j9& 
 
L I E) RA RY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 U N I VLRS ITY 
 
 or 1 LLl N O IS 
 

THE 
 
 HOLY PLACES AT JERUSALEM, 
 
 OR 
 
 FERGUSSON'S THEORIES AND PIEROTTFS 
 DISCOVERIES. 
 
 BY 
 
 T. G. BONNEY, M.A. F.G.S. 
 
 FELLOW OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE. CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 "There is nothing (in Jerusalem Explored) that is new or valuable, except 
 some 1 3 pages devoted to the underground watercourse of the place, 
 and these so absolutely confirm all that I have ever written regarding 
 the site of the temple and of the Holy Places that I, at least, for one 
 have no desire to throw stones at Signor Pierotti." Mr Fergusson's 
 Letter to the Times, March 21, 1864. 
 
 LONDON: BELL AND DALDY. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE : DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. 
 
 1864. 
 
CambriUge : 
 
 PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY. M.A. 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
P K E F A C E. 
 
 Some time before I undertook the translation of Dr 
 Pierotti's work, I had gathered the outlines of Mr Fer- 
 gusson's theory from a hasty perusal of his article on 
 Jerusalem in Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible; at 
 that time it struck me as a very ingenious hypothesis, 
 which, however, required facts to corroborate it. When 
 I was engaged upon Jerusalem Explored, I soon saw 
 that Dr Pierotti's discoveries were fatal to Mr Fergusson's 
 theory; hence I was not a little startled on reading 
 the sentence which I have placed upon the title-page. 
 Some while after this a friend placed in my hands Mr 
 Fergusson's two works on Jerusalem, which I had not 
 up to that time read, pointing out to me at the same 
 time two glaring mistranslations. My suspicions being 
 aroused by the intemperate manner in which Mr Fer- 
 gusson expressed himself, I determined to examine care- 
 fully the original authorities which he quoted ; the result 
 of this undertaking is contained in the following pages. 
 I find that many of the blunders have already been ex- 
 posed by Mr Williams {The Holy City), by a critic in 
 The Edinburgh Review (vol. cxii. p. 423), and others ; 
 but as Mr Fergusson still reiterates his statements, and 
 as the refutations of them are scattered up and down 
 several works, I have thought myself justified in putting 
 the whole matter before the public in a connected form, 
 and have only to state that I have done my best to form 
 an independent and unbiassed judgment upon all the 
 passages. With regard to the authenticity of the sites 
 of the Holy Places, I express no opinion : all that I 
 
 1—2 
 
have endeavoured to shew is, that the Church of the 
 Resurrection stands upon the sjDot where Constantine 
 discovered a rock tomb, which was then beheved to be 
 the Holy Sepulchre. Neither do I think Dr Pierotti 
 faultless : he has certainly, in a few instances, made 
 more use in his illustrations than he should have done 
 (at least without acknowledgment) of the labours of 
 others ; but I believe that his ignorance of our language 
 and of the customs and laws of authorship has caused 
 the error; of deliberate dishonesty, despite all that his 
 foes have raked up against him, I still believe him in- 
 capable. The testimony of an unknown person like 
 myself may be of little value, but after living on terms 
 of intimacy with him for more than a year, and attending 
 him through a dangerous and well nigh fatal illness, 
 I feel bound to say that I have always found him all 
 that a Christian gentleman should be. 
 
 Plate I. The Haram es-Sherif, witli the sites of the Holy Places ac- 
 cording to Mr Fergusson, and the watercourses discovered by Dr Pierotti. 
 
 The names given hy the former only are printed iu italics. 
 
 Plate II. Sketch-plan of .Jerusalem. 
 
 In Plates I. and II, in order to avoid any misrepresentation of Mr Fer- 
 gusson's views, the main outlines have been traced from the plans given in 
 hia 'Notes,' and Dr Pierotti's discoveries sketched iu afterwards. 
 Description of Plate III, according to Arculf: — 
 
 A. Tegurium rotundum. 
 
 B. Sepulchrum Domini. 
 
 C. Altaria dualia. 
 
 D. Altaria. 
 
 E. Ecclesia. 
 
 F. Golgothana Ecclesia. 
 
 G. In loco altaris Abraham. 
 
 H. In quo loco crux dominica cum binis latronum crucibus sub 
 
 teiTa reperta est. 
 I. Mensa lignea. 
 
 K. Plateola in qua die ac nocte lampades ardent. 
 L. Sanctae IMariae Ecclesia. 
 M. Constautiniana basilica, hoc est martyrium. 
 N. Exedra cum calice Domini. 
 
 UIUC . 
 
Mr Fergusson's theory, that the cave in the rock 
 es-Sakharah is the Holy Sepulchre which was discovered 
 by Constantine, and held iu veneration by all Christians, 
 until transferred to the present site at the end of the 
 tenth or the beginning of the eleventh century, is un- 
 tenable, unless every one of the following three points can 
 be established: — 
 
 (I.) That this rock was not enclosed by the city walls 
 at the time of our Saviour's crucifixion. 
 
 (II.) That there is nothing in the cave itself, which 
 is incompatible with its having been used as a tomb. 
 
 (III.) That the descriptions of the Holy Sepulchre, 
 before the time at which Mr Fergusson supposes the 
 change of locality to have been made, accord with the 
 Sakharah, and not with the usually received site. 
 
 In considering the first condition, it will be necessary 
 to enter somewhat in detail upon the question of the 
 ancient courses of the walls of Jerusalem and the position 
 of the temple. 
 
 The historian Josephus has left us a tolerably minute 
 account of both these points, and as Mr Fergusson' gives 
 him so high a character for accuracy we may venture to 
 summon him as a witness. His statements are as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 " Jerusalem, fortified by three walls — except where it was 
 encompassed by its impassable raviues, for there it had but a 
 single rampart — was built, the one division fronting the other, 
 
 on two hills separated by an intervening valley Of the 
 
 three walls, the most ancient, as well from the ravines which 
 surrounded it, as from the hill above them on which it was 
 
 erected, was almost impregnable The second (wall) had its 
 
 beginning at the gate which they called Gennath, belonging to 
 the first wall. It reached to the Antonia, and encii'cled oidy 
 the northern quarter of the town. The tower Hippicus formed 
 tlie commencement of the third wall, which stretched from 
 
 ^ Essay on the Ancient Topoyraplvj of Jerusalem, pp. 4, 5. 
 
