seminaries, schools, and a
hospital; but of these, and of those belonging to the other communities,
I will speak in detail in another chapter.

The number of the Latins or Roman Catholics is about 1,270. Except a few
who are under the protection of the different Consuls, they are all
subject to the Porte, but yield religious submission to a Patriarch,
delegated by the Pope, who resides in Jerusalem. The inability to lavish
money, as the Greek convent does, would limit the influence of the
Patriarch and the Franciscan Fathers of the Holy Land, but that happily
this want is largely compensated by the special protection accorded to
the Holy Places officially by France, and also by other Christian
Powers, which, though not called upon to give protection, yield it from
devotion. Chief among these is Spain, who, both in times past and
present, has liberally aided in supporting the religious communities
that have the care of the Holy Places. Hence it comes that from these
resources, in addition to those supplied by the French Government, the
Propaganda of Rome, Lyons, and other places, both the Patriarch and the
Guardian of the Holy Land are so well able to minister to the wants of
the members of their Church, to assist the sick, to entertain the
pilgrims, and to maintain seminaries and schools for the civil and
religious education of the youth of both sexes.

The Armenians do not exceed 526 in number, and belong to the Monophysite
sect, declared heretical by the Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 451. They are
subject to the Porte, but yield religious submission to their Patriarch,
who sometimes gives them excellent advice in civil matters. The
Armenians are few and well governed. They are industrious and free from
abject poverty, applying themselves to trade and commerce, and may be
truly said to live by the sweat of their brows.

Of the Protestants, about 206 belong to the Anglican Church, and 62 to
the Lutheran; total 268.

The Copts are so few in number, and so entirely engrossed in their
commercial pursuits, that there is nothing whatever to be said about
them; they live a quiet unobtrusive life, and are 130 in all.

The Abyssinians are so wretchedly poor that they have ceded, or at least
leased out in perpetuity, most of their rights in the Holy Places to the
Armenians, who, in return, furnish them with the means of daily
subsistence. Their number does not exceed 80.

Notwithstanding the numerous caravans of pilgrims which Russia annually
sent to the Holy Land, that country formerly did not possess a foot of
ground in Jerusalem. But a few years before the last Eastern war, Russia
established in the Holy City an Archimandrite, for whom the Greeks
themselves supplied a fitting residence. The jealousy of the latter,
however, was soon aroused, and they were foolish enough to treat as
dangerous intruders those whom a more prudent course of conduct might
have made valuable allies. The plans of Russia have perhaps changed
since the late war; that which she has been unable to secure at once by
force of arms, she will doubtless acquire more slowly by other means,
which time will bring more fully to light. Meanwhile she is at present
taking the lead in the restoration of the cupola of the Holy Sepulchre.
In February 1858 a Russian Bishop, accompanied by his clergy, took up
his abode in Jerusalem; in October of the same year, the Russian
consulate was established, and a temporary hospice opened pending the
erection of a permanent one.

The new buildings are nearly finished, but not yet inhabited. The
community numbers 68.

The Syrians, who possess a convent presided over by a Bishop, are in
number 32.

The Greek Catholics have a well-built convent. The number of those
permanently established in the city is 24.

The Armenian Catholics possess an estate, on which they intend to erect
a church, a convent, and a Bishop's house. Their number will then
increase, at present they are but 6.

The Ammonites are 8 in number, the Disciples 3, and the Sabbatarians 2:
these three sects have arrived during the last few years from America,
but have not made any proselytes.

From these numbers it results that the whole population, as I have
already stated, amounts to 20,453.

Compared with the space surrounded by the walls the population is very
small. Without including the large area of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_,
Jerusalem could easily contain at least three times as many inhabitants
as it now does. If indeed the houses were built two or three stories
high, if those belonging to the Government and the mosques were
occupied, if those now tottering or in ruins were rebuilt and made
habitable, if the numerous convents of the different religious
communities contained a number of inhabitants in proportion to their
sizes, if also the plots of land now abandoned, covered with rubbish or
occupied by gardens, were partially built over, there would be no lack
of room for a greatly increased population. From this it is evident
that, even if the city did not contain the exaggerated number of more
than a million at the time of the siege by Titus, the amount of its
inhabitants might have been considerable, especially when Ophel and the
southern part of Sion were within the enclosure, thus augmenting the
habitable space by more than a third.

To complete the description of the present state of Jerusalem, a few
words may be said about the sources of water and the sewers, which at
present so insufficiently supply the wants of the city. First come the
cisterns for rain-water, which are thickly sprinkled over Jerusalem and
its suburbs; one at least being possessed by every landholder and
community. When, during the summer-months, the supply of rain-water
fails, the peasants of the neighbouring villages, especially of Siloam
(where it is drawn from the well of Joab, _Bir-el-Eyub_), drive a
thriving trade as water-carriers. Such is the sad state of a city once
so well supplied with water from the works constructed by its former
kings and the Herods, which are now for the most part in ruins.

The conduit of Solomon (by many called that of Pilate), which constantly
supplied Jerusalem from the fountains of Etham, still exists, and by it
during the last few years (by direction of Kiamil Pasha and Surraya
Pasha) the water was, under my care, again brought into the city. Owing
to the length of the aqueduct (about three hours' journey) it was
impossible to protect it from the Arabs, whose wanton injuries before
long cut off the supply of water. On the west, the Pool of Mamillah,
though partly filled with earth, catches the rain-water, which is
conveyed from it by a dilapidated conduit into the so-called Pool of
Hezekiah, inside the city. This, during a few months of the year,
supplies a bath. The water, being mixed with dirt and the drainings from
the sepulchres round Mamillah, is not fit to drink. The Pool by St
Mary's Gate, being in bad repair, contains very little water; during
twenty or thirty days in the year it supplies the bath close to the
wall, within the city, called _Hamman-sitti-Mariam_. A similar reason to
that mentioned above renders this water also unfit for drinking. The
Pilgrims' Pool, on the north, close to Herod's Gate, is too small to be
worth further notice. The Pool at the head of the Valley of Kidron, on
the north, is filled with earth and stones. That of _Birket-es-Sultan_
on the west cannot hold water, as it escapes by the south wall. The
great Pool of Siloam is now filled with earth and converted into a
garden. The Pool of Bethesda, within the walls, is almost choked with
earth and refuse that has been thrown into it; by this time it would
have been quite filled up, had not Kiamil Pasha, at my earnest request,
put a stop to the practice in 1856. Within the _Haram-es-Sherîf_ the
great cistern at the south-east corner is not only in ruins but so
filled with rubbish as to be useless. This is the effect not so much of
time as of Vandalism and of the carelessness of Mohammedans about
keeping up ancient monuments; when they are gone they regret their loss,
but take no pains whatever to preserve them.

The waters naturally unfit for drinking are, inside the city, the
springs of the _Hammam-es-shefa_ (Bath of Shefa), situated near the
western side of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_. The water supplies the
neighbouring bath, but has a disagreeable taste. Outside the city is the
spring called the Fountain of the Virgin, that runs into the Pool of
Siloam. It is used for irrigating the gardens of Siloam and for domestic
purposes. Neither of these springs gives a copious supply of water.

The city is full of sewers, the principal being that which, beginning
from the Damascus Gate and following the line of the central valley,
goes out under the south wall at the Dung Gate, and continues along the
western side of the same valley till it comes to the great Pool of
Siloam. Another goes along the Street of David, joining the former on
the east. All are in the worst possible condition, and annually stand in
need of repair, as they frequently become choked up by the accumulated
filth.

The above brief sketch may suffice for the present; the subject will be
treated in detail, and further information given in a future chapter.


FOOTNOTES:

[2] Gen. xiv. 18.

[3] Ep. ad Evang. Presb. § 7.

[4] S. John iii. 23.

[5] Gen. xiv. 17.

[6] Advocates of the other opinion rely on 2 Sam. xviii. 18, but in this
passage _the king's dale_ only is mentioned, without the specification
of _the valley of the plain_. These last words could not be used of a
place overhung by the steep slopes of Mount Moriah and Mount Olivet.

[7] Herod, II. 159; III. 5.

[8] Josephus, c. Ap. I. 34.

[9] Josh. x. 1-27.

[10] Judg. i. 21; Josephus, Ant. V. 2, §§ 2, 3.

[11] 2 Sam. v. 6-9.

[12] 1 Kings xiv. 25, 26.

[13] 2 Chron. xxi. 16, 17.

[14] 2 Chron. xxv. 23, 24.

[15] 2 Kings xix. 35.

[16] 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14.

[17] 2 Kings xxv. 9, 10.

[18] Note I.

[19] See the Chronology in Appendix.

[20] Plates II., IV.

[21] Note II.

[22] Note III.

[23] Note IV.

[24] Plate V.

[25] Plate VI.

[26] Note V.

[27] Plate VII.

[28] Images of animals are not forbidden to Mohammedans; see for example
the Court of Lions in the Alhambra.

[29] Plate XVIII.

[30] Plate XX.

[31] Plate V.

[32] Plate I.

[33] Note VI.

[34] Psalm xlviii. 2.

[35] The Great Synagogue and the Polish are the only two worth mention.




CHAPTER II.

     ANCIENT TOPOGRAPHY OF JERUSALEM--IDENTIFICATION OF THE MOUNTAINS,
     HILLS AND VALLEYS--JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF THE JEBUSITES, DAVID,
     SOLOMON, JOTHAM, HEZEKIAH, MANASSEH, NEHEMIAH, HEROD--THE TESTIMONY
     OF JOSEPHUS EXAMINED--THE SIEGE BY TITUS--FORMER EXTENT OF THE
     CITY--JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF HADRIAN, THE CRUSADERS AND SOLYMAN.


Having thus described the existing city, let us pass on to consider the
ancient, and endeavour to recognise in its mountains and hills, its
valleys and other landmarks, points corresponding to the allusions of
the Bible and the writings of Josephus. We will suppose the reader to be
standing with us on the summit of the Mount of Olives, and will point
out the chief features of the view before him[36]. At the first glance
we see that the city is built upon two nearly parallel ranges of hills,
separated by a central valley. These we proceed to examine in detail.
The summit of the western part forms a kind of plateau, extending from
the north-west to the south, whose highest points are at the southern
extremity, at the Armenian convent, at the castle of David, and at the
north-west corner; but on closer examination we see that the plateau,
which commences at the castle and terminates at the south, forms a hill
sloping sensibly on the west, east, south, and slightly on the north as
far as the street of David, where there is nothing to be seen which
would induce us to suppose that a valley had once existed there. I
believe that the fortress of the Jebusites, and afterwards that of Sion,
used to stand on the upper part of this hill, and that the city of
David[37] extended over the whole of its irregular quadrilateral area.
This opinion is confirmed by Josephus, who says[38] it was defended by
precipices on every side, except the north, which, being the weakest,
was guarded by a triple wall. This hill then has on the west the valley
of Gihon[39], on the south the valley of Hinnom[40], on the east the
continuation of the central valley, while on the north it is open to
attack, and consequently in former time was fortified there more
strongly than on the other sides, which were inaccessible. Sion is then
the spot on which the _upper city_ of Josephus was situated.

A street, rising from the Gate of S. Mary and running in a westerly
direction to meet the central valley, distinctly divides the eastern
range. North of this division is the highest ground; on the south there
is the great plateau of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_. Outside the west wall of
the _Haram_ a gentle slope leads towards the central valley, which is
covered by houses. The testimony of Josephus[41] is consequently
verified, that "the city was built on two hills, which are opposite one
to another, and have a valley to divide them asunder; at which valley
the corresponding rows of houses on both hills end."

Having thus pointed out the western hill, Sion, and the valley indicated
by Josephus, which we call the central valley, let us examine that part
of the eastern range, which is to the south of the dividing street, in
order to identify Moriah and Acra. Josephus[42] states that "the other
hill which was called Acra, and sustains the lower city, slopes[43] on
all sides; over against this there was a third hill, but naturally lower
than Acra, and parted formerly from the other by a broad valley.
However, in those times when the Asamoneans reigned, they filled up that
valley with earth, and had a mind to join the city to the Temple. They
then took off part of the height of Acra, and reduced it to be of less
elevation than it was before, that the Temple might be superior to it."
Hence it appears why we no longer see the broad valley and the two
separate hills, but an area in which the site of the ancient Temple
overtops the rest. We consider Moriah to be the third hill, and Acra the
part lying between the west side of Moriah and the central valley.

The identification of Moriah does not admit of any doubt. The name and
its probable equivalent Jehovah-jireh, are found in the story of
Abraham's sacrifice[44]; there Solomon[45] built the Temple, whose
precious remains still indicate its position: of these we will speak at
length in a future chapter. The name Moriah is not used by Josephus, but
the place can be identified with certainty from his description. We are
told by him[46] that the platform of the temple was defended on the
north-west by the tower Antonia, which was itself protected by a ditch.
An examination of the Pool of Bethesda and the excavations, which I
made by the foundations of the barracks of the _Haram_, have convinced
me of the historian's accuracy. In his description of the Temple[47] it
is stated that the hill-side to the east of it was precipitous, and that
Solomon was obliged to build a wall to support the made ground. The
ancient wall and the valley of Kidron still exist, in confirmation of
this statement. It is also implied that the south side was precipitous,
which is proved by the remains of buildings still to be seen and the
actual declivity of Ophel. That there was once a large valley on the
west side, is proved by the following fact: on the west of the area of
the _Haram-es-Sherîf_ the rock runs up to the inside of the boundary
wall, but on the outside it disappears, and is replaced by made ground
of very great depth. I have inspected several excavations in the
neighbourhood, and examined the tanks which are just outside the
_Haram_, usually not less than 50 or 56 feet deep, the shaft (passing
through the earth) being generally from 30 to 36 feet, and built with
masonry. Hence I infer that a valley once existed on this spot, and that
the made ground was obtained by the demolition of Acra; by this means
Moriah was thrown open to every part of the city, which surrounded it
like a theatre[48], and so was made 'superior to Acra.' But on examining
the tanks nearer to the Tyropoeon valley, I found the shafts not more
than 12 feet deep: here then was Acra in former times. These few feet of
made ground were probably formed by the destruction of the city by
Titus. Acra was said to 'slope on all sides,' because it had on the east
the 'broad valley,' on the south the descent to the central valley, on
the west the central valley itself, and on the north the valley, which,
starting from the central valley, went in an easterly direction to that
of Kidron. How this last has been filled up I will presently explain. In
the time of Josephus these hills were already united, and so, speaking
generally, the city appeared to be 'built on two hills opposite to one
another.'

In the northern part of the eastern range we find _Bezetha_, or the 'New
city' of Josephus, which was entirely surrounded by valleys or
ditches[49] artificially made. This position is elevated and opposite to
the north[50] side of the _Haram_, and must therefore be identical with
_Bezetha_, which had the central valley on the west, ditches on the
north and east, and on the south the valley dividing it from the Tower
of Antonia: all which characteristics may still be recognised on the
spot.

There is yet another hill in Jerusalem, called _Gareb_. The only
instance we have of the use of the name in former times is in Jer. xxxi.
39. Josephus does not mention it, either considering it as part of Mount
Sion, with which it was continuous, or, more probably, comprehending it
in the 'New city.' It bears the name _Gareb_ among the Arabs at the
present day. When I speak of the walls of the city, the Temple, and the
tower Antonia, I will bring forward other arguments to confirm my
assertions about the hills; for the present I reserve them, and pass on
to the valleys.