6 
 
 thence toward the northern quarter as far as the tower Pse- 
 phinus, and then passing opposite the monuments of Helena, 
 Queen of Adiabene and mother of King Izates, and extending 
 through the royal caverns (8(a cnrrjXaLoiv /JacrtXtKwv) was inflected 
 at the corner tower, near to the spot known by the appellation 
 of the Fuller's Tomb; and connecting itself with the old wall, 
 terminated at the valley called Kedron. This wall Agrippa had 
 thro^\•Tl round the new-built town, which was quite unprotected ; 
 for the city overflowing with inhabitants, gradually crept 
 beyond the ramparts, and the people incorporating with the 
 city the quarter north of the temple close to the hill, made a 
 considerable advance, insomuch that a fourth hill, which was 
 called Bezetha, was also surrounded with habitations. It lay 
 over against the Antonia, from which it was separated by a 
 
 deep fosse " 
 
 "The temple, as I have said, was seated on a strong hill. 
 Originally the level space on its summit scarcely sufficed for 
 the sanctuary and the altar, the ground about being abrupt and 
 steep. But King Solomon, who built the sanctuary, having 
 completely walled up the eastern side, a colonnade was built 
 upon the embankment. On the other sides the sanctuary re- 
 mained exposed. In process of time, however, as the people 
 "were constantly adding to tlie embankment, the hill became 
 level and broader. They also threw down the northern wall, 
 and enclosed as much ground as the circuit of the temple at 
 large subsequently occupied '." 
 
 Josephiis then speaks of the depth from which the 
 walls were built up, and gives a description of the temple 
 and its courts. In another of his works we find, after 
 some account of Herod's Temple, 
 
 "There was a large wall to both the cloisters, which wall 
 was itself the most pi-odigious work that was ever heard of by 
 man. The hill was a rocky ascent, that declined by degrees 
 towards the east parts of the city, till it came to an elevated 
 level. This hill it was which Solomon, who was the first of 
 our kings, by divine revelation encompassed with a wall : it 
 was of excellent wox-kmanship upwards and i-ound the top of 
 it. He also built a wall below, beginning at the bottom, which 
 was encompassed by a deep valley'^.' 
 
 He then describes the materials of which the wall was 
 built, the level surface at the top, and the size of the 
 square enclosure, a stadium each way'. 
 
 » Jewish War, V. 4. §§ r, -2 and 5. § i (Traill). 
 
 2 Ant. XV. II. § 3 (Whiston). 
 
 3 Ant. XV. II. §§4, 5, 7. 
 
Again : — 
 
 " On the north side (of the temple) was built a citadel 
 (Antonia), whose walls wei-e square aud strong and of ex- 
 traordinary firmness The city lay over against the temple, 
 
 in the manner of a theatre There was also an occult 
 
 passage built for the king; it led from Antonia to the inner 
 temple at its eastern gate i." 
 
 From these passages the following conclusions may be 
 drawn : — 
 
 (i.) That the temple was placed on the summit of tlie 
 hill. 
 
 (ii.) That the area about the sanctuary was enlarged 
 towards the east by building a wall up from the valley 
 below to the level (or nearly so) of the summit of the hill. 
 
 (iii.) That the temple hill was separated by a fosse or 
 valley on the north from the rest of the city, which there- 
 fore lay round about the temple like a theatre. 
 
 (iv.) That the space occupied by the temple was a 
 stadium each way. 
 
 Let us now apply these tests to the site proposed for 
 the temple by Mr Fergusson. He places the temple area 
 at the south-west corner of the Haram^, on a space about 
 600 feet square; bounded on the north by the south wall 
 of the platform of the Kubbet es-Sakharah, and on the 
 east by the west wall of the vaults at the south-east 
 angle of the Haram. 
 
 This position does not accord with (i.). For, if the 
 temple had been erected here, it could not be described 
 as placed on the summit of the hill, because the Sakharah 
 and the platform around it are higher, and the ground 
 must formerly have sloped gradually upward from south 
 to north ^ 
 
 It does not accord with (ii.), for very little ground would 
 be gained by a wall in the position of Mr Fergusson's 
 east wall, because the rock on which this rests appears 
 above the floor of the vaults, and the large cistern Birket 
 es-Sultan (on the north-east of the Aksa, and about seventy- 
 five feet from the supposed wall) is wholly hewn out of the 
 rock*. This wall, less than forty feet high, could not be said 
 to be built up from a great depth, and instead of a steep 
 
 ^ The context seems to warrant reading 'outer' for 'inner' in this 
 passage. It is but the change of one letter. 
 ^ Essay, p. 8 et seq. See Plate I. 
 
 3 Jertisakm Explored, Vol. I. p. 77. Vol. 11. Plate iv. 
 •• lb. Vol. I. pp. 96, 97. Vol. II. Plate xi. 
 
8 
 
 slope below there would have been a nearly level plateau, 
 300 feet wide, before the brow of the rapid descent into 
 the Kidron valley was reached. A good deal of license 
 must doubtless be conceded to Josephus, but with the 
 most liberal allowance for Oriental exaggeration, how can 
 this position be reconciled with his " dizzy depths," and 
 similar expressions^? 
 
 Next, allowing for one moment that the Antonia is 
 rio-htly placed by Mr Fergusson, let us examine (iii.). Where 
 is the deep valley or fosse cutting off the fortress from the 
 rest of the city ? In the place which it ought to occupy is 
 the rocky platform around the mosque, with its numerous 
 rock-hewn cisterns. Unless we believe Dr Pierotti utterly 
 unworthy of credit, we are compelled, after reading his 
 description of the Haram and examining his plans ^ to 
 acknowledge that a valley cannot have traversed this part 
 of the Haram area, because he discovered the rock a 
 small depth below the surface, at so many points, that no 
 room is left for it. But on the contrary, Dr Pierotti found 
 distinct traces of a valley just outside the Haram wall on 
 the north. Place the valley close to the Sakharah, and 
 the city cannot correctly be said to lie about the temple 
 like a theatre. Suppose that the temple and the Antonia 
 occupied the present Haram area, and the historian's 
 description is accurate. 
 
 Finally, we have to consider (iv.). Here I at once 
 admit that the site proposed by Mr Fergl^sson, so far as 
 the temple is concerned, appears to fulfil the required 
 condition, and the Haram es-Shenf does not. But can 
 Josephus be implicitly trusted in his measurements? In 
 his account of the third wall, he says that it had 90 
 towers 20 cubits square, divided by intervals of 200 
 cubits, and that the perimeter of the city was 33 stadia*. 
 Now, 90 X 20= 1800 cubits; adding 18000 cubits for the 
 sum of the intervals we have as the whole length of the 
 third wall 19800 cubits, or about 48 stadia. That is, the 
 part is very much gi-eater than the whole ! Mr Fergusson 
 himself does not hesitate to admit this*. As moreover it 
 appears that a wall enclosed OpheP, Mr Fergusson must 
 either abandon his theory about the extension of the wall 
 
 ^ Ant. XV. II. §§ 3, 5. Cf. Jewish War, iv. 5, § 4. 
 
 ' Jerusalem Explored, Vol. I. Ch. iii. Vol. Ii. Plates iv. xi. 
 
 3 Jewish War, v. 4. § 3. 
 
 * Essa;/, p. 43. Mr Fergusson in bis remarks on the second wall does 
 not appear to be aware that 14, not 40, is, according to the Greek, the 
 number of towers in that wall. 
 
 5 Jerusalem Explored, Vol. i. pp. 25, 26. 
 
to the north of the present enclosure, or allow Josephus 
 to be wrong again — this time in defect. In the matters 
 of the size of the temple-gates and the population of the 
 city he sets the historian's statement aside (rightly in my 
 opinion) without a scruple \ 
 
 Again, in order to obtain the right perimeter for the 
 temple and the Antonia, he is obliged to make that for- 
 tress project considerably to the west of the temple. But 
 surely this is a very strange position for a fortress; the 
 outworks down in a valley, commanded by the opposite 
 hill on the west, and built upon the made ground near 
 the Hammam es-Shefa^. Again, just on the east there 
 would have been the Sakharah, quite large enough to 
 afford cover to the troops of an enemy, and form an ex- 
 cellent point d'ajjpui for him in a siege ; a worse strategic 
 position could not be selected. If the temple did occupy 
 the south-west corner, surely Mr Thrupp's^ conjecture 
 that the Antonia stood upon the Sakharah is far more 
 probable. Most scholars will, I think, agree with me 
 in saying that arguments founded on numerical state- 
 ments in ancient writers, are, unless supported by un- 
 designed coincidences and other evidence, of no great 
 value ; the sources of error being so many and so frequent. 
 Hence, since the only point in favour of Mr Fergusson's 
 theory is contradicted by the Talmud, unsupported by 
 the vision temple of EzekieP, and unsustained by any 
 topographical evidence whatever, it must be set aside. 
 
 Before passing on to condition ii. we will glance at 
 some additional facts stated in Jerusalem Explored^, which 
 seem fatal to Mr Fergusson's theory. 
 
 (1) In the foundation of the present eastern wall 
 of the Haram Dr Pierotti discovered masonry much more 
 ancient than that of Herod, consisting of roughly squared 
 stones, fastened together by tenon and mortise, without 
 metal clamps or mortar. These were some twelve feet 
 cast of the present wall and at a depth of fourteen feet, 
 just in the position that they would occupy in a wall 
 rising in a series of steps against the face of a hill. 
 
 (2) At various points all round the Haram enclosure 
 masonry is found, the whole of which apparently belongs 
 to the age of Herod the Great. 
 
 ^ Essay, pp. 23, 46. 
 
 " Jerusalem Explored, Vol. I. p. 18. This applies to the Essay Plan ; in 
 that in the Dictlemary of the Bible the outer wall of the Antonia would 
 touch the Sakharah. * Anticnt Jerusalem, p. 315. 
 
 ■* Ezek. xl. — xlii. •' Jerusalem Explored, Vol. i. Ch. iii. 
 
10 
 
 (3) Mr Fergusson's foundation of the first wall of 
 Josephus' is a causeway supporting an aqueduct, which 
 is probably of the date of Solomon. 
 
 (4) The position he assigns to the south-east part 
 of Agrippa's wall, making a double wall all along the east of 
 the temple, is at variance with the statement of Josephus, 
 who says that the city was defended by one wall on every 
 side, except the north. 
 
 (5) The north-eastern angle of the enclosure over- 
 hung the Kedron ravine I 
 
 (6) We read that a subterranean passage led from 
 the Antonia to near the east gate of the temple. The 
 remains of a passage were found by Dr Pierotti extending 
 from near the rock in the north-east angle of the Haram 
 to the neighbourhood of the Golden Gate. We also find 
 mention of another passage called Strato's Tower ^ leading 
 from the outside into the Antonia. Dr Pierotti discovered 
 a large gallery on the north-east of the Haram, terminat- 
 ing at the wall. I do not of course mean to assert that 
 every one of these points taken singly is conclusive, but I 
 think that their collective evidence is very strong. 
 
 II. 
 
 We now come to the second condition — that the dis- 
 tinctive features of the cave allow us to suppose that it 
 may have been a tomb. 
 
 Before discussing this point, a few words must be said 
 on the ordinary construction of Jewish rock-hewn tombs 
 about the age of the Herod s. They appear generally 
 to have consisted of a vestibule, communicating with one 
 or more inner chambers ; in the walls of which were either 
 sepulchral niches, or long deep vaults; so that in the 
 former the corpse lay (in a recess) parallel to the wall 
 of the chamber, in the latter at right angles to it. Oc- 
 casionally both these kinds of vaults occur in the same 
 catacomb ■*. Tombs are also found in which there is only 
 a single niched Mr Fergusson's assumption that these 
 open niches must have contained sarcophagi is gratuitous", 
 
 ^ Essay, p. 17. ' Jeicish War, vi, 3. § 2. 
 
 ^ Ant. XIII. ir. § 2. Jewish War, 1. 3. § 3. 
 
 * See plans of Tombs of Kings and Judges, Jerusalem Explored, Vol. it. 
 Plates Ivi. and lix. What right has Mr Fergusson to assert {Dictionary of 
 Bible, art. Tomb, Vol. Iil. p. 1533) that because Dr Pierotti's plan, made 
 after excavations in the tombs, contains a chamber more than De Saulcy's, 
 it is probably incorrect ? 
 
 " Jerusalem Explored, Plates Ivi. and lix. 
 
 « Diet. Bible, Vol. in. p. 1529. 
 