The central valley has already been mentioned several times. It agrees
in every respect with the Tyropoeon of Josephus[51], which
"distinguished the hill of the upper city from that of the lower, (and)
extended as far as Siloam." Many who have written on the topography of
ancient Jerusalem, especially Dr Robinson, assert that the Tyropoeon
valley ran eastwards from the Jaffa Gate till it joined the central
valley, at the point where the latter bends to the south-east, in its
course to the Pool of Siloam. In opposition to this opinion, and in
confirmation of my own, I have certain facts to bring forward. The
valley which I consider the Tyropoeon still drains the whole city; all
along it runs a sewer receiving those from the eastern and western
divisions. I have had frequent opportunities of ascertaining this, while
repairs were being carried on[52]. I found that the central sewer,
although 12, 16, and sometimes even 18 feet below the surface, was not
based upon rock, but upon made ground. During the repairs I searched for
the rock in the upper part of the valley, and found it at a depth of 18
feet, near the Damascus Gate, of 26 feet near the Temple Bazaar, of 22
feet at a few paces to the north of the Dung Gate. These facts shew that
there was formerly a valley in this part of Jerusalem. Now we cannot
adopt the position assigned to the Tyropoeon by Dr Robinson, for the
following reasons: (1) In the north ditch of the Castle of David we find
the rock, which extends thence in a north-west direction. I came upon it
in 1860, when a building (now used as a custom-house) was erected by the
Greek convent outside the wall adjoining the Jaffa Gate. (2) The rock,
found under the new buildings belonging to the Latin Patriarch a little
to the north of the castle, under the English church and under a new
building to the north of it, plainly shews that the head of the valley
could not be at this spot. On the south side of the Christian Bazaar is
the Greek Convent of S. John, and a few paces to the south of this the
Prussian hospital. While this was being built in 1858, I examined its
foundations, and ascertained the shelving stratum on which they rest to
be a continuation of the rock beneath the convent. Where then could the
valley be? (3) A similar state of things is found on descending about
350 feet to the east. (4) From west to east along the course of the
supposed valley runs a sewer, 6 feet below the ground, cut in some parts
in the rock. This I helped to repair at several points in 1856, and was
able to ascertain that there was but very little made ground anywhere
near it; I cannot therefore allow that there ever was a valley at this
place. Brocardus about A.D. 1283, Adrichomius and Villalpandus near the
close of the sixteenth century, assert that this valley existed, but to
prove their statement they ought to have made excavations. They must
have seen Jerusalem in a condition very like its present, especially as
regards its valleys, which must have been already filled up, either at
the time of the destruction by Titus or of the rebuilding by Hadrian;
for since these periods the city cannot have undergone any material
change. The above authors inferred the existence of a valley from seeing
that the south side of the street of David was considerably upraised,
while the north was nearly level. Had they searched for the rock, they
would have found the higher ground to the south to be nothing but a mass
of rubbish, while the south front of the Convent of S. John, and the
rest of the buildings on the same side, rest upon rock a few feet below
the surface.

The supposed existence of this valley has led some to think that the
ground, now occupied by the Church of the Resurrection, was the hill
Acra; but this locality does not correspond with any of the
topographical _data_ of Josephus. How could the citadel[53] of Antiochus
Epiphanes be built in this position to command the Temple? How could the
Macedonian garrison from this place harass and even kill the Jews who
were going to the Temple? Could this be Acra 'sloping on all sides'
which was 'levelled that the temple might be higher than it[54]'? None
of these conditions are satisfied, therefore this theory must be
rejected. In the Tyropoeon of Dr Robinson I place the Quarter of
_Millo_: my reasons for doing so I will give at the proper place.

A valley has already been mentioned as dividing Moriah from Bezetha;
only the eastern extremity of this is now visible, at the Pool of
Bethesda, at which place we will examine it. The north and south side
walls of the pool are founded upon and rest against the rock, while on
the east, as the valley once extended down to Kidron, a solid sloping
wall has been built solely to confine the water. There is also a wall on
the west, and all the observations that I have made in this direction,
as far as the Tyropoeon, have convinced me of the existence of a
valley; and on questioning the old masons who in the time of Ibrahim
Pasha, A.D. 1836, laid the foundations of the Barrack of the
_Haram-es-Sherîf_, I was assured that on the north side they had gone
down not less than 26 or 30 feet before they came to the rock. On the
south side of the Latin Chapel of the Flagellation, which lies directly
north of the Barrack, the Franciscans had to dig 16 or 18 feet for the
same purpose. In laying the foundations of the Austrian Hospice above
the eastern verge of the Tyropoeon, A.D. 1856, I clearly ascertained
the existence of the valley on the south side, and have done the same on
the property of the Armenian Catholics, called 'the first fall of
Christ.' Hence I conclude that there was a valley in this part of the
city, which divided Bezetha from Moriah and the north-west corner of
Acra.

A small valley, commencing on the north near Herod's Gate, runs into the
city, and terminates at the Pool of Bethesda, thus dividing Bezetha into
two parts. Inside the city it can hardly be distinguished, owing to the
quantity of rubbish by which it has been filled up. Its existence
however is proved by the water-courses that descend from the east slope
of the western part of Bezetha.

Let us now proceed to examine the exterior of the city. Ophel or Ophlas
is to the south of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_. Its position corresponds
exactly with the statement of Josephus[55], that it adjoins the Temple
on the south. Its form is that of a triangle with the base resting
against the south side of the _Haram_ and the vertex directed towards
the Pool of Siloam. It is bounded on the east by the sloping sides of
the valley of Kidron, on the west by those of the Tyropoeon valley.
Its defences were carefully attended to by different kings of Judah,
because its fortifications greatly increased the strength of the Temple,
which otherwise would have been exposed to an attack from the south. The
position is a sufficient argument for its identity.

The positions of Mount Olivet and the Mount of Offence are indisputable.
David[56] went up Mount Olivet, weeping, after crossing the torrent
Kidron, and the Mount of Offence[57] is 'before Jerusalem.' Olivet is
frequently mentioned in the New Testament, especially in the Acts of the
Apostles, where its distance from the city is fixed by the words
"Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath-day's journey[58]," that is,
a little more than 2000 cubits, according to the rabbinical writers; and
so we find it to be. We may also cite in confirmation the testimony of
Josephus, who says that it "lies over against the city on the east side,
and is parted from it by a deep valley interposed between them, which is
named Kidron[59]."

Authors differ about the site of Mount Gihon[60], or Guihon, but I place
it on the west, because we find that Hezekiah "stopped the upper
water-course of Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side of
the city of David[61]," and Manasseh "built a wall without the city of
David on the west side of Gihon, in the valley, even to the entering in
at the Fish-gate[62]." This gate was probably the same as that of Jaffa,
which might very likely bear this name, because through it the produce
of the sea would be brought into Jerusalem. If Gihon does not correspond
with the hill on the west, outside the city, I cannot understand the two
verses cited above; especially since Hezekiah could not have brought
water into the city from any other point, without either cutting through
the hills with great trouble and expense, or making an aqueduct over a
valley.

The Hill of Evil Counsel is probably the same as Tophet[63]. We find
from the prophet Jeremiah that it was a place of sepulture, and indeed
it was only there that room could be found for the purpose. Even now
the Arabs call it the _Mount of the Sepulchres_, from the number of
graves there. They call Hinnom the _Valley of the Fire_; in Syriac it is
_Gehenna_ (Hell). This nearly corresponds with the _Valley of
Slaughter_, as it is called by Jeremiah[64]. It is not impossible that
the fortress of Bethsura[65] stood on this mount, which was distant from
the city about five[66] stadia, towards the south. Mount Shafat, or
Scopus, is the northern part of the range of Olivet, which runs in a
north-west direction; the account of it given by Josephus, the distance
from the city of seven stadia, the use made of it in the strategic
operations of Titus[67], all correspond exactly with this position.

Having thus gone through the chief points of topographic interest, let
us glance at the condition of the city during the different epochs of
its existence. First, then, in the time of the Jebusites. On this
subject the Bible only tells us, that it was defended on the south by
the valley of Hinnom[68], that it was on high ground, and, in the then
state of the art of war, nearly impregnable, so that its inhabitants
thought it could be defended against the army of David by the blind and
the lame[69]. Jerusalem was then divided into two parts, the Fortress
and the Lower City[70]. Hence we can understand how it was that the
descendants of Benjamin[71] dwelt at Jerusalem with the Jebusites; the
former dwelling in the Lower City, the latter in the Fortress. This we
find confirmed by the statement of Josephus[72]. It is very probable
that the fortress of the Jebusites covered the platform of Sion, which
reaches from its southern extremity to the castle still existing on the
north, and is bounded on the east by the Tomb of David, the Armenian
convent[73], and the English church. This opinion is confirmed by the
remains of an old wall, which the Armenians found on building a seminary
and rooms for pilgrims, and by the discovery of an ancient pool. Both
these appear to be the work of a very early age, and anterior to the
introduction of Phoenician art into Jerusalem. The lower city must
have occupied the eastern slope of Sion near the western side of the
Tyropoeon. Owing to the scanty materials that have come down to us, we
cannot add anything more about the city of the Jebusites.

The form and size of the City of David have already been mentioned in
the account of Mount Sion. It is stated in the Bible, that David,
directly after his conquest, began to strengthen not only the fortress
but the whole city, that he dwelt in the fortress[74], that the King of
Tyre sent labourers to build his house[75], which was certainly the
whole fortress, that "David built round about from Millo and
inward[76]," and that "Joab repaired the rest of the city[77]." We are
not told that David enlarged the city, but unquestionably he fortified
it; possibly however he may have made its form more regular by bringing
the houses up to the edge of the declivities of the valleys on the west,
south, and east. To test this opinion I examined the part of Mount Sion
which is outside the present wall, and found in the Protestant cemetery
the vertical hewn rock, and a flight of steps close by cut out of it,
which were discovered by the workmen employed by the Mission; at the
same time large stones were also dug up in the ground, such as are
frequently thrown out by the spades of the husbandmen. On questioning
some of them, more particularly the older men, I heard that, for a long
time past, large stones had been found in considerable quantities, and
sold by the landowners to the builders in the city, who, in order to
remove them more easily, broke them up on the spot. I was able to
satisfy myself of the truth of this statement at the place itself[78]. I
then asked them about the shape of the stones, and inquired whether
those found near the surface corresponded with those found at a greater
depth, and was told that the former were usually rusticated, and also
almost calcined, while the latter were large irregular blocks in
excellent preservation. I satisfied myself of the truth of this by
examining the two kinds of stone. I then inquired about the direction in
which the greatest number of stones were discovered, but their answers
on this point were so vague, that I determined to make some excavations
on my own account. With some difficulty permission was obtained from the
owners of the land, under the condition that I should use their workmen,
give them all that might be found, and make them a present in addition.
As I was only anxious to obtain proof of the position of the wall of
David, I willingly agreed to this. The attempt was successful; at
certain points on the south and east[79] I found the rock hewn vertical
or cut into steps, or else steep and broken; on it fragments of ancient
masonry still remained, built of large irregular blocks, fitted together
without mortar: in some places other rows of stones, joined with greater
skill, were laid upon these, which in turn supported others rudely
rusticated in high relief, with the surface rough. I am inclined to
think that the lower rows belong to the period of the Jebusites, the
next to that of David[80], and the upper to a later date. Near the Pool
of Siloam the vertical hewn rock is again plainly seen, and also inside
the city, on the west side of the Tyropoeon Valley, and in front of
the Mosque _el-Aksa_. I believe therefore that the Wall of David can be
traced on the south and east. A careful examination of the western brow
of Sion and the configuration of the ground shew that this wall must
have followed its present course, and have continued in the same
direction as far as the south-west angle. All that I have been able to
find at the castle belongs to a much later period, as we shall presently
see. North of Sion, on the south side of the Street of David, the ground
is covered by houses. I have therefore been unable to examine it, and
can only draw inferences; but I am led to think that Millo was on that
side for the following reasons.--We have seen that David "built round
about from Millo and inward[81];" which must mean that _he began to
build from the position of Millo inwards_, i.e. to the south, or round
about the city. Now I believe that the quarter of Millo derived its name
from the great pool in the neighbourhood, commonly called the Pool of
Hezekiah[82]--the original _Millo_ of David. A learned Russian ex-rabbi
explained to me that the word _Millo_ generally meant 'made ground,' but
that a large reservoir, which receives water from another, is commonly
called _Millo_, while this other is called _Mamillah_, and
water-carriers, _Malleah_. We can therefore understand that David began
to build from Millo, because, as there is not a valley on that side, it
was the weakest part of the city. This explanation, as we shall see,
suits all the other passages in the Bible in which Millo is mentioned;
but it cannot be a place of 'made ground,' because there is none here.
This is all that is known about the City of David.

The city was undoubtedly enlarged in the reign of Solomon, by the
addition of Mount Moriah, on which the Temple was built[83]. David
bought the threshingfloor (its site) from Araunah[84], a rich Jebusite,
at which time it evidently was outside Jerusalem: but when Solomon built
upon it, he joined it to the City of David[85]. Josephus also tells us
that Solomon enlarged the city, and built new walls and fortified it
with towers[86]. My opinion is that Solomon's wall began on the north
side of David's, to the east of the Castle, and ran in a northerly
direction, till it bent round to the east, so as to include Mount
Moriah, which it encompassed on the east, south, and for a short
distance on the west, till it again joined the wall of the City of
David, after crossing the Tyropoeon Valley. Thus the fortifications of
the Old city were strengthened on the north, while the New was liable to
be taken from the north-west and a small part of the north side; but the
rest of this, and the other sides, were strongly defended by art or the
natural difficulties of the position. In this new part of the city I
have found fragments of the age of Solomon in the foundations of houses,
in the walls of the Pool of Bethesda, and in the eastern and southern
boundary wall of the _Haram_; but will speak of these more particularly
in the chapter on the Temple. The remains that I have seen or found
inside the city are of the greatest interest, but all belong to a much
later period. In the passages of the Bible that speak of Solomon, we
find frequent mention of _Millo_; for example, "This is the reason of
the levy which King Solomon raised, for to build the house of the Lord,
and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem.... Pharaoh's
daughter came up out of the city of David unto her house which Solomon
had built for her: then did he build Millo[87]." And "Solomon built
Millo, and repaired the breaches of the city of David his father[88]."
This Millo is not the same as the Millo of David; for I hold with the
rabbinical tradition, that Solomon's house was near the south side of
the Temple, to which place he brought Pharaoh's daughter from the City
of David; that this Millo is the immense reservoir still to be seen at
the south-east corner of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_, and that the materials
derived from it were used to fill up the depths of the Tyropoeon
Valley, between the New and the Old City. The "House of Millo, which
goeth down to Silla[89]," where Joash was murdered, I take to be near
the Millo of David, because the _going down to Silla_ must have been a
street leading down to Siloam, and therefore corresponding with the
street of David. We may observe that this part added to the city is
specified at an early period[90].

Some works of defence appear to have been constructed on Ophel, before
the reign of Jotham, for it is said that "Jotham built much on the wall
of Ophel[91]," which seems to mean that he found the wall already in
existence. What he did build there we have now no means of ascertaining.
Of Hezekiah we learn that he "built up all the wall that was broken, and
raised it up to the towers, and another wall without, and repaired
Millo, _in the City of David_[92]." This place I have already identified
with the Pool[93] bearing Hezekiah's name, which before his time was
outside the city, and was by him enclosed within the defences so as to
deprive the Assyrians of water. In confirmation of this view I may
mention that when the fathers of the Holy Land were laying the
foundation of the house now occupied by the Latin Patriarch, they came
upon remains of the solid masonry of the old wall. The same thing
occurred to the Copts on the north side of the foundations of their
Hospice. I do not speak of this from personal knowledge, as I was not
living in Jerusalem at the time, but I have no doubt of the truth of the
statement. I myself found a fragment of the massive ancient wall, when
superintending the laying of the foundations of the little mosque,
dedicated to Omar[94], which is opposite to the Church of the
Resurrection on the south: the masonry was composed of large blocks of
stone, of a tolerably regular form, which were fastened together by iron
clamps: and the thickness of the wall was about seven feet and a half. I
have therefore traced and attributed to Hezekiah the wall, which
starting on the north of the Castle of David, passes on the north of
the Copts' Hospice, and finally joins the line of that which I have
attributed to Solomon, after running parallel to the street of the
Sepulchre.

A strong line of fortifications was built round Ophel by Manasseh[95].
Directed by the hints given in the Bible, I examined it as I had Sion.
The answers given to me by the _fellahîn_, the evidence on the spot, and
my excavations, brought to light some traces of a wall of
circumvallation on the east side of the Tyropoeon, and at the south
end of Ophel. The great accumulation of earth on the Kidron side would
have made any investigations very costly, and I was convinced of the
direction of the walls in this part by the account of Josephus[96];
accordingly I did not make any excavations here.