11 
 
 though probably they were used for embahned bodies. 
 So far as we can infer from the description given by the 
 Evangelists our Lord's tomb was one of these caves with 
 a single niche on the right side and perhaps a vestibule in 
 front: such a tomb may still be seen on the south of 
 Jerusalem ^ 
 
 Let us now examine the cave in the Sakharah. Dr 
 Pierotti discovered it to be a double cave, with an upper 
 and a lower chamber, joined by a pipe, so that its shape 
 is something like a dumb-bell ; and he found in other 
 parts of Palestine similar caves in connexion with ancient 
 threshing-floors. Can any instance be produced of a tomb 
 made after this pattern ? Mr Fergusson seems to think 
 that the actual grave was a deep vault, of the second 
 class described above, in the side of the tomb. I confess 
 that the accounts appear to me to describe a niche of the 
 former I That, however, is a matter of little moment. 
 Again, is it not rather strange to find a tomb within 200 
 feet, and a place of execution within 400 feet, of the 
 Jewish temple ? We may also feel some surprise that the 
 Mohammedans, if they believed the Sakharah to be the 
 tomb of Christ, treated it so differently from the other re- 
 puted burial places of their great saints. In the mosques 
 above the graves of the Patriarchs at Hebron, of David 
 on Sion, and of Samuel at Neby Samwil, cenotaphs are all 
 that the ordinary worshipper is allowed to see ; the vaults 
 below are far too sacred for the vulgar eye. But passing 
 by this, the recent discoveries of Dr Pierotti appear to 
 me to render Mr Fergusson's theory untenable. He 
 found that the aqueduct (which, coming from Etham, 
 crosses the Tyropoeon valley by a causeway) enters the 
 Haram nearly opposite to the south-west corner of the 
 platform of the Kubbet es-Sakharah. Thence a branch 
 of it is diverted to the fountain in front of the Aksa, 
 whence it descends to the lower cave under the Sakh- 
 arah; from this cave a conduit runs northward for about 
 120 feet, when it is joined by another conduit from 
 a cistern on the west, after which it enters a large cis- 
 tern; from this another conduit descends towards the 
 east, and at no great distance from the Golden Gate 
 enters one of a chain of cisterns, the northernmost of 
 which receives a conduit coming from the Pool of 
 Bethesda; from the southernmost of these an important 
 
 ^ Jerusalem, Explored, Vol. ii. Plate Ivi. fig. 5, 
 • ^ i. e. those of Arculf, Willibald, and Bernard. 
 
12 
 
 conduit runs eastward, passes under the Haram wall, and 
 then turning soutliward can be traced at intervals down 
 to the Pool of Siloam. Besides these there are a number 
 of cisterns and conduits in the Haram, the connexion of 
 which with the above system can be more or less distinctly- 
 ascertained. The majority of these appear to be very 
 ancient, and, as we cannot suppose that works of such 
 magnitude would have been undertaken at any period 
 since the days of Herod, they must at all events be prior 
 (how much it matters not) to the date of the crucifixion. 
 Hence they prove, beyond a possibility of doubt, that 
 whatever the Sakharah cave may have been, it cannot 
 have been a tomb. 
 
 III. 
 
 We have next to consider whether the earlier descrip- 
 tions of the Holy Sepulchre are more applicable to the 
 traditional site or to the Sakharah. First comes the 
 account of Constantine's church in Eusebius. 
 
 Here I take exception, not only to Mr Fergusson's 
 conclusions, but also (in several cases) to the rendering 
 of the original on which he founds them. He states^ "In 
 Chapter 29 the Emperor commands that a house of prayer 
 worthy of the service of God should be erected ivund 
 the Saviour's tomb, — oIkov evKry^pLov OeoTrpeTrfj dficfil to 
 acoTrjpLov avrpov." I deny that dfxcfil, with the accusative, 
 necessarily means round — a more probable meaning is hy^. 
 If it were followed by the dative it would be another 
 thing. 
 
 The next topographical notice of importance is found 
 in chapter 38 ^ 
 
 "And indeed at the very martyry of the Saviour {i. e. tlie 
 spot wliicb. was a proof of the truth of the Passion and Resur- 
 rection), the New Jerusalem was erected, facing that celebrated 
 of old, which after the polhitiou of tlie Lord's death paid the 
 penalty in its impiovis inhabitants by imdergoing the most 
 extreme desolation'*. Opposite, then, to this, &c." 
 
 ^ Notes on the Site of the Holy Sepulchre, p. 45. 
 
 ^ See Liddell and Scott's Lexicon, dfi(pl. Donaldson's Grceh Grammar, 
 P- 195. 
 
 •* Kal drj Kar' avrb rb (TUT-qpiov /napTijpiov, i) via KarecTKevd'^eTO 'lepou- 
 ffaXij/x, di/T(7rp6cra)7ros rfj wdXat. ^oijjjj.ivrj, -q fKra Trjv KvpioKTdvov p.Lai(poviav 
 ipi)/j.ias e7r' ^(Txara TrepLTpaTrftaa, biKrjv Iricre hvaae^wv olKTjrbpwv — Taurg 5' 
 ovv dvTiKpvs, K.T.X. {Vitu Vonst. Lib. iii.) 
 
 * I must ask the reader to pardon the baldness of my translations 
 throughout ; I have striven to give as nearly as possible the exact meaning 
 of the original. 
 
13 
 
 I confess that this passage conveys to my mind an 
 idea very different from that which it conveys to Mr Fer- 
 gusson's. It seems to me to describe a place on the 
 western hill (Sion), commanding a view across the Tyi'o- 
 poeon of the devastated site of the temple. Surely this, 
 not the western hill, would in a rhetorical figure represent 
 Jerusalem ; this, the pride and hope of the Jew, the place 
 of which Christ had prophesied that not one stone should 
 be left upon another \ 
 
 So also in the j)arallel passage from Socrates''^ — 
 
 " The mother of the emperor built a magnificent house of 
 prayer at the place of the sepxilchi*e (iv tw tov ix-vrjiiaToq totto)) 
 and called it New Jerusalem, having erected it opposite to 
 the old and deserted city." 
 
 Mr Fergusson^ thinks that these Greek words confirm 
 his view, as if he read eirl tw tov /x.f ////.aro? tottw. 'Ev does 
 not imply that it was built over the tomb; it might mean 
 that it was built in it; but of course this meaning is im- 
 possible here. We must also remember that the western 
 hill is just the only spot on which Titus left any buildings 
 of importance standing, so that less truly than any other 
 part could it be said to have undergone the most extreme 
 desolation, while from the accounts of the destruction of 
 the temple, that quarter must have been left utterly waste. 
 