Before describing Jerusalem at the time of Nehemiah, it will be well to
enumerate the gates of the city before the Captivity, and to fix, as far
as possible, their positions. We are told that Jehoash king of Israel
"brake down the walls of Jerusalem from the gate of Ephraim to the
corner gate, four hundred cubits[97]." I place the _gate of Ephraim_ at
the N.W. angle of Solomon's wall because it led to the land of Ephraim.
The _Corner gate_ was, I think, at the north-east angle of the platform
of the Temple. We find in Jeremiah "The city shall be built from the
tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner[98]," which may be very
well understood to mean "from one extremity of the city to the other." I
believe that the tower of Hananeel was in the present castle. King
"Uzziah built towers in Jerusalem at the corner gate and at the _valley
gate_, and fortified them[99]." The latter might have been in the south
side of the wall of Sion. The _horse gate_[100] is also mentioned, but
this was probably in the wall of the Temple, not of the city. I identify
the _fish gate_[101] with the present Jaffa gate. The situation of "the
_high gate of Benjamin_, which was by the house of the Lord[102]," is
uncertain: I think it to have been either a gate of the Temple, or one
through which a road to the Temple passed. Perhaps it may be found in
the second line of wall on the north, but this is very doubtful. Lastly,
it is said that when the Chaldeans entered Jerusalem, "all the men of
war fled by night, by the way of the _gate between two walls_, which is
by the king's garden[103]." These are the walls of David and Manasseh on
the two sides of the Tyropoeon, so the gate was probably in the middle
of the valley, looking southwards towards the King's garden, now tilled
by the peasants of Siloam. I do not expect that the above remarks will
convince all, but trust that they may at least suggest subjects for
thought and study.

The city, thus built at different periods, was burnt and destroyed by
Nebuchadnezzar; but let us pass over the sad years of captivity, till
we come to the time when, by the energy and zeal of Nehemiah, it rose
again from its ruins. Something must be said of its aspect at that time,
and especially of its gates; but I must warn the reader that, after all
my labours, I have not been able thoroughly to satisfy myself about
their situation, because of the difficulty of reconciling the third and
twelfth with the second chapter of Nehemiah. Still, without desiring to
push my opinions presumptuously forward, I offer them in hopes that they
may be fortunate enough to attract the attention of competent students
to this interesting point of Biblical Archæology. I know that many have
already attempted to fix the position of these gates, but I am also
aware that their theories are contradictory, and often rest upon
hypotheses which are open to attack. The illustrious Reland has not
chosen to make any positive assertions on these points, and has
contented himself with a simple list of names; I will therefore follow
his example[104].

The _sheep gate_[105] must have been in the west wall, that runs
southwards from the castle, in which were the towers of Meah and
Hananeel: the _fish gate_, nearly on the site of the present Jaffa gate:
the _old gate_, in the north part of David's wall, near its junction
with Solomon's: the _broad wall_, that portion of the second enclosure,
which protected the west and north as far as the north-west corner of
the temple area, and the _tower of the furnaces_, outside it: the
_valley gate_, at the extreme south-west corner of Sion: the _dung
gate_, on the south side of Sion, a thousand cubits to the east of the
valley gate: the _fountain gate_, at the east extremity of the north
wall of David's enclosure, and, consequently, at the middle of the
Tyropoeon valley. I identify the _pool of Siloah_ with that, now
filled with earth, below the fountain of Siloam, and the _king's garden_
with those still existing there. The _stairs that go down from the city
of David_ begin at the south-east angle of that king's wall and extend
eastwards down the slopes of Sion. The _sepulchres of David_ are upon
Sion, a little to the west of that now shewn under that name. The _pool
that was made_ is _Birket-es-Sultan_, outside the walls on the west. The
_water gate_ is in the Tyropoeon valley, to the south of the fountain
gate; the _east gate_, on the site of the present golden gate. Let the
reader now examine the account[106] of the two companies which went, in
opposite directions, to dedicate the new wall to the Lord.

The _dragon well_[107] may have been near the south end of the pool
_Birket-es-Sultan_; indeed there is a tradition among the Arabs, that a
spring once existed on this spot, but I do not know whether it is of any
value. No remains of the age of Nehemiah are to be found either outside
the present city or in its walls, except in the east wall of the
_Haram-es-Sherîf_: I will explain my reasons for referring these to this
epoch in the chapter on the Temple.

No one besides Josephus has handed down to us a detailed account of the
topography of Jerusalem in the time of the Herods and Titus: since then
he lived in this period and is our sole authority, I follow his account
entirely. In endeavouring to identify the spots mentioned by him, in a
place that has undergone such frequent alterations, I have not imitated
the example of most writers, in ancient and modern times, who have
copied one from another, and based their arguments on mere hypotheses;
but, during a period of eight years, have devoted myself to a thorough
examination of every part of Jerusalem; have carefully studied the
_terrain_, the rocks, the stones, which I have sought under the
accumulated ruins of centuries; have made deep excavations to trace the
course of the ancient walls, underground passages and conduits; have
watched the digging of numbers of foundations, from day to day, within
and without the city; have collected information from persons worthy of
credit and experienced in building, about the most important works that
had been carried out before my arrival; have descended into and examined
cisterns, clean and dirty; and after working like a labourer during the
day, have read Josephus instead of going to sleep, and tested his
statements for myself. I did not use any other authors except Livy and
Cæsar, whose writings I studied in order to understand thoroughly the
Roman art of war and the siege operations of Titus against the city; and
after I had done all this, I made plans and sections upon the spot. This
being well known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, I fearlessly
present the results of my labours to all who take an interest in the
reconstruction of the city of the Herods. I may indeed sometimes be
mistaken in my arguments, or wrong in my conclusions; if so, I shall be
glad to be corrected; thankful if even by this means I have created an
interest in the subject, and given rise to new ideas and a better
knowledge of the archæology of Jerusalem.

Having now considered the general features of the city, its hills and
its valleys, and seen that it was guarded by a triple wall on the
exposed side and a single wall on those which overhung the valleys[108],
we will proceed to examine this triple line of defence.

The first wall began on the north at the _Tower Hippicus_, and passing
by the _Xystus_ joined on to the _Palace of the Council_, and ended at
the west gate of the Temple. It was strengthened with much care and
expense by David, Solomon, and their successors. In examining its course
on the present ground, I started from the castle of David, going
eastward in a line parallel to 'David's street' as far as the _Mekhemeh_
(the Turkish law courts), and thence to the west wall of the
_Haram-es-Sherîf_.

In order to identify the towers of Hippicus, Phasaëlus, and Mariamne, I
frequently and carefully examined the fortress[109]. In it there are
still three towers, one on the west, just south of the Jaffa gate,
whose architecture, as far as it is visible, appears mediæval; another
to the east of this, built of stones with large rustic work of the
Herodian pattern; and a third to the south of these two, resembling the
first. In all three I ascertained that the Jewish masonry is founded on
the rock, and that, for a height of five feet above the ground, they are
cased with large stones, roughly rusticated; but in the middle tower the
Jewish masonry continues about 39 feet from the bottom of the
ditch--only the _stones_, however, are of the Herodian period, the
architecture is of a later date, belonging to the time when art was
declining in the country[110]; for we see that these interesting remains
are used without the slightest care; being arranged without any regard
to their size, and most of them shewing the marks of the clamps, by
which they were formerly bolted together inside the wall; so that they
have evidently been placed in reverse order[111]. The three towers are
solid inside to a height of 11 feet, and the lower part of the ditch (14
feet deep) that surrounds them on the north, east, and south, is cut in
the rock; the west tower is nearly 25 cubits square, the centre 40, the
south 20. I adopt, then, Williams' opinion, that the tower Hippicus
stood on the foundation of the first, Phasaëlus on the second, and
Mariamne on the third. This identification seems to agree with Josephus'
description[112]; so that these are the positions of the three ancient
towers, which Titus ordered to be spared, "in order to demonstrate to
posterity what kind of a city it was, and how well fortified, which the
Roman valour had subdued[113]."

It may be urged, as an objection to this, that the cisterns, mentioned
by the historian, are not to be found in these towers; but it is surely
very unlikely that these would come down to us through so many changes.
One tower has been enlarged to accommodate a greater number of troops,
and nothing is more probable than that the cisterns would be destroyed
in some of the extensive alterations which the buildings have undergone;
for example, in making the story 20 cubits high, which now exists in it;
besides, the cisterns, which are in other parts of the fortress, seem to
shew that those within the towers have been removed. We shall presently
see that the position assigned to Hippicus agrees very well with the
historian's statements on other points, especially on the second
position, occupied by Titus during the siege[114].

The number of houses and the character of their several owners make it
impossible to excavate along the street of David, from the tower
Hippicus to the west wall of the Temple; so that I was obliged to be
contented with what I could find above ground. In many places I noticed
large stones, generally rusticated, built into the lower parts of the
present houses; for example, in the Greek convent of S. John, in the
south-east corner of the Pool of Hezekiah, and in many houses on the
south of the above-named street. These stones I suppose to be remains of
the old wall, because I cannot think that any one would have taken the
trouble to bring them from a distance. The most remarkable thing is a
semicircular Jewish arch, forming part of an ancient gateway, now almost
entirely buried. This I will describe when I come to the second wall.

The Xystus, as appears from several passages in Josephus, was a public
place surrounded by buildings, on the lower slopes of Sion, opposite the
west wall of the Temple. We are told that the priests built a wall on
the west of the Temple, to prevent king Agrippa II. from watching the
sacred rites from the top of his palace[115] near the Xystus; also that,
after the capture of the lower city and the Temple, the Jews, entrenched
on Sion, asked to speak with Titus, and that he placed himself on the
west side of the Temple, for "there were gates on that side above the
Xystus, and a bridge that connected the upper city with the
Temple[116]." The Xystus is also mentioned in conjunction with the
bridge in other passages; but it is unnecessary to quote them, as the
present state of the ground assists us in determining its position, the
slope of Sion being much less here than at any other part of the east
side. In the careful investigations that I have made on the west side of
the Tyropoeon, I found evidence that the surface had been levelled in
the direction of the street of David; this however did not extend
southwards beyond the point opposite to the south-west corner of the
_Haram-es-Sherîf_, where the ground is very much broken with steep faces
of rock; therefore, as I cannot suppose that a public place would be on
an uneven site, I imagine that the Xystus began at the street of David
and ended before it came opposite to the south-west corner of the
_Haram_.

The Palace of the Council was probably situated in the position of the
present _Mekhemeh_. The number of stones of Jewish workmanship of the
Herodian period in the foundation of the present building, and its
position with reference to the Xystus and the Temple, are strong
arguments in favour of this identification[117]. This is all that I have
been able to gather about the northern part of the first line of walls;
excavations being impossible, from the nature of the place, and still
more of the inhabitants.

On the west, the first wall started from _Hippicus_ and "extended
through a place called _Bethso_ to the _gate of the Essenes_, and after
that it went southward, having its bending above the _fountain of
Siloam_, where it also bends again to the east at _Solomon's pool_, and
reaches as far as a certain place which they called _Ophlas_ (Ophel),
where it was joined to the eastern cloister of the Temple[118]." I have
already stated how I was able to retrace this part of the wall on the
south of Sion and at Ophel, and have no more to add, except that I
found, during my investigations on Sion, great vaulted cisterns hewn out
in the rock, remains of conduits, also cut in the solid rock, and ruined
caverns, which had obviously once been reservoirs; but all these
occurred inside the circuit of the wall, that I have laid down on the
Plan, and never outside; shewing that one part had been formerly covered
by houses, the other not. The position of _Bethso_ is unknown: some
think that the word means "house of filth:" one Rabbi supposes it to
have been a place where waters met; however, I have not been able to
find out anything certain about it.

The site of the _gate of the Essenes_ is also unknown to us: I place it
at the south-east angle of the City of David, because this position
seems to suit best the Greek text of Josephus--"the wall extended
downwards to the gate of the Essenes[119];" moreover, from this point I
see that the wall could bend to the south, while, from a higher
position, a very irregular course must be given it, in order to obtain
this angle.

The positions of the fountain of Siloam and the pool of Solomon cannot
be doubted. As the latter is filled with earth, I was obliged to make
excavations, in order to ascertain whether it still retained marks of
its antiquity. I found that the wall on the east side, especially in its
lower part, was of ancient Jewish work; so also were parts of the
north-west side and the east extremities of the other two walls. The
pool is from 7-3/4 to 10 feet deep on the south-east, and 14 feet on the
north-west. I have no doubt that it is as old as the time of Solomon,
and think it may be the one named by the prophet Isaiah, "Ye made also a
ditch between the two walls for the waters of the old pool, but ye have
not looked unto the maker thereof, neither had respect unto him that
fashioned it long ago[120]."

Josephus does not directly state that the east side of Sion, above the
Tyropoeon valley, was fortified, but we may infer it, as he[121] tells
us that, when Titus had gained possession of the Temple and Ophel and
all the north part of Jerusalem, he laid siege to the Upper City, which
must have fallen at once, if there had not been a wall defending it on
the east. We can hardly suppose that the Jews would have built it at the
time, after seeing the fall of their strongest bulwarks, the tower
Antonia and the Temple, nor would an obstacle hastily thrown up, and
therefore weak, have arrested the victorious Romans.

The second wall is thus described: it "took its beginning from that gate
which they called _Gennath_, which belonged to the first wall; it only
encompassed the northern quarter of the city, and reached as far as the
_tower Antonia_[122]." I have already mentioned the addition made to
the city of David and its probable extent, in speaking of Jerusalem at
the time of Solomon: consequently I now have only to give the reasons
that have induced me to fix the position of the places, and see whether
they agree with the narrative of the historian. There are but two points
to give in the line of the wall, the _gate Gennath_, whose position we
must determine, and the _tower Antonia_, which was situated at the
north-west angle of the platform[123] of the Temple, and whose position
we may consider to be nearly ascertained. I place the gate Gennath (i.e.
of gardens) east of the tower Hippicus, in the northern part of the
first wall, at the place where I stated that I had found an ancient
Jewish semicircular arch. From its name we may infer that it opened on
cultivated land, and Josephus[124] speaks of the gardens on the north
and north-west of the city, which were destroyed by the troops of Titus
in levelling the ground. If the Pool of Hezekiah be the same as the pool
_Amygdalon_[125] (of almonds), we may infer that probably plantations of
almonds were in this neighbourhood. We must also recollect that if the
sepulchre of Joseph of Arimathea were on the north-west, there would be
a garden here[126]. Now as all the gates of Jerusalem in former times
were named from their position or destination, it is very probable that
this was called the _garden gate_, because the road to the gardens went
through it; and indeed on excavating by the side of the arch above
named, I found the two piers, which have been preserved by the
accumulation of the earth. The arch, visible for about five feet above
ground, is formed of large stones, rusticated, although the work has
been much injured by time. They are firmly fastened together inside with
iron clamps without mortar, that which I saw being merely superficial,
and introduced by the Arabs during repairs. The two piers are
constructed of similar masonry, but here the rustic work is very
conspicuous. I discovered that the gate was founded on the rock, was 18
feet high and 8-1/2 wide. It is buried by a mass of rubbish, that here,
as elsewhere, has raised the true level of the soil. The position of the
gate (looking west) is not incompatible with its having formed part of a
line of defence from the tower Hippicus to the Xystus; because not only
were angles admitted into the systems of fortifications of that time,
but also, with regard to Jerusalem, we are told by Tacitus[127] that
"Walls with re-entering angles and curves, to take the assailants in
flank, enclosed two very high hills."

In the immediate neighbourhood of the tower Hippicus I was not able to
find any ancient remains, and therefore suppose that the wall commenced
at this gate. I sought for its ruins, along a line northwards from this
point, but was at first unsuccessful; although I found a fragment of a
building on the east side of the plot of land formerly occupied by the
convent of S. Mary the Great[128], which may possibly belong to an early
period; but I had afterwards three opportunities of learning that I was
not mistaken, in expecting to find the required evidence somewhere in
this part. (1) In January 1857, the weight of a quantity of fallen snow
threw down a part of the wall of a Mohammedan Bazaar[129], called the
Meat Bazaar, near the above-named convent. By order of the Governor I
repaired it in 1858, and in digging down to the rock to lay the new
foundations, at a depth of 10 feet below the surface, came upon large
stones, boldly rusticated, and arranged in a manner that reminded me of
the Phoenician work of the time of Solomon. This wall is nine feet
thick, and consists of three courses of stone, the first, which lies on
the rock, being 3-1/4 feet in height, the second 2, and the third 2-1/2;
thus an extension both north and south from this spot was proved by this
fragment. (2) In 1858 the Russian mission at Jerusalem, by my
suggestion, obtained a piece of land near to the church[130] of the
Resurrection on the east. In 1859 they cleared away the accumulated
rubbish, and during the work a corner of a Jewish wall was discovered;
the stones of which were rusticated to a depth of 4 or 5 lines, and
carefully finished; these were the remains of a restoration of the time
of the Herods on the ancient foundation of Solomon's wall. (3) In 1860
the dragoman of the French consul built a house, close to the west side
of the present _judgement-gate_, and in digging down for the rock found,
at a depth of 18 feet below the surface, a fragment of a wall,
resembling in all respects that described above in the first case. From
these three points I ascertained the course of the west side of the
wall; it remained therefore to search for the northern face towards the
Damascus gate; and an opportunity occurred before long, when the Greek
Archimandrite Bisarion repaired and strengthened a house (now
temporarily occupied by the Russian consulate). I dug some pits to
examine its foundation, but no remains of antiquity were discovered, and
the only result of my labours was to ascertain the true level of ancient
Jerusalem at this spot. I made enquiries of all, who in former years had
built in this neighbourhood, but could not hear that any Jewish ruins
had ever been found, and therefore think that the wall must have turned
sharp to the east at the _judgement-gate_ (formerly the gate of
Ephraim), and so, facing the north, gone on to the tower Antonia. The
occurrence of very large stones, evidently of Jewish work, in the walls
of the houses (especially in the lower parts) in this direction confirms
this idea. These were found when the Effendi Kadduti repaired and partly
rebuilt the house in the Via Dolorosa, at the _Station of Veronica_. A
similar discovery was made by the Mufti, in strengthening his house, at
the _Station of Simon of Cyrene_; and by the Effendi Soliman Giari,
opposite to the Mufti's house on the north. The Armenian Catholic Monk
requested me to examine and level a piece of land, at the _Station of
the first fall of Christ_, which, as representative of his nation, he
had just bought. In the lower part of the wall enclosing it on the north
very large stones and an ancient gate were found.

In the foundations of the Austrian hospice, laid in 1857, to the north
of the Armenian property, large stones were discovered, and also,
farther to the east, in the new convent of the Daughters of Sion. From
all these facts, I infer that the line of the second wall passed along
this side. I may also remark that the Greek text of Josephus states that
the wall "went up to the Antonia[131];" and we can still see, from the
conformation of the ground in this direction, that, after crossing the
Tyropoeon valley, it would _go up_ to the tower. The assertion that
the second wall "only encompassed the northern quarter of the city," is
true, because, at the time of Josephus, Hezekiah's wall must have been
standing, and therefore considered to form part of the second line. I
once supposed that the gate Gennath was near the tower Hippicus on the
east, and that consequently the second wall went in a zigzag course
until it joined the Antonia: but, as mentioned above, I did not find any
traces of it very near the tower Hippicus, and I think that if the gate
of Gennath had been close to this, the historian would have mentioned
it. I have already said that I attribute this wall to Solomon, because
it is mentioned in the Bible in connection with events after his time.

Josephus states that "the beginning of the third wall was at the tower
Hippicus, where it reached as far as the north quarter of the city and
the tower Psephinus, and then was so far extended till it came over
against the monuments of Helena, which Helena was queen of Adiabene, the
daughter of Izates; it then extended farther to a great length, and
passed by the royal caverns (+spêlaiôn+), and bent again at the tower of
the corner, at the monument which is called the Monument of the Fuller,
and joined to the old wall at the valley called the Valley of the
Kidron[132]." In laying down the course of this wall I differ from all
those (in particular Barclay, Schultz and Robinson) who, up to the
present time, have written on the topography of ancient Jerusalem. I am
led to do this by the careful investigations, which, during a long time,
I carried on in the district north of the city. It is my positive
opinion that the ancient walls did not extend to the north beyond the
present enclosure; that is, that they began at the Jaffa gate, passed by
the Damascus gate, and ended at the north-east corner of the
_Haram-es-Sherîf_. Let me now state the facts which have led me to this
conclusion.

In 1860 the Greek convent repaired the building outside the Jaffa[133]
gate, now used as a custom-house. Wishing to lay some foundations
against the city wall, I came, on digging down, upon those of Agrippa's,
which rest upon the rock; now we know that this wall near to Hippicus
was defended by the steep slope of the side of the valley, and that
where this ceased, towards the north-west corner, a ditch was cut in the
rock. This may still be seen, and is a proof that I am right in
supposing the present to be the wall that went from Hippicus to
Psephinus.

At the north-west corner a massive ruin still exists inside the city,
rising about twenty feet above the ground, and built of small stones
joined with strong mortar; in the south-west corner however are found
large stones, rusticated after the Herodian pattern. On digging about
the shapeless pile, I discovered that courses of similar stones
continued down to the rock. I also found two sides of masonry, and many
large rusticated stones buried in the rubbish, and traces of a great
cistern. Hence I consider this to be the site of the tower Psephinus, an
octagon in form, and seventy cubits high[134]. Beyond these ruins,
outside the present wall, is a ditch cut in the rock, unquestionably a
work of the Herodian age, for no later conquerors would have had the
time or desire to execute such a great and costly work. It is now
concealed by rubbish, but it runs eastward parallel to the present wall,
which therefore can scarcely have extended beyond it, in the course laid
down by Barclay, Schultz, and many others.

The position I assign to Psephinus is the highest point in the city;
therefore as the tower was seventy cubits high, we can understand that
from its top the confines of Arabia and the sea (the Dead Sea) might be
visible; indeed the latter may even now be seen from the terraces of the
highest houses in the neighbourhood of the ruins. I call particular
attention to this, because some have supposed that Josephus meant the
Mediterranean; which cannot be seen even from the higher station of
Mount Olivet. Besides he tells us that the tower was _at_ the north-west
corner of the wall[135]. The position assigned to Psephinus by Schultz,
about 1800 feet from the corner, _along_ the line, is not only a very
bad one in a strategic point of view, being in a hollow and commanded by
higher ground in front, but also would not have given a glimpse of the
sea had the tower been double the height. Barclay's position is to the
north-west and beyond the present wall, but nearer to mine and on higher
ground, so that it satisfies the historian's conditions, but still is
inadmissible, because it would be on a plateau without any defences, and
would therefore have been easily taken by the Romans, instead of giving
them some trouble.

I believe that Schultz fixed upon his position because a pool and some
fragments of a wall, which he considered ancient, were found there. The
reservoir is however too small and is an oblong, and therefore ill
suited for an octagonal tower; in which we should at least expect to
find a square. I examined the wall by excavations, and found it to be
only an Arab work: some stones, large but not thick, are the only things
that have a look of antiquity, and this character is not decisive
because they are embedded in mortar; in fact they are only the remains
of some slabs that have once been used in a conduit. Barclay has
certainly made the most of the reservoir of the _Meidan_; but in his
time it was filled with rubbish, and therefore could not be examined. I
have seen it empty, and its dimensions are nine feet deep, twenty long,
and ten wide. It is therefore too small for the tower. I have surveyed
and carefully investigated all the ground near it, for the Russian
Mission and for Signor Tanûs (the owner of the reservoir), but could not
discover the slightest trace either of defensive works, or a wall, or
detached stones, to induce me to believe that a fortification ever
occupied this spot, but on the contrary found rock, either quite bare or
thinly covered with a red clayey soil. Other writers have assigned other
positions to Psephinus, which are either near the above, and so open to
the same objections, or else do not agree with the account of Josephus.

At the north-west corner the wall turns to the east, and after about 150
paces, before arriving at the Damascus Gate, we come to a new Greek
building, touching the city-wall. When the foundations of this were
laid, I examined a piece of wall, entirely of the age of the Agrippas,
some stones of which are still visible. From this we see that a part of
the wall, or a tower, was formerly on this spot, in accordance with my
opinion.

The present Damascus Gate[136] bears strong testimony to the fact that
Agrippa's wall once passed by it. It is flanked, east and west, by two
towers, that are conspicuous objects from inside the city; their bases
are entirely composed of large stones of the Herodian period. They are
twenty cubits square[137], and solid up to the ancient level of the
ground. I believe them to be the 'women's towers' mentioned by
Josephus[138]. I say the ancient level, because in a reservoir outside
the gate, on the east, I discovered traces of another gate, at a lower
level than and supporting the present Damascus Gate. In the south wall
of this there is a segment of a semicircular arch, 12 feet wide and 26
high, the stones forming the side piers are large and rusticated, those
of the arch itself are also large but smooth. I discovered it in
January, 1861. This I believe to be identical with the 'North Gate' of
Josephus, through which the Jews made a sortie to disturb Titus' first
reconnoissance of the city[139]. On both sides, without the present
gate, are large stones, rusticated, of the Herodian period, some in the
lower part of the present wall, others forming a sort of terrace above
the road.

About 980 feet north of the Damascus Gate is an isolated rock rising 8
or 10 feet above the ground, and bearing inside and out traces of the
hand of man. In the east side is an aperture, which resembles the doors
in the sepulchres of the Kings, of the Judges and of Aceldama, and, like
these, has been closed by a heavy stone moving on two hinges, the holes
for which are still visible. It leads into a ruined cistern, nearly
filled with rubbish. I had often been struck by the resemblance this
presented to an ancient sepulchre, and thought that in that case it
might be the tomb of Helena, but several difficulties stood in my way,
and it is to the intelligent co-operation of M. Edmond de Barrère,
French Consul at Jerusalem, that I am indebted for the confirmation of
my idea. During our investigation at this place, we discovered that the
rock appeared to be cut into the form of the base of a pyramid; also, by
excavating inside the cistern, we found traces of tombs hewn in the
rock. Hence I conclude that this is the site of the tomb of Helena. This
is not the only instance where the resting-places of the dead have been
profaned. Near the tombs of the Judges, and to the north of the head of
the Kidron valley, changes of this kind are common: so too at the
sepulchres of Aceldama the peasants of Siloam have converted some into
dwelling-houses, others into barns. We know the history of some of the
accidents that have befallen the grave of Helena; for a church was built
on the same rock by the Empress Eudoxia, between the years A.D. 450 and
461, and dedicated to S. Stephen, who was said by tradition to have been
stoned there; it was destroyed by the Saracens on the approach of the
Crusaders. These rebuilt it, completing the work about the middle of the
twelfth century; but destroyed it again A.D. 1187, fearing that Saladin
would use it to cover his troops in attacking the city. This site
satisfies another condition given by Josephus, when he says that the
tomb was "distant no more than three stadia from the city of
Jerusalem[140]." Now he invariably uses the words 'city of Jerusalem' to
express the part enclosed by the first or second line of walls, and 'the
new city' or 'Bezetha' for that within the third. Agrippa's wall,
commenced A.D. 44, and continued A.D. 66, by the Jews[141], was lying in
an unfinished state at the time of Helena's death; consequently, I
understand that Josephus intended the three stadia to be reckoned from
the second wall. S. Jerome[142], speaking of the Journey of Paula,
states that, coming from Ramah and Gabaah, she left the tomb of Helena
on the left hand, and then entered Jerusalem. The ancient road from
Ramah, whose remains may still be seen, passed a little to the north of
the sepulchres of the Kings, and then turning to the N.W., left the
monument of Helena on the left and entered Jerusalem. The distance from
the north gate, as determined by me, is another very strong argument for
this position.

The following Jewish tradition also confirms my opinion. It is the
custom for the Jews, every year, about the time of the Feast of
Pentecost, to leave Jerusalem by the Damascus Gate, and pass the whole
day in visiting this rock, the sepulchres of the Kings, the supposed
tomb of Simon the Just, and a grotto, opposite to this, looking south,
called in Arabic _Jadagat el-Ahel_, that is, "store of food" or "alms of
food[143]." They repeat their visit, or rather pilgrimage, for three
days, and never return to the city without scrupulously visiting these
four places. I asked educated Jews the reason of this custom, and was
told that from this direction a great Queen had come, who, during a
severe famine, had brought large supplies of food to Jerusalem, which
were deposited in the above-named grotto; that on her death she wished
to be buried on the north near the city; (I asked them to point out the
place, but they could not), and consequently they went out in respectful
remembrance of her, (they did not know even her name,) and also to visit
the tombs of their ancestors. Thus, though the tradition does not fix
the exact place of the grave, it shews that it was near the city, and
indicates the direction in which it lay.

Close to the outer side of the wall, a little to the east of the
Damascus gate, is a large deep hollow, almost entirely enclosed on the
south, east, and north, by bare rock, which has evidently been worked at
some very distant period[144]. In the upper part of the south side is a
hole, opening into a long deep cavern extending southward and eastward
under the city; and facing this, to the north, is the (commonly called)
grotto of Jeremiah. These are nothing but ancient stone-quarries, which
I consider to be the _Royal Caverns_ of Josephus, and believe that the
stones, which at different times have been used to build the city walls
and the Temple, have been, at least in great part, taken from them. They
were separated one from another, as at present, partly in getting the
stone and partly in fortifying the north of the New City (Bezetha) with
a ditch, which still runs eastward along the wall till it arrives at the
pool near S. Mary's gate. It is cut entirely in the rock, like the one
on the north-west in front of the tower Psephinus, and is a regular
defence for the city-walls. As similar works have never been found in
any other part of the district on the north, its occurrence at this
place seems a strong argument in favour of my theory. I also compared
the levels of the bottom of the hollow in front of the cavern, and of
the Tyropoeon valley, with the old level of the north gate, and found
they correspond. I further ascertained that the road sloped gently
towards the Temple, so that the huge blocks could have been easily
transported. We may remark also that Josephus uses different words to
express Cavern and Sepulchre[145]; and that the word used in speaking of
this place does not apply to a place of burial. I conclude therefore
that these are the Royal Caverns of Josephus, and if it be objected that
this position restricts too much the line of Agrippa's wall, I ask to
what other place on the north this name can be applied.

To the east of the Royal Caverns is Herod's gate, and a little below it,
in the same direction, the lower part of the present wall for four
courses above the ground is of Herodian work; another point in favour of
my theory.

It is stated that "the wall bent again at the tower of the corner, at
the monument which is called the Monument of the Fuller[146]." We must
now endeavour to assign the position of these two. I place the tower
inside the present wall at its north-east corner, where massive masonry
may still be seen on a level with the ground. The Monument of the Fuller
is entirely destroyed, and its place cannot be exactly determined.
Still, two passages in the Bible give some clue: Josiah burnt the grove
which he had removed from the house of the Lord "at the brook Kidron,
and stamped it small to powder, and cast the powder thereof upon the
graves of the children of the people[147];" also, Jehoiakim slew Urijah
"with the sword, and cast his dead body into the graves of the common
people[148]." Now in the valley of the Kidron, east of the corner of the
wall, are some rocks bearing evident traces of workmanship, but so much
injured and weatherworn, and so covered with rubbish, that it is
impossible to say whether they have belonged to a monument or not; but
there are some signs of sepulchres; so, as the 'graves of the common
people' are in the valley of Kidron, I am inclined to think that this
may have been the Fullers Monument. The highway of the Fuller's field is
mentioned in 2 Kings xviii. 17, Isaiah xxxvi. 2, and some think that
this is connected with the monument named by Josephus; but the two
things are quite distinct, and there is no reason why the former should
be near the latter. After passing the monument the wall joined the old
wall, which now forms the north-east corner of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_.

Having thus examined the line of the walls, let us try to prove, both
from the historian's words and the conformation of the ground, that the
city cannot have extended to the north beyond its present limits.