 Again, Eusebius goes on to say*, — 
 
 "And indeed as a kind of head of the whole, first of all 
 
 he began to adorn the sacred cave, that divine tomb This, 
 
 then, first, as the head of the whole, the munificence of the em^ 
 peror began to adorn with choice columns and very much 
 ornament, beautifying it with decorations of all kinds. Thence 
 he passed on to a very large place, lying open to the pure air, 
 which shining stone, laid level upon a foundation, was adorning, 
 surrounded (as it was) on three sides by long enclosures of 
 cloisters. For on to the opposite side of the cave, that, I 
 
 1 S. Matt. xxiv. 1. 
 
 * Eccles. Hist. Lib. i. c. 17. 
 
 3 Notes on the Site of the Hohj Sepulchre, p. 46. 
 
 * /cat drj Tou rrapTos uiawep tlvo. Ki(paXr)v, rrpoiTOV aTrdvTwv to iepbv avTpov 
 iK6(T/JLei. iiv7j/j.a iKitvo dea-Kicriov, k. t. \. (Ch. xxxiii.), tovto f^ih ovv TrpQrov, 
 (baaveL tov wavrbs Ke^aXrjv, i^aip^rois kIoctl, Kdafiu) re TrXdcxTU} KareirolKik' 
 Xev ?} ^aaiK^ws cptXorifiia, tra.vToioi.s KaWuirla/JLaai KaracpaiSpvovaa (ch. 
 xxxiv.). AU^aive 5' e^f;s iirl Trafip-ey^dr) xtDpoj', els KaOapbv aWpiov avawe- 
 TafiivoV ov by] \lOos Xapiirpos Kari(TTpwp.ivos iw' eSdcpovs cKoap-ei, p-aKpols 
 irepibpbp.01% (TTOuiv €K rpinXevpov Trept.ex<'il-'-ivov (ch. xxxv.). T(p yap Karau- 
 TiKpv irXevpi^ Tju dvTpov, 6 07] irpbs dviuxovra rjXiov eJjpa, b [SaaiXeios aw- 
 TJTTTO cews, 'ipyov iilaicriop els v\pos Eiretpov ypfxifov, fiijKovs re Kal TrXdrovs 
 iirl nXelaTOv evpvfojj.evov k. t. X. (ch. xxxvi.) 
 
14 
 
 mean, which looked towards the rising sun, the royal temple 
 was joined : a magnificent work, raised to a boundless height, 
 and extending very far both in length and breadth." 
 
 The words tm 'yap KaravriKpi) irXevpu) k.t.X. are thus 
 translated by Mr Fergusson', "For opposite that side of 
 the cave, which looks towards the rising sun, is placed 
 the Basilican Temple," which is entirely wrong; and his 
 commentary on the passage is no better. " I do not know 
 how he (Eusebius) could find words to express more clearly 
 the relative position of the two buildings. The junction 
 of Kara with dvriKpv may not in itself be sufficient to 
 prove that the one building was on a different level 
 with the other, but it is just such a compound as would 
 be used by an author having that idea present in his 
 mind!" 
 
 I confidently assert that there is not one word in 
 the above description to countenance the notion that 
 Constantine built tiuo churches. It is evident that the 
 projecting rock, in which the cave was excavated, was 
 in some way or other encased or ornamented with marbles, 
 that it stood in a kind of court, either square or nearly 
 circular in form, surrounded on three sides by cloisters, 
 with a magnificent church, of considerable breadth as well 
 as length, forming the eastern side, and perhaps approach- 
 ing nearer to the rock than the cloisters. These conditions 
 Mr Fergusson thinks satisfied by his Anastasis church 
 (the Kubbet es-Sakharah), his long church on the south- 
 east, (the axis of which, if produced, lies some 230 feet 
 north of the centre of the Anastasis church), whose 
 festal gateway (the Golden Gate) by way of giving a 
 pleasing finish to so grand a basilica has its axis inclined 
 at an angle to that of the basilica I 
 
 Again, Mr Fergusson says' " Eusebius then concludes 
 with a short chapter (the 40th) entitled 'of the number 
 of his offerings,' in which the words ' fiapTvpiov rrj'i ava- 
 a-rdo-eox; ' again occur, but certainly here as applied to all 
 that is found in the preceding chapters. The words do 
 
 ^ Notes, pp. 48, 49 : cf. Preface, p. 6. Mr Fergusson does not seem to 
 be aware that the usual sense of KaravTiKpv is "right opposite to," 
 " facing." The instances upon which I suppose he relies are in Homer, 
 wliere the word is used as a preposition. 
 
 2 Plan in Essay. I see that in his last published plan, Smith, Diet. 
 Bible, Vol. I. Jerusalem, this " crick in the neck" is altered, and the whole 
 basilica is twisted northward so as to be in the same line with the gateway, 
 and consequently do more violence to Eusebius' description. See Plate I. 
 
 ^ Notes on the Site of the Holy Sepulchre, p. 5 1 . 
 
15 
 
 not occur in those chapters in which the basiHca is de- 
 scribed or spoken of." The words of Eusebius are rovBe 
 jjuev ovv rov veoov, acorrjplov avaa-rdaeco^ ivap<ye<i dvicm] 
 fxapTvpiov ^a(xCkei<;, k.t.X. The preceding chapters con- 
 tain a description of the basilica (vem), and if these words 
 do not assert that it was a fxaprvpLov t/;? dvaa-rdcreoo^;, I 
 do not know what they mean/ 
 
 We may also quote the words of Eusebius in another 
 work.^ " Is it not surprising to see this rock standing 
 alone in the centre of a level space with a cavern in- 
 side it?" 
 
 And again those of Cyril ^ — 
 
 " The cleft which was then at the door of the Salutary 
 Sepi^lcbre and was hewn out of the rock itself, as is cus- 
 tomary here in the fi-ont of sepulchres. For now it appears 
 not, the oviter cave having been hewu away for the sake of the 
 present adornment; for before the sepulchre was decorated by 
 royal zeal there was a cave in the face of the rock." 
 
 Surely these words can never have been spoken of 
 the Sakharah. 
 
 The passages in the Onomasticons of Eusebius and Je- 
 rome*, stating that " the sepulchre is situated on the north- 
 ern parts of Sion," are disposed of® as " at best but a mere 
 assertion without any detail or circumstantial evidence by 
 which to test its credibility, and just such an expression 
 as any meddling monk or commentator, copying the book 
 after the first crusade, might easily alter, supposing it to be 
 a mistake." But, really, they are independent witnesses. 
 Mr Fergusson also tries to shew, as an alternative, that 
 Jerome might have used Sion to express all Jerusalem, by 
 quoting a use in the Placentine Pilgi'im, which is not 
 really a parallel. Besides, could the Sakharah, under any 
 circumstances, be said to be on the northern parts of 
 Sion ? 
 