It is stated[149] that "the third wall had ninety towers (twenty cubits
square), and the spaces between them were each two hundred cubits, but
in the middle wall were fourteen towers[150], and the old wall was
divided by sixty; while the whole compass of the city was thirty-three
stadia." Now it is quite credible that the middle and old walls had the
above numbers of towers, but it is very hard to understand how the third
could have had ninety, and these two hundred cubits apart. If each tower
was twenty cubits square, then the space occupied by towers would be
eighteen hundred cubits; and if they were two hundred cubits apart, the
sum of their distances would be eighteen thousand cubits; so that the
whole length of the third wall would have been nineteen thousand eight
hundred cubits; which is equal to about nine thousand seven hundred and
ninety-one yards, or _forty-eight stadia_. This, besides being greater
than the whole compass of the city (thirty-three stadia), is far too
large for even the space claimed by Barclay; because in order to obtain
a measurement of this extent, we must suppose a part of the Scopus
itself to have been included within the walls. There must therefore, as
it appears to me, be some error in the text of Josephus in the number
'ninety,' so that no argument can be founded upon it. The position,
however, which I assign to the wall, agrees very well with the
thirty-three stadia, given by the historian as the whole length of the
walls[151].

My theory is also supported by the description of Titus' wall of
circumvallation[152]. "He began the wall from the _Camp of the
Assyrians_, where his own camp was pitched; and drew it down to the
lower parts of the New City; thence it went along the valley of the
Kidron to the Mount of Olives; it then bent towards the south, and
encompassed the mountain as far as the rock called _Peristereon_, and
that other hill which lies next it; and is over against the valley which
reaches to Siloam; whence it tended again to the west, and went down to
the valley of the fountain, beyond which it went up again at the
_Monument of Ananus_ the high priest; and encompassing that mountain
where Pompeius had formerly pitched his camp, it returned back to the
north side of the city, and was carried on as far as a certain village
called the _House of the Erebinthi_, after which it encompassed _Herod's
Monument_, and there on the east was joined to Titus' own camp, where it
began. Now, the length of this wall was thirty-nine stadia. Now, at this
wall without were erected thirteen places to keep garrison in, whose
circumferences put together amounted to ten stadia."

Of the places mentioned in the above description, the camp of the
Assyrians is at the north-west corner of the present line of walls, two
stadia distant from which were the head-quarters of Titus[153].

I cannot ascertain the position of the rock Peristereon (dovecote).
According to Schultz this word has the same meaning as the Latin
'Columbarium[154],' and he identified it with the so-called 'Tombs of
the Prophets[155],' but this does not correspond with the 'Columbarium'
of the Romans. Its position indeed, at the first glance, seems to agree
with the _data_ of Josephus; but his words appear more applicable to a
prominent rock than to a monument, which moreover is too far up the
hill-side to be included in the line of circumvallation. I believe
therefore that the Peristereon of Josephus was situated at the north
entrance of the present village of Siloam, where the rocks still bear
marks of having been extensively quarried.

The Monument of Ananus has been identified by Schultz with the present
tomb of S. Onuphrius, a building in the Doric style, situated in
Aceldama; we will examine it more minutely hereafter.

I also agree with Schultz in placing the village, called 'House of
Erebinthi' (chick peas), in the valley of Gihon to the west of
_Birket-es-Sultan_, at a spot marked by some ruins, quarried rock, and a
considerable number of cisterns hewn in the rock; called by the Arabs,
_Kasr-el-Asfur_ or _el-Ghazal_ (castle of the young sparrow or of the
gazelle) and _Abu-Wair_. Near, and to the west of _Birket Mamillah_, is
a large mass of ruins, covering some sepulchral caves, which are
identified by Schultz with Herod's monument. Though it is difficult to
recognise in them the customary magnificence of that family, still the
position suits the account of Josephus. They were injured in the early
ages of Christianity on the building of the Greek church of St Babylas,
which was afterwards destroyed by the Persians under Chosroes II., and
to which the present remains belong.

Some authors are very anxious to extend Jerusalem towards the north
(since this is impossible on the south), in order to make it large
enough to contain the immense population, and the numbers of dead and
prisoners recorded by Josephus[156]. But Hecatæus of Abdera, cited by
the historian[157], reckons its inhabitants, at the time of Alexander
the Great, at 120,000; is it then possible that the population of the
city could have so greatly increased in four centuries, during which
Palestine had been drained by numerous emigrations and frequent
revolutions, and was the field of constant and bloody strife[158]? Nor
must we forget that the defenders were not more than 25,000, nor the
besiegers more than 60,000[159]. Could not then so great a population
(about 2,000,000) furnish a larger garrison for the defence of their
Palladium? Though Titus might have reckoned on the intestine struggles
among the Jews, would he even then, skilful general and experienced
warrior as he was, have undertaken so hazardous an enterprise? Could he
have approached so large and populous a city with an army relatively so
weak? We do not need more evidence to convince us that either the
historian has included in his numbers the prisoners and dead of the
whole war, or has indulged in exaggeration, or else that the figures
have been wrongly transcribed.

Let us also consider the conformation of the ground on the north.
Josephus has distinctly stated that the city was enclosed by a triple
wall, except on the side of the valleys, where there was but one, as
this part was inaccessible[160]. These few words appear to me to be
fatal to any theory that lays down Agrippa's wall near the Tombs of the
Kings. If he had begun to build it on the ridge south of the upper part
of the Kidron valley, the Jews would of course have completed it on the
same spot, and Josephus would not have omitted to state that the city
was defended to a considerable extent by a valley on the north. But on
this point he is silent, and finding his description correct in other
respects, I cannot suppose that he has made an omission in this. If it
be contended that the upper part of the Kidron valley is too shallow to
be worth mention, I reply, that it is from 16 to 24 feet deep, and was
no doubt deeper in the time of Josephus; who therefore would not have
failed to observe that there was also a valley on the north, which at
any rate was quite deep enough to be a formidable obstacle to an attack
from that side. Again, suppose that the city-wall had come up to the
Tombs of the Kings, or stood a little to the south of them, what would
then have been the use of Titus' reconnoissance from Gofna with 600
horse[161]; thus uselessly exposing himself to danger, when he could
have examined the place better, and even exhorted the people to submit,
from Mount Scopus. Had the city extended thus far, it would have been
open to view and exposed to an attack on the north-west, being closely
surrounded by higher hills; nor would a skilful general like Titus have
given his men the trouble of levelling the ground from Scopus up to
Herod's monument[162], needlessly increasing the labours of his troops,
and exposing them to constant attacks from the Jews. He certainly would
not have moved his camp to a position two stadia distant from both
Psephinus and Hippicus[163], because he could easily have attacked the
city at any point between the Tombs of the Kings and Psephinus. Lastly,
I assert that no signs of defensive works, natural or artificial, are
found to the north or north-west of the present walls. From the Jaffa
Gate to the Tombs of the Kings, and thence to the north-east corner of
the walls, there is not the slightest trace of the foundation or the
masonry of the outer wall; no great hewn stones scattered over or buried
in the ground; nothing but twenty-six vaulted cisterns, hollowed out in
the rock, and four very small pools, which could not have supplied the
large population that must have covered this space; the rock, though in
places worked, is generally rough and untouched by any tool; the soil is
everywhere red and clayey, its natural condition; another proof that it
was never built over, for where the houses have been destroyed by fire
or age, it is of a blackish or greyish colour, and contains fragments of
walls or at least hewn stones in plenty. Let any one examine the south
part of Sion or Ophel and contradict my assertion if he can. On the
south heaps of broken stones and rubbish are scattered over a grey soil;
on the north is bare rock, or a scanty though rich virgin earth.

Some, however, infer an extension of the city to the north, from the
occurrence not only of cisterns but also of small cubes of stone,
belonging to mosaic pavements, and of certain walls which, without
proper examination, have been considered to be ancient Jewish work. But
these remains are not of any value, because, as stated by Josephus[164],
there were houses and gardens in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem to the
north. We may indeed infer the same from the words of Nehemiah[165],
because we cannot imagine persons engaged in the service of the Temple
living elsewhere in the environs of the city, on account of the great
number of tombs in every other part. Houses also stood here at the time
of the Crusades, and a church, dedicated to the Martyrdom of S. Stephen;
therefore the occurrence of some mosaics and stones is easily accounted
for. For all these reasons I deny that the walls extended farther to the
north than their present position; and if the advocates of other
theories are not convinced, I invite them to examine the places for
themselves, when they will see that I have spoken the truth.

A Roman garrison was left by Titus at Jerusalem, after the work of
destruction was completed, to watch over the ruins and prevent any
attempt at restoring the city[166]; and it was not till 60 years
afterwards that Hadrian sent thither a heathen colony to rebuild it and
call it _Ælia_, after his name Ælius. A temple to Jupiter Capitolinus
was erected on the site of the ancient Temple, whence the epithet
_Capitolina_. He forbade the Jews to enter the territory of Jerusalem
under pain of death, in order, according to Ariston of Pella[167], that
they might not behold the home of their fathers even from afar. He also
caused the effigy of a pig to be sculptured in marble on the gate
leading to Bethlehem; an animal unclean to the Jews, but one of the
Roman standards[168]. The southern part of Sion was excluded from his
city, and all agree that its form and size coincided with the present.
On this point we have the testimony of the Pilgrim of Bordeaux[169], who
visited the place early in the fourth century, during the building of
the Church of the Resurrection by Constantine.

At the time of the arrival of the Crusaders Jerusalem had not undergone
any material change, as we learn from El Edrisi[170], who finished his
work January, A.D. 1154, Benjamin of Tudela, who visited it A.D. 1173,
and Willibrand of Oldenburgh, who stayed there A.D. 1211. During the
occupation by the Crusaders a ditch extended along the wall from the
south-west corner to the Sion Gate. It is now covered by a street, but
on descending into one of the cisterns which opens into the middle of
the road, I found that they were all in reality formed out of the ditch.
This is the only part of the city of the Crusaders that has disappeared
from view owing to the restorations of Solyman the Magnificent, who
ascended the throne A.D. 1534.

The form of Jerusalem was not changed in his days, although he greatly
wished it. He had given orders to the architect, who was building the
new walls, to extend them on the side of Sion, so as to include the
whole of that hill. Regard for the sanctity of the place was not his
motive (as many Christians both then and since have thought), but fear,
lest in the event of a siege it might be occupied by an enemy, as a
commanding position on which to collect troops preparatory to an
assault. But when the architect, who hated the Christians, saw their
deep reverence for the place and their desire that it might be included
in the city, he determined to leave it outside as Hadrian had done;
without thinking of the political or military views of his sovereign. He
paid dear for his disobedience, for the Sultan recalled him to give an
account of his actions, and regardless of his religious scruples cut off
his head.

Having thus given a general idea of modern and ancient Jerusalem, we
will proceed to describe all the objects of interest enclosed within its
walls.


FOOTNOTES:

[36] See the Panorama, Plate I, and Plates II., III., IV.

[37] 2 Sam. v. 6, 7, 9.

[38] Jewish War, V. 4, § 1.

[39] 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14.

[40] Josh. xv. 8; xviii. 16.

[41] Jewish War, V. 4, § 1.

[42] Ibid.

[43] +amphikyptos+. Whiston translates 'Of the shape of a moon when she
is horned.'

[44] Gen. xxii. 2, 14.

[45] 2 Chron. iii. 1.

[46] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2; 5, § 8.

[47] Jewish War, V. 5, § 1; Ant. XV. 11, § 3.

[48] Ant. XV. 11, § 5.

[49] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[50] Jewish War, V. 5, § 8.

[51] Jewish War, V. 4, § 1.

[52] Note I.

[53] Ant. XII. 5, § 4; 9, § 3.

[54] Ant. XIII. 6, § 7; Jewish War, V. 4, § 1.

[55] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[56] 2 Sam. xv. 23, 30.

[57] 1 Kings xi. 7; 2 Kings xxiii. 13.

[58] Acts i. 12; Note II.

[59] Jewish War, V. 2, § 3.

[60] 1 Kings i. 38. See Note XIII.

[61] 2 Chron. xxxii. 30.

[62] 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14.

[63] 2 Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. vii. 31, 32; xix. 11.

[64] Jer. xix. 6.

[65] 1 Macc. iv. 61; vi. 26, 31; 2 Macc. xi. 5.

[66] Note II.

[67] Ant. XI. 8, § 5; Jewish War, II. 19, § 4; V. 2, § 3.

[68] Josh. xviii. 16.

[69] 2 Sam. v. 6, 7.

[70] Ant. VII. 3, § 1.

[71] Judges i. 21.

[72] Ant. V. 2, § 2.

[73] Note III.

[74] 2 Sam. v. 9; 1 Chron. xi. 7.

[75] 2 Sam. v. 11.

[76] 2 Sam. v. 9.

[77] 1 Chron. xi. 8.

[78] Note IV.

[79] Marked with black on the Plan of the Ancient City. Plate II.

[80] Note V.

[81] 2 Sam. v. 9; 1 Chron. xi. 8.

[82] Plate XXXI.

[83] 2 Chron. iii. 1.

[84] 2 Sam. xxiv. 16-25; 1 Chron. xxi. 18.

[85] 1 Kings ix. 15; xi. 27.

[86] Ant. VIII. 2, § 1; 6, § 1.

[87] 1 Kings ix. 15, 24.

[88] 1 Kings xi. 27.

[89] 2 Kings xii. 20.

[90] 2 Kings xxii. 14 (margin); Zeph. i. 10.

[91] 2 Chron. xxvii. 3.

[92] 2 Chron. xxxii. 5.

[93] Plate XXXI.

[94] Note VI.

[95] 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14.

[96] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[97] 2 Kings xiv. 13; 2 Chron. xxv. 23.

[98] Jer. xxxi. 38.

[99] 2 Chron. xxvi. 9.

[100] 2 Chron. xxiii. 15; Jer. xxxi. 40.

[101] 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14; Zeph. i. 10.

[102] Jer. xx. 2.

[103] 2 Kings xxv. 4; Jer. lii. 7.

[104] Note VII.

[105] For what follows see Neh. ch. iii.

[106] Neh. xii. 31, 37, 38, 39.

[107] Neh. ii. 13.

[108] Jewish War, V. 4, § 1, 2, 3.

[109] Plate V.

[110] Note VIII.

[111] Jewish War, V. 4, § 3.

[112] Plate VI.

[113] Jewish War, VII. 1, § 1.

[114] Ibid. V. 3, § 5.

[115] Ant. XX. 8, § 11.

[116] Jewish War, VI. 6, § 2.

[117] Note IX.

[118] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[119] +Dia de tou Bêthsô kaloumenou chôriou katateinon epi tên Essênôn
pylên.+

[120] Isaiah xxii. 1, 11.

[121] Jewish War, VI. 7, § 2; 8, § 1.

[122] Ibid. V. 4, § 2.

[123] Jewish War, V. 5, § 8.

[124] Ibid. V. 3, § 2.

[125] Ibid. V. 11, § 4.

[126] S. John xix. 41.

[127] "Duos colles, in immensum editos, claudebant muri per artem
obliqui, aut introrsus sinuati ut latera oppugnantium ad ictus
patescerent."--Hist. V. 11; Note X.

[128] Plate XXX.

[129] Plate XXX.

[130] Plate XXX.

[131] +Anêei mechri tês Antônias.+

[132] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[133] Plate V.

[134] Jewish War, V. 4, § 3.

[135] Ibid. V. 3, § 3; 4, § 3.

[136] Plate VII.

[137] Jewish War, V. 4, § 3.

[138] Ibid. V. 2, § 2.

[139] Ibid.

[140] Ant. XX. 4, § 3.

[141] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[142] Jerome, Ep. CVIII. Ed. Migue, (_Ad Eustochium virginem_).

[143] Plate LVII.

[144] Plates VIII., IX.

[145] +spêlaion+ (cavern), +mnêmeion+ (sepulchre).

[146] Jewish War, V. 4, § 2.

[147] 2 Kings xxiii. 6.

[148] Jer. xxvi. 23.

[149] Jewish War, V. 4, § 3.

[150] Whiston reads 'forty' instead of fourteen; the latter is the
number in the Greek text.

[151] Note II.

[152] Jewish War, V. 12, § 2.

[153] Ibid. V. 7, § 3.

[154] Columbarium means not only a dovecote, but also a sepulchre, with
niches for urns.

[155] Plate LIV.

[156] Jewish War, V. 13, § 7; VI. 9, § 3.

[157] c. Apion. I. 22.

[158] See the Chronological Table.

[159] Jewish War, V. 1, § 6; 6, § 1.

[160] Ibid. V. 4, § 1.