 The next witness cited by Mr Fergusson is the Bor- 
 deaux Pilgrim, of whom he says^ " His testimony to the 
 
 ^ I may also remark that Mr Fergusson, Notes, pp. 67, 68, takes the 
 ■words fjied' as (TriiXas) eir aiTrjs fi4crT}s irXareia! dyopSis to mean tha,t "in 
 front of the Propylaea was a broad market-place ; they do not however 
 necessarily imply that the market-place was close by. " In the direction of 
 the very middle of the broad market" is more literal. 
 
 " Theophania (Lee's Transl. p. 199. Carab. 1843). 
 
 ^ Catech. Lect. Xiv. (Library of Fathers, Vol. 11. p. 169.) Other pas- 
 sages, in which the Holy Places are mentioned, are cited in Williams' 
 Holy City, Vol. 11. p. 253. 
 
 •* Svb. V. "Golgotha." ■' Essay, p. 90. " Notes, p. 52. 
 
16 
 
 locality is that passing outwards from the Sion Gate, a 
 person going to the Neapolitan Gate^ outside the wall, 
 ' foris murum,' has the house of Pilate 'down in the val- 
 ley on the right, and the Sepulchre and Golgotha on the 
 left,' thus confirming my views to the fullest extent." 
 Further on we find (p. 67), " Taking the text, however, 
 as it stands, the Pilgrim could not have turned to the 
 right when he went out of the Sion Gate, or passed round 
 the wall by the Citadel and the Jaffa Gate, first because 
 there is no route in that direction, and because then the 
 sepulchre and the house of Pilate, wherever situated, must 
 have been both on his right hand. On the contrary, he 
 must have turned to his left, as any one would naturally 
 do, and passing along the bi'ow of Sion he would leave 
 the house of Pilate down in the valley on his right, where 
 the tradition of the middle ages generally placed it, After 
 this, whether he went to the Golden Gateway (which is, 
 I believe, the one he calls Porta Neapolitana, i.e. of the 
 New Jerusalem, mentioned by Eusebius), or to the Da- 
 mascus Gate, as Dr Robinson insists, he would have had 
 Golgotha on his left, and passed within a stone's throw 
 of the buildings of Constantino, if they were where I have 
 placed them; and I defy Dr Robinson or any one else 
 to translate the passage fairly and make sense of it, 
 unless he adopts literally and entirely the view I have 
 promulgated." 
 
 Very good : let us examine the original. It runs as 
 follows: (First is a description of the site of the Temple, 
 the " lapis pertusu«," and the house of Hezekiah king of 
 Judah, then) 
 
 " Moreover^ to you going out into Jerusalem that you may 
 
 ^ Item exeunti in Hierusalem, ut ascenclas Sion, in parte sinistr.^, et 
 
 deorsum in valle juxta murum, est piscina, quis dicitur Siloa In eadera 
 
 ascenditur Sion, et paret ubi fuit domns Caiphfe sacerdotis, et columna 
 adhuc ibi est in qua Christum flagellis ceciderunt. Intus autem intra 
 murum Sion, paret locus ubi palatium habuit David et septem synagogaj, 
 quae illic fuerunt, una tantuni remansit, reliquEe autem arantur et semi- 
 nantur, sicut Isaias propheta dixit. Inde ut eas foris murum de Sione 
 euntibus ad portam Neapolitanam, ad partem dextram, deorsum in valle 
 sunt parietes, ubi domus fuit sive prjetorium Pontii Pilati. Ibi Dominus 
 auditus est antequam pateretur. A sinistra autem parte est monticulus Gol- 
 gotha, ubi Dominus crucifixus est. Inde quasi ad lapidem missum est 
 cripta. ubi corpus ejus positum fuit et tertia die resurrexit. Ibidem modo 
 jussu Constantiui Im[>eratoris basilica facta est, id est, Dominicum mirjs 
 pulcbritudinis, habens ad latus exceptoria unde aqua levatur, et balneum, 
 a tergo ubi infantes lavantur. Item ab Hierusalem euntibus ad portam, 
 quae est contra Orientem, ut ascendatur in montem Oliveti, &c. Itinerariuni 
 a Burdigala Ilkrusakm usque, pp. 591 — 594. {Vetera Eomanoruvi Itinera, 
 Wesaelingius. Amsterdam, 1735). 
 
17 
 
 ascend Sion, on the left side and below in the valley near the 
 wall is a pool which is called Siloa...In the same (way) Sion 
 is ascended and (the place) appeal's where was the house of Cai- 
 aphas the priest, and a column is still there at which they beat 
 Christ with scourges. But within, inside the Sion wall, appears 
 the place where David had a palace, and seven synagogues 
 (appear) which were there (but) one only is left, for the rest 
 are ploughed and sown over, as Isaias the prophet hath said. 
 Thence in order to go outside the icall (i. e. to follow the coui-.'^e 
 you would take in quitting the city) to those going to the 
 Neapolis Gate, on the right hand, below in the valley are walls 
 where was the house or prsetorium of Pontius Pilate. There the 
 Lord was examined before he suffered. But on the left hand is 
 the little hill Golgotha, where the Lord was crucified. Thence, 
 about a stone's throw distant, is a crypt, where his body was laid 
 and (whence) on the third day he rose again. There lately by 
 the order of the Emperor Constantine a basilica has been built ; 
 a 'Lord's Church' of wondrous beauty, with reservoirs at the 
 side whence water is drawn up, and a bath behind, where infants 
 are washed (baptized)." 
 
 Afterwards lie speaks of the east gate leading from 
 Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives, and of other matters. 
 
 That the pilgrim is a sorry scholar I readily allow; 
 but as an author's meaning may be plain though his Latin 
 be bad, I maintain that " foris murum" (rect : foras murum) 
 cannot mean " when making a tour of the walls or of any 
 part of them." When foris (or foras) is used as a pre- 
 position with a verb of motion, it simply expresses the 
 act of going outside (from within) of the word which it 
 governs; therefore "ut eas foris murum" does not in the 
 least imply that you ever get outside the walls, only that 
 you start with the intention of going. So much for the 
 tour of the city! Again, with regard to the Neapolis 
 Gate: it is very remarkable that the last place but one 
 before Jerusalem, mentioned by the pilgrim, is " Civitas 
 Neapoli" (now Nablous): it therefore seems very likely 
 that he first entered Jerusalem by the north gate (now 
 the Damascus Gate), and so naturally used it afterwards 
 as a point of reference. He appears to me to have de- 
 scended from near the S.W. corner of the temple area\ and 
 mounted the hill of Sion (which name he plainly applies to 
 the western hill) in the direction of the Coenaculum ; whence 
 any one turning northward, and going straight through the 
 city towards the Neapolis (Damascus) Gate, would pass 
 near to the Castle of David (the present citadel), and then 
 
 » See Plate II. 
 