[161] Jewish War, V. 2, § 1.

[162] Ibid. V. 3, § 2.

[163] Ibid. V. 3, § 5.

[164] Jewish War, V. 3, § 2.

[165] Nehem. xii. 28, 29.

[166] Jewish War, VII. 1, § 1.

[167] Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. IV. 6.

[168] Jerome, 'Interpretatio Chronicæ Eusebii Pamphili' (Hadr. An. XX.).

[169] Note XI.

[170] Note XII.




CHAPTER III.

     MOUNT MORIAH AND ITS ENVIRONS--HISTORY IN THE TIME OF ABRAHAM,
     JACOB, DAVID, SOLOMON, ZERUBBABEL, ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ANTIOCHUS
     EPIPHANES, THE MACCABEES, POMPEIUS, CRASSUS, THE HERODS, TITUS,
     HADRIAN, CONSTANTINE, JULIAN THE APOSTATE, OMAR, ABD-EL-MALEK,
     VALID OR ELULID, THE CRUSADERS, SALADIN, SELIM I., SOLYMAN
     I.--GENERAL EXAMINATION OF MORIAH, WITH DETAILS OF THE
     INVESTIGATIONS.


Mount Moriah, forming the south-east part of the Lower City, is one of
the points in Jerusalem whose situation can be fixed with the greatest
certainty, from the evidence of the place itself with its ruins and
remains, and from the testimony of ancient authors and local traditions.
At the present day it is surrounded by walls and buildings enclosing
the great plateau, in the middle of which rises the majestic
_Kubbet-es-Sakharah_ (Dome of the Rock), on the site formerly occupied
by the Temple of the God of Israel. The followers of Islam, on their
conquest of Jerusalem, dedicated this spot to the service of their own
faith, under the name of _Beit-el-Mokaddas-es-Sherîf_ (the Noble
Sanctuary). They esteemed it the holiest place on earth, after Mecca and
Medina, and, as usual, strictly forbade all unbelievers to enter it. An
accurate and scientific examination of it was not made, so far as we
know, in the days of the Crusaders, and since then, though many have
attempted it, none have succeeded. Ali Bey's description, made A.D.
1807, is correct enough for a traveller, but does not touch upon
questions of archæology; Catherwood, Bonomi, and Arundale, during
Ibrahim Pasha's occupation of Syria, A.D. 1833, commenced a survey with
plans and views; but were hindered and finally stopped by the fanaticism
of the Arabs, and so obliged to bring to a hasty conclusion a work
carefully begun. Many have spoken before scientific societies and
written on this subject in various publications; some after looking at
the place from the Mount of Olives or the terrace of the Barrack at the
north-west corner of the enclosure, others after a hurried visit; but no
one since the time of its destruction by Titus has examined the ground,
no one has carried on careful and systematic investigations there; all
have been content to speak of what appeared above the soil, and were
consequently ignorant of the objects of far greater interest below.

In consequence of the late war in the East, Mohammedan fanaticism was
somewhat abated, and Kiamil Pasha, Governor of the city, several times
allowed travellers to visit the _Haram_[171], and kindly gave me
frequent leave to enter it alone, without forming one of the train of
some distinguished visitor; at other times I went in disguise with Arab
friends; but on all these occasions I could only use my eyes, and now
and then venture to measure a distance by stepping it. This was not what
I wanted, for I had determined to construct plans and thoroughly examine
the ground in every direction. My wishes were carried into effect by the
great kindness and powerful protection of Surraya Pasha, who attached me
to his service as honorary architect, and then gave me every opportunity
and assistance in accomplishing my design, during a period lasting from
the beginning of 1857 to August 1861, when I returned to Europe. I have
accordingly examined this celebrated place, patiently and perseveringly,
and with no small sacrifice of time and private means[172]. I have
penetrated into the subterranean works, sought out and classified the
conduits and ascertained their course, constructed plans[173], and now
present the details of my labours to the reader, in confidence that,
even if I have not fully accomplished my design, I am the first to bring
forward many facts useful to archæology, and that if others continue the
researches (when that is possible) many great problems will be solved.

The first mention of Moriah in the Bible is when Abraham, in obedience
to the divine command, came to it to offer up his son Isaac, and the
Almighty, satisfied both of the faith of the father and the obedience of
the son, arrested the knife, and substituted another victim[174]. It is
possible that this mount may have been the scene of Jacob's dream[175],
and not the Bethel usually supposed; where at a later period the golden
calf was set up by Jeroboam. Had it been the latter place it is rather
improbable that the patriarch would have halted at so short a distance
from Shechem, when he fled from the vengeance of the neighbours of
Hamor[176]. Moriah is not directly mentioned in the account of David's
conquest of Jerusalem, nor in the history of his reign, but it is
indirectly when his country was smitten by a pestilence, after that, led
astray by pride, he had numbered the people[177]. He repented and
entreated God, who checked the destroying angel's hand, as his sword was
stretched out over Jerusalem. Bidden by the prophet Gad, the King went
out from the city to raise an altar to the Lord on the threshing-floor
of Araunah the Jebusite, near to which he had seen the angel. He found
the owner with his four sons threshing wheat, purchased the floor for
600 shekels of gold, with the oxen for sacrifices, the grain for
meat-offerings, and the instruments for wood; built an altar there, and
called upon the Lord. The fire of heaven descended upon it, and the
angel thrust back his sword into the sheath. He continued to sacrifice
there, saying, "This is the house of the Lord God, and this is the altar
of the burnt-offering for Israel[178]." From the above narrative we see
that the threshing-floor was without the city, and the property of a
Jebusite, that it was a sacred spot, chosen by the Lord himself for his
House, and identical with Moriah. Josephus[179] informs us that this was
the very place to which Abraham brought his son Isaac to offer him as a
burnt-offering.

Here it will be well to digress a little to describe a 'threshing-floor'
(Goren) of this period. It consisted of a plot of ground, usually rocky,
levelled to allow of the crops being spread out to the air and sun,
ready for the labourers, yet so situated as to be sheltered from the
full force of the prevailing wind. For greater security it was usually
near a dwelling; and, either within the enclosure or in the immediate
neighbourhood, cisterns were hewn in the rock, some to catch the
rain-water, others to hold the grain and other farm produce[180]. The
purposes for which these were designed can be determined from their
form. Those for water have only one chamber, with a shaft (about 2-3/4
feet wide) opening out into the middle of the roof; the rest have two
chambers, one below the other, communicating by a hole (about 4 feet
wide) in the middle of the floor of the upper[181], which itself opens
to the threshing-floor by a sloping passage (about 3-1/2 feet wide). The
lower cavern is deeper and larger than the upper.

I have met with very many of these cisterns during my frequent journeys
in Palestine, where they are still applied to their ancient uses; they
are especially common in those Arab villages which stand upon sites
mentioned in the Bible; as at Beth-shemesh, on the road from Jaffa to
Jerusalem just at the east of the village of _El-Atrun_, at _Neby
Samwîl_ (formerly Ramah the home of Samuel), at Gibeon and Beth-horon,
at _Beit-zacaria_, the ancient Bath-zacharias[182], at _El-Kebab_ in the
plain of Sharon, and in many other places.

In the threshing-floor of Araunah there are many cisterns, but I wish to
call especial attention to two very near each other, to the north of the
_Kubbet-es-Sakharah_[183] and to one inside it, beneath the sacred rock;
of which the visitor can only see the hole on the north-east side and
the upper part, but can convince himself by the hollow sound of the
existence of the lower cave. These are, in my opinion, the strongest
proofs of the identity of the position of the mosque and its platform
with the ancient threshing-floor of the Jebusite. I will hereafter
explain how I contrived to explore the interior of the cisterns in a
place of such sanctity.

David collected materials, and instructed his son to build the Temple on
the spot where he had offered sacrifice; and when Solomon had
established himself upon the throne, he commenced the work, which was to
perpetuate the glory of his reign. As his own dominions were not able to
supply suitable wood for the building, and as his people had not as yet
made sufficient progress in art to enable him to execute his magnificent
designs, he asked Hiram king of Tyre to furnish him with cedars from
Lebanon and Phoenician masons[184], with a skilful artist to direct
the work[185]. His request was granted, a treaty was made between the
two kings[186]: timber was prepared and brought to Jaffa[187] by orders
of Hiram, while Solomon had great blocks of stone, of 8 and 10
cubits[188], quarried and transported to the spot ready for use, so that
"there was neither hammer, nor axe, nor any tool of iron heard in the
house, while it was in building[189]." Before laying the foundations of
the Temple itself he executed great works to enlarge and strengthen the
ground[190]. Josephus indeed states that the summit of the mountain was
so abrupt and surrounded by precipices, that it was hardly large enough
to support the sacred house and the surrounding buildings, and that in
consequence a wall was built on the east, rising 400 cubits from the
bottom of the valley, and the intervening space filled up with earth to
support a portico[191]. The work began in the fourth year of his reign
in the month _Zif_ (April-May) and lasted seven years[192].

I agree with Munk that it is impossible to give an exact description of
this Temple; those found in 1 Kings vi. 7 and 2 Chron. iii. and iv. are
very incomplete, and often hard to reconcile; besides the meaning of the
architectural terms used in them cannot readily be determined. That
given by Josephus frequently differs, especially in dimensions, from
those given in the Bible, and the details which he adds seem based upon
mere conjecture. The numerous modern accounts[193] are very dissimilar
and present great difficulties, when elevations are made from them. We
may therefore conclude that a correct idea of the proportions and
architecture of Solomon's Temple cannot be obtained; consequently I have
put aside during my researches all considerations about the height,
style, and ornamentation of the building, referring my reader to
Josephus[194] and Munk[195], and concerned myself only about the
details relating to the ground-plan. This was an oblong, 60 cubits in
length from east to west, and 20 cubits wide. At the entrance of the
Temple on the east was a portico called _Oulam_, measuring 20 cubits
from north to south, and therefore corresponding with the house, and 10
cubits from east to west[196]. The Temple itself was divided into two
distinct parts; that in front on the east, called _Hechel_ (Palace), now
the Holy Place, was 40 cubits long; inside it, on the right or north,
was the table of shewbread, on the left the seven-branched candlestick;
between these in front of the veil, the altar of incense. The inner
part, _Debir_ (the Holy of Holies), was twenty cubits square, and
contained the ark alone, in which were the two tables of stone, placed
there by Moses at Horeb[197].

The Temple was surrounded by two courts. The inner is mentioned in 1
Kings vi. 36, but its dimensions are not recorded; it was probably an
oblong, enclosing the building, which stood near the west end, so as to
leave a considerable space in front, where the holy things, used in the
Jewish ritual, were arranged; as none but the Priests could enter this,
it was called the court of the Priests[198]. Besides this there was the
'great' or 'outward' court[199], where the people assembled to worship.
In the middle of the inner court, opposite to the entrance of the
Sanctuary, was placed the great bronze altar of burnt-offerings, which
was 20 cubits square and 10 cubits in height[200]. South-west of this
and south-east of the Temple, was the large laver called from its size
the 'sea of bronze,' 10 cubits in diameter and containing 3,000
baths[201] of water, used for the lustrations of the priests[202].
Besides this there were ten other vases, 4 cubits in diameter, five on
either hand, each containing 40 baths[203]; these were used in washing
the burnt-offerings[204]. The effect of these works was to change
entirely the appearance of the Moriah of Abraham and David; but the
threshing-floor of Araunah, which had sustained the original altar, was
handed down to posterity by the succession of events which identified
the spot, and the indelible traces of antiquity, yet to be found there.

As Solomon had built in the Temple enclosure houses for the
Levites[205], besides the laver and altar of burnt-offering; it was
necessary for him to construct conduits and cisterns to bring, to keep,
and to carry off water for the religious ceremonies and the various
purposes of daily life, as well as to remove the blood of the victims
and other refuse. On this point the Bible is silent, but we can easily
see that there were not any sources of drinkable water in the Temple and
its vicinity, or indeed in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem; and that the
rain-water alone could not be depended upon for a supply sufficient for
the wants of the place; we may therefore assert with confidence that
Solomon must have made great works to bring water from distant sources,
as from Etham (Eccl. ii. 6), where an abundant quantity could always be
obtained; with cisterns to keep it, and conduits attached to convey it
to different parts of the platform of the Sanctuary.

We are told that the victims were slain on the north, the blood
sprinkled about the altar, and the refuse cast away towards the east, in
the 'place of the ashes[206],' and the Priest's chambers built on the
north side of the altar of burnt-offerings[207]. Hence it follows that
drains must have existed at the altar of burnt-offerings, on the
north-side, and at the 'place of the ashes.' That these and many other
things were constructed by Solomon, we shall presently see from my
investigations in the _Haram-es-Sherîf_; I have now only alluded to the
account given in the Bible of the ground-plan of the building, in order
to be more easily understood in describing them.

Although the Temple was sacked in the reign of Rehoboam by Shishak king
of Egypt[208], and under Amaziah by Joash king of Israel[209], and
repaired by Joash king of Judah[210], it did not undergo any material
change up to the time of its destruction by the Chaldeans. It was set on
fire by order of Nebuchadnezzar, with the rest of Jerusalem, and in a
few days became a heap of ruins. So fell the first Temple of the Lord,
rather more than four centuries after its first foundation[211]. This
done, the Chaldeans carried away a part of the people into captivity,
but left the poorer class to cultivate the land; over whom Gedaliah,
their countryman, was set as governor. He fixed his residence at
Mizpah[212], the abode of Jeremiah, and under his good rule the number
of inhabitants rapidly increased, the fugitives returned from all
quarters, tranquillity and order were established, and the people began
to devote themselves to the vintage and the harvest of summer-fruits[213];
but before long a traitor, Ishmael, overthrew the hopes of this remnant of
Judah by the murder of Gedaliah[214], after which the greater part of
them, fearing the anger of the king of Babylon, migrated into Egypt, and
settled in the land of Tahpanhes[215], five years after the destruction of
Jerusalem. From these facts, derived from the Bible, it is evident that
the country was never wholly cleared of its inhabitants during the
captivity; and that, as Jeremiah mourned for five years over the ruins of
the city, so might many others follow his example during successive years;
so that the recollection, not only of the site of the Temple, but of its
very details, would be preserved, together with the traces of the ancient
threshing-floor of Araunah, and the cisterns, which must have escaped the
flames.

Cyrus ascended the throne of Persia B.C. 536, and in the first year of
his reign allowed the Jews to return to Palestine and rebuild the
Temple[216]; fifty-two years after the destruction of the city, and
sixty-three after the exile of King Jehoiakim[217], a numerous band,
headed by Zerubbabel and Joshua, set out for Judæa, and arrived there
after a journey of four months[218]. The next year, B.C. 535, in the
second month, Zerubbabel began to rebuild the Temple, and the new walls
rose among the joyful shouts of the young men, who saw them for the
first time, and the tears of the old, who remembered the greater glories
of the former House[219]. Hence we see that persons, worthy of credit,
who had seen the first Temple, were alive when the second was built; and
therefore cannot but believe that it stood on its ancient foundations.
The Samaritans, ever the rivals of the Jews, wished to share in this
work; and when their offers were rejected, harassed the workmen and
interrupted its progress, until, at last, by sending exaggerated and
false reports to the King, they obtained an order suspending it[220].
After a lapse of fifteen years, in the second year of Darius,
Zerubbabel[221], instigated by Haggai, re-commenced the building; which
was finished and solemnly inaugurated[222], in the sixth year of Darius
B.C. 517, on the third day of the month _Adar_ (February-March). We do
not find any description of the dimensions and appearance of
Zerubbabel's Temple: according to the decree of Cyrus[223], it was to be
sixty cubits broad and as many high; but these dimensions cannot be
relied on, because we are told that the new edifice was not in any
respect equal to the former[224]. It was visited by Alexander the Great
B.C. 332; and if we can credit Hecatæus of Abdera, a contemporary of the
conqueror, it differed considerably in style and size from Solomon's
Temple; the dimensions of the enclosure in which it stood were six
plethra (606 feet) long and 100 cubits wide; the great altar of
burnt-offerings was built of large white unpolished stones, being 20
cubits square and 12 high. According to the assertion of Herod the
Great, quoted by Josephus[225], the second House was not so high as the
first.

Antiochus Epiphanes entered Jerusalem B.C. 170, and after killing many
of the Jews and plundering the Temple, withdrew to Antioch. After two
years he returned, persecuted the people more barbarously than ever, and
profaned the House of the Lord, despoiling it of all that had been left
on the former occasion. He built a fortress in the lower city in a
commanding position, and placed therein a Macedonian garrison to harass
all who went to pray at the Holy Place[226]; still the form of the
Temple and its enclosure remained unaltered during this calamitous
period.

Never have more glorious deeds been done by any nation than by the Jews
under the rule of the Maccabees, men ever ready to die rather than break
the laws of their God and country. The Temple was recovered and cleansed
from pollution; the sacred things, which had been carried away by the
Syrians, were recaptured; the altar of burnt-offerings, having been
defiled by heathen sacrifices, was destroyed and a new one erected[227];
the walls surrounding the Temple, which had been pulled down by
Antiochus Eupator, were rebuilt by Jonathan, and strengthened by
towers[228]; the neighbouring fortress on the hill Acra was captured by
Simon, the Macedonian garrison expelled, and the building razed. The
hill itself was levelled, so that it no longer commanded the Temple:
three years of incessant labour, night and day, being spent on the work.
He afterwards fortified Moriah, and built his house upon it[229],
probably on the site at the north-west corner, where his successors
built the castle Baris[230]. In this dwelt Aristobulus, son of Hyrcanus,
by whose orders his brother Antigonus was murdered, at a place in an
underground passage, leading to the castle, called Strato's Tower[231].
I shall return to this again, as I think that I have discovered it, or
at least been the first to identify it.

At the time of Pompeius the Great the Temple was joined to the city by a
bridge, which was destroyed by the followers of Aristobulus, as they
retreated within the sacred walls, and prepared to defend themselves
against their assailants, who had called the Roman forces to their aid.
On the north it was protected by high towers and a deep ditch, excavated
with great pains in a valley; and on the west by precipices, which could
not be scaled when the bridge was broken down[232]. The Roman conqueror
entered the sanctuary, but respected its treasures, and permitted the
Jews to carry on their worship without interruption. Crassus, on the
contrary, though only passing through Jerusalem, did not imitate the
moderation of Pompeius, but despoiled it of its treasures and sacred
vessels. The last calamity that befell it was when some of the cloisters
were burnt, during the siege by Herod the Great[233].

Of all the great works executed by this King, the most important for
several reasons was the Temple of Jerusalem. In the eighteenth year of
his reign he convoked a national assembly, and set before them the
necessity of rebuilding it, giving as his chief reason that, at the time
of its restoration by Zerubbabel, it had not been made of the proper
dimensions or on the right plan. No doubt a house, raised five centuries
before, by a poor colony, with funds supplied by the King of Persia,
must have had a paltry appearance, contrasted with the magnificent
buildings erected by Herod in the highest style of Grecian art. The Jews
hesitated to consent to his scheme, fearing that after he had
demolished the old Temple, he might be unable or unwilling to finish the
new. He reassured them by promising not to begin to pull it down, until
he had collected all the materials required for so great an undertaking.
He kept his word; two years were spent in preparation[234]; the
sanctuary itself was completed in eighteen months, and the courts and
their cloisters in eight years; but the works in the outer buildings
were carried on for a much longer time[235]. This wonderful pile rose
upon the summit of Moriah, now enlarged by the labours of many
centuries, and surrounded by solid walls and deep valleys, more like an
impregnable fortress than a house of prayer; therefore the Apostles,
beholding with wonder the huge blocks of stone, bound with clamps of
lead and iron into a mass as firm as the rock itself, said one day to
our Saviour, "Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are
here!" The truth of His reply may still be seen at the place
itself[236].

I must now describe the ground-plan of the Temple sufficiently to enable
my readers to understand my investigations; referring those who are
desirous of entering more minutely into the subject, to the two accounts
of Josephus[237], and the description of Munk, to which I am greatly
indebted[238]. The area, enclosed by the outer wall, (called in the
Mischna 'the Temple Hill,') was a square of 500 cubits, or, according to
Josephus[239], of one stadium. This was divided into a series of
platforms, rising one above the other, and the Sanctuary was situated
rather nearer to the north-west corner, on the highest ground. This
arrangement produced a magnificent effect, and rendered the building
visible from every part of the city[240]. In the outer wall were several
gates; five, according to the Mischna[241], two on the south, and one on
each of the other sides; but in Josephus[242] it is stated that there
were four on the west alone, the numbers on the other sides not being
mentioned. Cloisters were built round the wall on the inside, those on
the east, north, and west were double, being supported by three rows of
columns, and thirty cubits wide; that on the south, called the 'Royal
Cloister,' was triple, and supported by four rows of columns[243]. The
Temple-market was held in this court; for all, even foreigners, were
allowed to enter it; hence it has been called by modern authors the
'Court of the Gentiles[244].' It was bounded on the inside by a stone
balustrade, in which columns were placed at certain intervals, bearing
inscriptions forbidding the Gentiles to pass them. In this fence,
according to the Mischna, were thirteen gateways from which fourteen
steps (each half a cubit in height and breadth) led up to a platform
ten cubits wide, called by the Mischna, _Hêl_ (before the wall), above
which rose the wall enclosing the sacred precincts. This was 25 cubits
high, and had nine gates, four to the north, four to the south, and one
to the east; these were approached by five steps; consequently the
enclosure was higher than the _Hêl_. It was divided into two courts, one
on the east, another on the west. The eastern gate led into a court, 135
cubits square, devoted to the women, and called after them _Azarath
naschîm_ (court of the women). This was divided from the western court
by a wall, in the middle of which, opposite to the entrance into the
women's court, was 'Nicanor's Gate[245],' approached by five steps
circular in form; the western court was therefore raised above the
eastern. It surrounded the Sanctuary, and was 135 cubits from north to
south, and 187 from east to west. The wall on the inside was surrounded
by columns; and on the north, east and south were a number of chambers,
devoted to various purposes, among which was the Hall of the Sanhedrim,
_Lischcath Hagazîth_. This court was divided by a balustrade, 11 cubits
from the east end, in the middle of which were three flights of
steps[246], from which the Priests blessed the people. The part devoted
to the men (135 cubits from north to south, and 11 from east to west)
was called the 'Court of the Israelites,' _Azarath Yisrael_: the other,
the 'Court of the Priests,' _Azarath Cohanîm_.

The Temple itself was 100 cubits in length, and as many in height; its
east front was formed by a vestibule, 100 cubits wide, measuring from
east to west 11 cubits, according to the Mischna, and 20 according to
Josephus. The rest of the building was 60 cubits wide (according to the
Mischna 70), therefore the vestibule projected 20 (or 15) cubits on each
side; twelve steps led up to the open door of the vestibule, which was
25 cubits wide. The _Hechal_, or Holy Place, was 20 cubits wide and 43
long, and was divided from the Holy of Holies (20 cubits square) by a
curtain. The sacred things were arranged as in Solomon's Temple. The
bronze laver stood in the Priests' court, south-east of the Sanctuary; a
certain Ben Katîn made twelve outlets for water in it, so that the same
number of Priests could purify themselves at the same time; he also
contrived a machine to bring the water into it from a well[247]. In the
middle of the court opposite the entrance of the Temple, north-east of
the laver, was the altar of burnt-offerings, made of unhewn stones, as
ordered by the law of Moses[248]. According to Josephus it was 50 cubits
square and 15 high, terminated at each corner by a kind of horn, and
approached by a gentle slope on the south side. The Rabbins say that it
rose in steps, the base being 32 cubits square[249], and that at the
south-east corner was a conduit, draining off the blood into the torrent
Kidron. North of the altar were marble tables to receive the flesh of
the victims[250]. In the Holy Place, the table of shewbread stood on the
north, the seven-branched candlestick on the south, and between them the
altar of incense; all made of gold. The Holy of Holies was empty, since
there was no ark in the second Temple, as it was lost when the first was
destroyed. According to a tradition, it had been hidden for security by
the prophet Jeremiah in a cave on Mount Nebo, which could not afterwards
be found[251]. A stone, about 2 inches high, called by the Rabbins
_Schethiyya_ (foundation), occupied its place, on which the High Priest
placed the censer on the day of Atonement[252].

Herod did not restrict his liberality to the Temple alone, but executed
some other great works in the same part of the city. He extended the
sacred enclosure on the north[253], strengthened its fortifications,
restored the ancient tower Baris[254], built by the Asmonean princes at
the north-west corner of the Temple, and called it Antonia, after his
patron, Marcus Antonius. As altered by him it was a square[255], half a
stadium each way; so that the whole perimeter of it and the Temple
together was six stadia. The outer wall enclosed a palace and four
towers, one at each angle; three of them 50 cubits high, and the fourth,
at the south-east corner, nearest the Temple, 70; from its summit the
Roman sentinel could see what was going on in the several courts[256].
The fortress was joined by a subterranean passage to a tower near the
east gate of the Temple, so that in case of a popular tumult the king
could easily escape into the Antonia[257]. At the present day, a plot of
levelled ground, a rocky knoll on the north of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_,
and a few shapeless fragments of masonry, are all that remain of the
splendid buildings of Herod.

All the buildings connected with Herod's Temple were finished at the
time of our Saviour's ministry[258]. He frequently taught in its courts,
and twice expelled those who profaned them with merchandise. He
prophesied the destruction of the place; and in its citadel His
sufferings commenced; for the Prætorium of Pilate was in the tower
Antonia, which was the residence of the Roman Governor and his
garrison[259]. There the sentence was proclaimed to the infuriated
people, who called down on their own heads the curse of the innocent
blood; in a few years so terribly avenged.

The description of Josephus, who was an eye-witness of the scene, has
been followed by all who have written on the siege and fall of
Jerusalem; it bears every mark of truth; and I shall give a brief sketch
of the part relating to the Temple and its environs, in order that the
account of my researches on the spot may be more intelligible to the
reader. On the first day of the month Thammuz (June-July) the Romans
assaulted the tower Antonia[260] and made a breach in the wall; but were
surprised to find that a second had been built up behind it. This was
carried on the fifth of the same month, and the Jews were driven within
the walls of the Temple courts. The greater part of the fortress was
razed during the next seven days, and the assailants erected mounds for
their engines on the space thus cleared, and battered the walls of the
Temple. Meanwhile the Jews burnt the north-west cloister, fearing that
it would open a communication with the main building for the Romans, who
themselves burnt the north cloister on the twenty-fourth day. This was
in no way opposed by the Jews, who considered that their position was
improved by the destruction of the cloister, and on the twenty-seventh,
by a feigned retreat, they decoyed a number of the Romans on to the roof
of the west cloister, and then fired a quantity of combustible material,
which had been previously heaped up below; so that numbers of their
enemies perished in the flames. The Romans having battered the west wall
of the inner inclosure during six days, and tried in vain to undermine
the north gate, were ordered to carry the cloisters by escalade. On the
eighth day of the month _Ab_ (July-August) they mounted the ladders
without opposition, but when they had arrived on the roof, they were
fiercely assailed by the Jews, and driven back with the loss of some
standards. Titus, seeing that the attempt had failed, set the gates on
fire; these were quickly destroyed, and the flames spread to the
cloisters in both directions. The fire continued till the next day, when
Titus, wishing to open a passage to the Temple for his troops, and to
save the building itself, if possible, ordered it to be extinguished.
During this day the Jews remained quiet; but on the morrow they renewed
the attack, determined either to drive the Romans from the Sanctuary, or
to perish beneath its ruins. By a sortie from the east gate they forced
back the enemy; but Titus, seeing from the Antonia the retreat of his
soldiers, went to their aid, and at last, about the fifth hour, the Jews
were again driven within the walls. He determined to wait and collect
his forces before making the assault; but this was a fatal day, being
the anniversary of the destruction of Solomon's Temple by the
Babylonians, six centuries and a half before[261]. The Jews made another
sortie upon the Romans, who were occupied in extinguishing the flames in
the inner inclosure, and were forced back as far as the buildings in the
neighbourhood of the House itself; these were set on fire by a Roman
soldier without orders, and the flames quickly spread to all the
chambers. Titus, in vain, commanded his troops to extinguish them; his
voice was drowned in the tumult; the Jews, with loud shrieks, fought
furiously in defence of the last bulwark of their nationality; but it
was now too late; the sacred building was in a blaze, and its obstinate
and heroic defenders perished beneath the ruins. After the Temple had
fallen, Titus tried to induce John and Simon, who had retreated into the
Upper city, to submit, and a parley was held at the bridge by the
Xystus[262]. These proud and blood-thirsty tyrants would not hearken to
him; the siege was carried on, and before long the whole upper city was
in his power. He ordered the Temple and the rest of Jerusalem to be
levelled with the ground, leaving only some of the western
fortifications to mark its former magnificence[263]. Thus ended the
political existence of the Jewish race.

The Christians came back from Pella to Jerusalem soon after its
destruction, and some of the Jews returned there to mourn over its
sacred ashes; so that the place was not wholly deserted even in the
darkest days of Trajan's persecution. Therefore tradition, as well as
the heaps of ruins, pointed out the site of the Sanctuary to Hadrian,
when, in order to humiliate the Jews and extinguish every hope of its
restoration, he built thereupon a temple to Jupiter Capitolinus.

When the idol temples were destroyed by Constantine the Great A.D. 332,
this too was demolished; but he took no care of Moriah, and allowed two
statues of Hadrian to remain there; neither did he attempt to clear it
of ruins, nor prevent its becoming a receptacle for rubbish; as if he
wished every trace of the departed glory of the nation to disappear.
However, the wretched descendants of David visited the place in
solitude, to anoint with oil and bedew with tears the 'perforated
stone,' which they considered a relic of their Sanctuary[264].

The accession of Julian the Apostate renewed the hopes of the Jews.
Wishing to prove the words of Scripture[265] false, he determined to
rebuild the Temple; and supplied the necessary funds, giving the
business in charge to Alypius of Antioch, Governor of Great Britain. The
Jews came in crowds to take part in the work, but their attempts to lay
the foundations were frustrated by flames, which issued from the
excavations with such peals of thunder, that the workmen fled
affrighted, mistaking in their ignorance a natural phenomenon for a
miracle[266].

The Emperor Justinian was the first to begin to clear away some of the
ruins from Moriah, A.D. 527. He endeavoured to identify the places
mentioned in the Gospels, and ordered a basilica to be erected on the
south side dedicated to the Presentation of the Virgin, not far from the
site of the Temple[267]. Some buildings were also constructed on the
north side, and perhaps on the east, as I will presently shew.

The Mohammedans, commanded by Khaled and Abu Obeida, besieged the Holy
City, A.D. 636. The Patriarch Sophronius capitulated to Omar himself,
and the new master of the place converted the basilica of Justinian into
a mosque (_Aksa_); purified the sacred rock (_Sakharah_), the ancient
threshing-floor of Araunah[268], and ordered a mosque to be built over
it, which was commenced A.D. 643. William of Tyre reports that in his
time Arabic inscriptions existed in the building, mentioning the date of
the foundation, the founder's name, and the cost of the work[269].
However, from the account of Said-Ebn-Batrik, it appears that the mosque
was afterwards enlarged by Abd-el-Malek-Ibn-Meruan, fifth Khalif of the
race of the Ommiades, who ascended the throne the 65th year of the Hejra
(A.D. 684), and died in the 86th (A.D. 705)[270]. His eldest son, Valid
or Elulid, embellished and enlarged the mosque, enriching it with a dome
of gilded copper, which he took from the church of Baalbek and placed
over the _Sakharah_[271]. The completion of the building must therefore
be attributed to him; although it was from time to time improved by the
Khalifs his successors, being considered second only in sanctity to
Mecca and Medina; so that when, during the Khalifat of Al-Moktadar (Hej.
229 = A.D. 950), the pilgrimages to the former place were interrupted by
the invasions of the Karmali, the _Kubbet-es-Sakharah_ took the place of
the _Kaaba_[272]. It is evident that the present mosque is not in every
respect identical with that built by Omar, from the words of Adamnanus
(an author of the eighth century) in a book on the Holy Places, compiled
from the accounts of Arculf, who had passed nine months at Jerusalem. He
says (speaking of the mosque) "but on that celebrated spot where once
the magnificent Temple stood, near the wall on the east side, the
Saracens have now meanly built with uprights and great beams, a
quadrangular house of prayer over some ruined remains, which they
frequent; it is large enough to contain three thousand men at
once[273]." William of Tyre however asserts that on the building seen by
him (which was different from the one described by Adamnanus), the name
of Omar its founder was inscribed. One of the existing Arabic
inscriptions seems, at first sight, to cause some difficulty; it runs as
follows: "May God render illustrious the great king, son of Meruan, who
enlarged this majestic temple, and grant him mercy." 65th year of the
Hejra (A.D. 684, the first of the reign of Abd-el-Malek[274]). This at
first sight appears to contradict the assertion made above, that Elulid,
son and successor of Abd-el-Malek, was the Khalif who added to the
splendour of the mosque, but it is very likely that if he completed the
work of restoration, he would inscribe not only the name of the first
founder Omar, but also that of his father. In other respects William of
Tyre gives no detailed information, in speaking of the mosque of Omar;
only alluding to it in general terms[275]. During my frequent visits to
the _Haram_, I often thought of copying all the inscriptions, but was
always pressed for time, and afraid that each visit might be the last;
therefore, as the examination of the subterranean vaults was by far the
most important matter, I thought it better not to turn aside to a work,
which others may easily execute by degrees.