18 
 
 leave the ruins of the PiEetoriuin below him on the right 
 and the present site of the Holy Sepulchre on the left. 
 I therefore maintain that the pilgrim speaks of only one 
 church, standing on the traditional site, and that Mr 
 Fergusson has neither translated the passage fairly nor 
 made sense of it. 
 
 There is also a very important description of the Holy 
 Places of Jerusalem, by Jerome, in the account of Paula's 
 journey' — 
 
 "Why delay I loDger? Leaving on her left the mauso- 
 leum of Helena, who, queen of the Adiabeni, had aided the 
 people with coin in a time of famine, she entered Jerusalem 
 ...Having entered the sepulchre of the resurrection, she kis.sed 
 the stone which the angel had removed from the door of the 
 monument... Going out of this, she ascended Sion, which 
 is turned into a citadel or watch tower. David formerly 
 conquered and rebuilt this city... There was shewn to her 
 the column sustaining the porch of a church stained with 
 the Lord's blood, to which (He) was said to have been bound 
 and scourged. The place was shewn where the Holy Spirit 
 descended upon a hundred and twenty souls of the believers." 
 
 Here we again have mentioned in order, the Sepul- 
 chre, the Citadel, and the Ccenaculum. The Citadel is 
 about seventy feet vertically above the Sepulchre, and 
 stands on the highest part of Sion proper, the latter l}dng 
 on the northern slope. 
 
 The words of Antoninus Placentinus^ are supposed by 
 
 ^ Ad Eustochium virginem, Ep. cviir. (Ed. Migne). Quid diu moror ? 
 ad laevam mausoleo Helense derelicto, quae Adiabenorum regina in fame 
 populiun frumento juverat, ingressa est Jerosolyniam iirbttm...Ingressa 
 sepulchrum resurrectioni-!, o.=!Culatur lapidem quern ostio moiiumenti amo- 
 verat angelus....Unde egrediens ascendit Sion, quie in arcem vel specu- 
 1am vertitur. Haiic urbem quondam expugnavit et re£edifaca\-it David... 
 Ostendebatur illi columna Ecclesise porticum sustinens infeota cruore Do- 
 mini ad quam vinctus dicitur flagel'atus. Monstrabatur locus, ubi super 
 centum viyinti credentium animas Spiiitus Sanctus descendisset. 
 
 * Itinerarium Antonhii Placcntini, xvii — xxiv. ; Ugolini Thesaurus, Tom. 
 vir. Mccxiii— XVI. " Portam civitatis (qufe cohaeret portse speciosae, quiB 
 fuit templi, cujus liminare et tribulatio stat) inclinanter proni in teriam 
 ingressi sumus m satictam civitatein, in qua adoravimus Domini monumeu- 
 tum. Ipsum monnmeutum, in quo corpus Domini positum fuit ; in natu- 
 ralem excisum est petiam,...Et ipsum monumentum in modum ecclesise co- 
 opertum ex argento; et ante monumentum idtare positum. A monumento 
 usque Golgotha sunt giessus So. Ab una parte ascenditur per gradu^, 
 unde Dominus ascendit ad crucifigendura. Nam in loco ubi fuit crucifixus, 
 apparet cruor sanguinis. Et in ipso latere petras est altare Patriarchsp Abra- 
 ham... Juxta ipsum altare est crypta, ubi ponis aurem, et audis dumina 
 aquarum ; et jactas ponium aut aliud quod natare potest, et vadis ad Siloa 
 fontem ubi illud recipies. Intra Siloa et Golgotha credo esse milliarium : 
 nam Hierosolyma aquam vivam non habet, prteter in Siloa fonte. De Gol- 
 
19 
 
 Mr Fergusson to favour his theory. Let us then examine 
 them. He, contrary to the usual practice of travellers, 
 approached Jerusalem from the east, ascending from the 
 Jordan by Bethany to the Mount of Olives ; whence he 
 descended to Gethsemane and the valley of Jehoshaphat, 
 entering the city by the east gate. After describing what 
 he saw during this journey he continues, 
 
 " Bending low unto the ground, we entered the gate of the 
 city (which is close to the ' Beautiful Gate' which belonged to 
 the temple, whose threshold and step (I) is standing) into the 
 holy city, in which we adored tlie monument of the Lord. 
 The monument itself, in which the Lord's body was laid, is 
 hewn out of the living I'ock." 
 
 After this the pilgrim describes the way in which the 
 monument is adorned, then continues, 
 
 " And the monument itself is like a church covered over 
 with silver, and an altar placed before the monument. From the 
 monument to Golgotha are 80 paces. In one part thei-e is an 
 ascent of steps, by which the Lord went up to be crucified. For 
 in the place where he was crucified the stain of the blood ap- 
 pears. And close by the side of the rock is the altar of the 
 
 patriarch Abraham Near the altar itself is a crypt, where 
 
 you place your ear and hear running water; and you throw 
 in an apple or anything that can swim, and go to the foun- 
 tain of Siloa, where you will find it again. Between Siloa 
 and Golgotha, I believe, there is a miles distance ; for Jeru- 
 salem has no springs of water, except at the fountain of Siloa. 
 From Golgotha to where the cross was found are 50 paces. 
 In the basilica of Constantine. builfc close by the monument or 
 Golgotha, in the atrium of the basilica itself, is a little chamber, 
 
 where the wood of the cross is kept Hence we went uji 
 
 into the tower of David, where he composed the Fsalter. It 
 is very lai-ge ; in each of the chambers, which are quadrangular', 
 there is a tower, and carved work, without a roof. ...... Thence 
 
 gotha usque ubi inventa est Crux sunt gressus 50. Tn basilica Constantini 
 cohjerente circa monuraentum, vel Golgotha, in atrio ipsius basilica;, est cu- 
 biculuin, ubi liifiium crucis reconditum est...Inde ascendimus in Turrim 
 David, ubi decautavit P.salteriuin. Magna est valde: in singulis coenaculi.i, 
 quae quadrangula, turris est : et opus sculptuin, non habens tectum... Deinde 
 veiiinius in basilicam Sion.. De Sione usque Basilicam S. Mariae, ubi con- 
 gregatio magna monachoiuiTi, ac mulierum mensse innumerabiles, lecta 
 languentium plus quiiique millia ad minus tria: Et oravimua in Prastorio, 
 ubi auditns est Dominus: et in eo basilica S. Sophias. Ante ruinas TempH 
 Salomonis sub platea aqua decurrit a fonte Siloa. Secus porticum Salorao- 
 nis in ipsa basilica estsedes, in qua sedit Pilatus, quando audivit Dominum... 
 Inde veninius ad aram, ubi fuit anti(iuitus porta civitatis: in ipso loco 
 sunt aquae putrid<e, in quas missus est Jeremias Propheta. Ab arcu illo 
 descendentibus nobis ad fontem Siloa per gradus multos, est ibi basilica, &c. 
 