It is evident that the mosque remained in the hands of the Mohammedans
from the commencement of Omar's building, A.D. 643, to the arrival of
the Crusaders, A.D. 1099. These soldiers of Christ, forgetful alike
of charity and mercy, slaughtered numbers of the followers of Islam
in the building[276]: they also converted the mosque _el-Aksa_
into a dwelling-house, and after altering the interior of the
_Kubbet-es-Sakharah_, consecrated it as a Christian church, on the
third day after Easter, A.D. 1143[277], under the name of Templum
Domini[278]; because the first Temple to the honour of God had been
erected by Solomon on that spot. Saladin, the champion of toleration,
magnanimity, and generosity[279], restored the worship of Islam in the
two mosques, A.D. 1187[280]; and from his time the _Haram-es-Sherîf_
has remained in the hands of the Mohammedans as one of their holy
places.

Selim I., Sultan of Constantinople, who conquered Syria and Palestine,
A.D. 1517, restored and improved the two mosques; doubtless the internal
and external mosaic decorations, with the various arabesque ornaments
still existing, are due to his liberality, and that of his successor,
Solyman I., with his favourite Sultana Rossellane; who, according to the
works of authors preserved in the Mohammedan archives, spent large sums
of money in adorning the whole of the _Haram_, and in erecting there
schools and other philanthropic establishments.

From the above narrative I draw the following conclusions: that history
and an unbroken chain of events prove that the whole _Haram-es-Sherîf_
is the ancient Mount Moriah; that the present mosque of Omar stands upon
the ancient threshing-floor of Araunah; that the levelled rock on the
north-west, and that rising at the barrack mark the position of the
tower Antonia, and that the mosque _el-Aksa_ is the original basilica of
Justinian.

Let us now proceed to a detailed examination of the whole area, within
and without, pausing at each object, which, either from its antiquity or
other causes, seems to merit special attention. The barrack, which,
according to ancient tradition, stands on the site of the Prætorium,
touches the western part of the north side of the wall enclosing
Moriah[281]; east of the barrack are buildings of the period of the
Crusades, or not much later; and near the north-east angle of the wall
the Pool of Bethesda[282]. Before proceeding to examine these places, we
must notice some objects in their immediate neighbourhood, which are
worthy of the most careful attention.

The Society of the Daughters of Sion bought (November, 1857) a plot of
land a few yards to the north-west of the barrack[283], on which stands
the north pier of the arch of the 'Ecce Homo[284];' and requested me to
survey it. In December, after removing with considerable difficulty the
accumulated rubbish of centuries, I came upon a small arch, close to the
larger one, which from its style, masonry, and materials, evidently was
part of the same building. I at once tried to examine the south side,
belonging to the Kusbeck dervishes, but as in this place excavations
were impossible, I was obliged to restrict myself to what appeared above
ground; and found, in the line of the large arch, a fragment of an
ancient wall, which from its form and position seemed to have belonged
to a pier supporting an arch corresponding to the one I had discovered.
Both the arches are semicircular, with a single archivolt composed of a
narrow fillet, a wide ogee moulding, and a band of the same breadth,
supported by a cornice, formed by two fillets, separated by an ogee
moulding. In the west face of the north pier is a semicircular recessed
niche, above a projecting cornice of the same width and pattern as the
one just described. Early in the year 1860 I took charge of the already
commenced buildings of the new convent of the Daughters of Sion, which
abut upon the arch mentioned above; and consequently had an opportunity
of examining the foundations of the piers, and convincing myself that
both their materials and masonry are of the Roman period; because the
blocks of stone, being neither rusticated nor clamped with iron or lead,
are not earlier than the time of Hadrian, and are not sufficiently
finished for so late an age as that of Constantine or Justinian. Some
think that the large arch was built before the capture of Jerusalem by
Titus; but how in that case could it have escaped the general
destruction of the city, and especially of the adjoining tower Antonia,
of which it was actually a part, in the opinion of those who believe
that from it our Lord was shewn to the people? But would the Romans, who
razed the tower and reduced the Temple and whole city to ruins, have
spared this insignificant building; or would the fire have left its
architectural features uninjured? The conformation of the ground itself
shews us that the arch could not have been standing at that time;
because, in its present position, there was then a valley or ditch,
separating Moriah from Bezetha. I found the rock, supporting the piers,
18 feet below the surface (as I have before stated), and to the north
and south are vaulted cisterns excavated in it, in the natural slopes of
Bezetha on one side and Moriah on the other. It is therefore highly
improbable that an arch would have been built in such a position with
reference to the fortress.

My predecessor had laid the foundations of the east wall of the convent,
but being ill acquainted with the nature of the ground at Jerusalem, he
discovered too late that they rested, especially on the north-east, on
unsolid ground, namely, on the vaulted roof of a subterranean building,
and as the walls rose they began to crack. Some of the masons were just
aware of the existence of the vault when I came; but no one had entered,
or measured it, or examined its whole length, so that I was the first to
do this and determine its age. In order to build a buttress at the
north-east corner, and at the same time to lay new foundations in a
small plot of land on the north, I was obliged to dig a hole, 18 feet
deep, below the level of the street, which rises towards Bezetha: and on
the 3rd of June came upon a layer of large slabs, each 4 or 5 feet long,
3 or 4 wide, and 9 or 10 inches thick. On removing two of these I found
a square hole, through which I entered, or rather fell, into the vault I
was looking for, but the intense heat and foul air compelled me to beat
a hasty retreat, and have the aperture enlarged to permit the air to
circulate more freely. Meanwhile I continued excavating a little to the
north, and met with the wall bounding the vault on that side, and found,
4-1/2 feet below its top, (measured from the outer surface,) the
original entrance; by which I obtained easy access for myself and
afterwards for many others.

The end of the east side of this gallery is just at the south-east angle
of the building on the north, separated from the body of the convent by
a small level street; and it terminates at the north-west angle of the
_Haram-es-Sherîf_; the floor throughout the whole length slopes slightly
and is formed in the rock: though the place was partly filled with earth
at the north end, and with filthy stinking mud at the south, I
thoroughly examined it and made a plan and elevation. At the entrance a
stone staircase, with steps about 2-1/2 feet wide, afforded an easy
descent; but unfortunately I was obliged to mutilate this, in order to
construct a pier to sustain the weight of the north-east corner of the
building above. The side walls are founded on the rock, which appears
above the level of the floor, at a distance of 69 feet from the
entrance, and gradually rises in them up to the southern extremity. They
are built of squared blocks, generally 3-1/2 feet long, and from above 2
to 3 high, perfectly fitted together. The semicircular vaulting is
admirable, being formed of oblong stones, 2-1/2 feet long, and 8 inches
high. Its exact regularity is its most striking feature.

I consider that this gallery was remodelled during the Roman period,
because some holes in it to admit the water are no part of the original
design. In the east wall is a semicircular arched door, built up, whose
width and height shew that it was formerly the entrance of a passage.
Along the side walls are semicircular headed apertures, which, together
with the two openings of the same shape, opposite one to another, near
the south end, are also no part of the original design. These two are
the beginnings of conduits, one of which ran eastward down to the Pool
of Bethesda; the other westward, into the Tyropoeon valley. The
accumulated water and filth did not allow me to make a close
examination of these, but, as far as I could see at the openings, the
masonry and shape of the stones led me to think that they formed part of
a Roman restoration. A short distance from these the gallery is closed
by a wall, entirely of Arab work; but I made a temporary opening in it,
and was able to continue my examination as far as the _Haram-es-Sherîf_;
the ground of which is about 8 feet above the top of the vault. The
quantity of water, earth, and filth, prevented my approaching the rock
at the end, and ascertaining the means of communication with the surface
at the _Haram_, but as I saw that the south-east corner was built up, I
have no doubt there had been access at that point. It immediately
occurred to me that the vault had originally been a passage between
Bezetha and Moriah, and was the 'Strato's Tower,' where Antigonus,
younger brother of Aristobulus, (the sons of John Hyrcanus,) was
murdered by the treacherous devices of the Queen Alexandra[285].

After completing the examination of the interior I applied myself to the
exterior, and found that the side walls rose one foot above the top of
the vault; the space thus made being filled with strong masonry, so as
to form a level surface of the same size as the gallery; which was
covered over along the whole length by large slabs, of the size
mentioned above; these, being firmly cemented together, bound into one
mass the two side walls and the vaulting.

At the same time, during the progress of the excavation another
interesting discovery was made, namely, the arched opening of a sewer,
3-1/2 feet wide and 4 feet high, by the side of the entrance to the
gallery on the east. It was choked up with dirt, but appeared to come
from the north, and ran along the east side of the vault of the gallery
as far as the middle of the Via Dolorosa, where it turned to the east.
Afterwards upon making further examinations I discovered that it bent
again towards the south, opposite to S. Ann's church, and came out on
the north side of the Pool of Bethesda. I followed it down for 112 feet
from the entrance, and found that after 22 feet the vaulting gave place
to a covering of large slabs. The floor rested upon made ground, and was
also formed of large slabs, strongly cemented together. I was unable to
continue my expedition by reason of the filth it contained, in which I
had a disgusting bath through a fall, caused by a sudden change of level
in the downward course of the sewer: so to make sure of its direction,
by the permission of the Pasha, I excavated in the middle of the Via
Dolorosa, opposite to the projecting north-east angle of the barrack,
and over against the tower commonly called the Antonia; and so verified
what I have already stated, and ascertained with greater certainty that
it rested upon made ground; another proof of the existence of a valley
in this part of the city. The sewer was made centuries after the first
construction of the gallery.

I have however not yet exhausted the objects of interest afforded by the
property of the convent of the Daughters of Sion. On continuing the
excavation to the north in order to lay new foundations, at a depth of
36 feet below the street, water was met with in abundance. At first I
supposed it had filtered through from some cistern, but as it did not
increase or diminish, I had the excavation deepened and enlarged, and
then discovered, to the north of the water, a perpendicular face of hewn
rock; and on digging deeper a small conduit cut in it, through which the
water ran from north to south. I was anxious to follow it in these
directions, but was prevented by the depth of the soil, the houses in
the neighbourhood, and above all by the customs of the country, and so
was obliged to restrict my researches to that spot, and even there the
owner did not allow me to do much, fearing to attract the attention of
the Mohammedans. I ascertained however that this water did not enter the
gallery, because after drawing off all that was found there, no more
appeared beyond what drained from the street after rain, while the
stream flowed continuously southward, yielding a constant supply for
building purposes. During the first three days its water was muddy and
brackish, but afterwards it gradually became clearer, but always had a
disagreeable taste and contained the same ingredients as that at the
springs of the _Hammam-es-Shefa_ and at the fountain of the Virgin in
the Kidron valley. From the day of its discovery (June 12, 1860), to the
end of January, 1861, it yielded a daily supply of from 200 to 250
gallons without any diminution, and was not affected by the fall of rain
or snow. At this time I resigned the charge of the works to a
master-mason, as all the difficulties had been overcome, but I am told
that the water continued to flow, and has done so abundantly up to the
present date (April, 1863). From several investigations which I will
mention in the chapter on the waters, I infer that this stream enters
the well of the _Hammam-es-Shefa_[286].

My plan and sections shew all the ancient cisterns, both excavated and
built, which occur in this small compass, and some remains of masonry
either of the age of the Crusades or of Arab work. This spot is an
excellent example of the great and frequent changes that the ground of
Jerusalem has undergone, and shews the difficulty that all have to
encounter, who attempt to form an opinion without taking them into
account.

Let us now examine the north side of the _Haram_. I have already
mentioned the depth of the foundations of the north walls of the
barrack[287]; but on the south the masonry rests upon the bare rock,
which here rises 35 feet above the level of the _Haram-es-Sherîf_ as is
shewn in the drawing[288]; its north face being 55 feet above the bottom
of the valley. Hence I cannot admit the common tradition that the
barrack stands on the site of the Antonia, but consider that the rock
above named is the true position of the _north_ side of the ancient
tower. This opinion, I think, is in accordance with all that Josephus
says of its height and situation, divided from Bezetha by a valley and
ditches[289]. If its southern side had coincided with that of the
barrack (which the height of the rock mentioned above entitles us to
assume), I cannot understand why it was built in so bad a position,
where it would be completely commanded by Bezetha, and from which it
could not have been separated by any work of defence. Besides, where are
we then to place the pool Struthium[290]? We must remember that the
shape of the Antonia was a square, each side being half a stadium; it
must therefore have extended to the north right across the valley. Now
if it had stood in this position, Titus would not have been obliged to
batter its walls with engines, and to throw up banks to support them and
to enable his troops to make the assault; because he could have poured
upon it such a storm of stones and combustibles from the summit of
Bezetha, that the garrison would have been obliged to evacuate so
untenable a post. Moreover, Josephus states, that the perimeter of the
Temple and the Antonia together was 6 stadia[291]. Now according to
every estimate of this measure, this condition cannot be satisfied
unless the latter is placed _within_ the north-west angle of the
_Haram_, as the description in Josephus seems to require[292]. We are
also told that it was razed by Titus; the place which I assign still
bears traces of this; and as a still stronger proof, there remains, in
the middle of the rock that has been thus levelled, a fragment of the
ancient Herodian wall; which I believe to have formed the south-east
corner of the inner buildings of the tower, i.e. of the Prætorium. On
the west is the house belonging to the Pasha, governor of Jerusalem, and
there I have seen, by means of excavations, the rock in the foundations
and, resting against it, the earth which conceals the valley filled up
by the Asmoneans. Lastly, there is a vault, which starts from the
position I assign to the Antonia and goes towards the present Golden
Gate. This I discovered by descending into two cisterns on the north of
the _Haram_, and by the fall of the west portion of an old wall, near
the north-west corner of the above gate, which, being washed away by the
rain, exposed the other end. I was not able to pass along its whole
extent, as it was nearly filled up by rubbish, but by examining the two
extremities at these places, I convinced myself that they belonged to a
continuous building. It is partly excavated in the rock, which however
sinks on approaching the east. The masonry of the side walls and
vaulting resembles that in the gallery below the convent of the
Daughters of Sion. The floor is also paved throughout the whole length,
as far as I saw. Josephus[293] mentions that a subterranean
communication existed between the Antonia and the east gate of the
Temple; consequently for this and the other preceding reasons I firmly
believe that I have placed the tower in the true position. I believe
then that the barrack stands in the valley; that is, upon the ancient
position of the Pool Struthium, which has been filled up, by the
materials cast into it by order of Titus, in making the bank to support
the Roman battering train, and by the ruins of the Antonia itself. Had
the tower occupied this position, the only side properly defended would
have been that towards the Temple, by the high face of rock, which in
that case ought to shew traces of having been hewn away towards the
north. What purpose could my 'Strato's tower' have then served, if it
had passed through the basement of the Antonia? It would have been
useless as a communication, because the tower itself would have done as
we

Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/41569