 2—2 
 
20 
 
 we came to the basilica of Siun. From Sion, as far as the 
 basilica of S. Mary, where there is a large assembly of mouks, 
 and innumerable tables of women, fi'om three to five thousand 
 beds for sick folk. And we prayed in the Prfetorium, where 
 the Lord was tried, and in it is the basilica of S. Sophia. 
 
 " Before the ruins of the Temple of Solomon water runs 
 down from the fountain of Siloain, under the street. Near 
 Solomon's porch, in the basilica itself, is a seat, on which Pilate 
 
 sat when he tried the Lord Hence we came to an altai", 
 
 where in foimer times was the gate of the city. In the place 
 itself are putrid waters, in Avhich Jeremiah the prophet was 
 thrown. From that arch we descend by many steps to the 
 fovmtain of Siloa. There is a church." 
 
 Mr. Fergusson argues from the above passage that the 
 Holy Places were in the Haram ; that the basilica of S. Mary- 
 stood near them on the vaults at the S. E. angle ; that the 
 mention of the crypt in connexion with Siloam proves 
 beyond a doubt that the description is not applicable to 
 the present ohuroh, and that the crypt is the Bir-Arruah\ 
 On the contraiy, this passage seems to shew that the 
 pilgrim visited first the Holy Places on their present site, 
 then ascended Sion to the present castle, thence went along 
 the hill to the Coenaculum, or its neighbourhood, and then, 
 crossing the Tyropoeon, visited Justinian's Church, now the 
 Aksa, with the ruins of Solomon's Temple and of the 
 Prsetorium; after which he descended (by the Gate of 
 Huldali ?) to Siloam. Hence this passage seems to be 
 far more intelligible, if we suppose the Holy Places to be 
 on their present site, than it would be if they were in 
 Mr Fergusson's positions ^ There are conduits from the 
 neighbourhood of the Holy Sepulchre, which run down 
 to Siloam', so that his argument on that point is worth 
 very little, and I may also observe that the pilgrim's 
 words shew clearly that the crypt was not 171 the Se- 
 pulchre. 
 
 ^ Mr Fergusson does not quote, i'ssai/, p. 128 (published 1847), *he words 
 which I have placed in Italics ; this omission is noticed by Mr Williams, 
 Holy City, Vol. 11. p. 99 (pub. 1849). In the dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 
 I. art. 'Jerusalem' (pub. 1861) and in his Notes, p. 53 (pub. 186 () he again 
 quotes Antoninus, still suppressing these words. The omission is most 
 important, for from Siloam to the Sepulchre (measured on the map) is 5^ fur- 
 longs, but from Siloam to the Sakharah is only 4^. The Roman mile is 
 about 7i furlotigs. Will Mr Fergusson, who is so ready at asking expla- 
 nations from others, clear up this suppressio veri ? He also assumes that 
 the gressus of the pilgrim is the Roman pace of nearly 5 feet. 
 
 2 Plates I. and II. 
 
 ' Jt7-usaleM Explored, Vol. l. pp. 176, ?6o. 
 
21 
 
 Tlie inflated account given by Procopius of the Mary 
 Church of Justinian is too long to be inserted here, and 
 does not contain any topographical indications so minute 
 as exactly to fix its site. All are agreed that it stood 
 somewhere in the southern part of the Haram area ; Mr 
 Fergusson thinks just north of the vaults at the south- 
 eastern angle, Dr Pierotti, with many others, believe that 
 it has been incorporated into the mosque El-Aksa. The 
 only passages which in any way help us in identifying the 
 building, are the following: 
 
 " The hills, however, had not sufficient space for the com- 
 pletion of the work according to the Emperor's order, but 
 a foui-th part of the Temple was deficient, towards the south 
 and east, just where it is lawful for the priests to perform 
 their rites. They laid the foundations at the extreme f)f 
 the flat ground, and raised a building of equal height witli 
 the work. When they had brought it as high as its extremity, 
 they placed over the intervening space arches from the top of 
 the walls, and connected the building with the remainder of 
 the Temple's foundation. In this way the Temple is in part 
 founded on solid rock, and in part suspended, the Emperor's 
 power having contrived a space in addition to the hill \" 
 
 Procopius then speaks of the great width of the roof, 
 of the difficulty of finding fit stone for the columns of the 
 church, which was obviated by the discovery of a proper 
 kind in the nearest mountains, of which " extraordinary 
 columns of great size" were made, resembling in their 
 colour the brightness of flame (aTro/jLCfjiov/biivcov tc5 -^^poofiari 
 'TTvpc^ Tiva <f)X6ya ) two of which, of unusual magni- 
 tude, stood before the door of the church. 
 
 In the accounts written by Adamnanus^ at the dicta- 
 tion of Arculf. after a description of the walls and gates, 
 in which it clearly appears that the western hill was called 
 Sion in his time^ we find the following notice: 
 
 " But in that famous place, where was formerly the splen- 
 didly built temple, in the neighbourhood of the eastern wall, 
 the Saracens have now erected a qxiadrangular house of prayer, 
 which they have meanly constructed with iipright boards and 
 large beams over certain remains of ruins (and) themselves 
 
 1 De JEdificiis JustAvmni, Lib. v. c. 6 (I use the translations given by 
 Wiiliams, Holy City, Vol. ii. p. 369). 
 
 '^ Adamnanus Dc Lon's Sancli.t {Acta Sanct. Ord. Benedict. Saac. ill. 
 pars 7, p. 502. Achery and MabiUon edd. 1672). 
 
 ^ i)e Locis Siinrtis, p. 503, cf. p. 50S, " Porta "David, &c." 
 
22 
 
 frequent (to tlie exciusiou of othei-s) : which house (as it is said) 
 is able to contain about 3,000 Uieu at once'." 
 
 Further on comes a desciiptiou of the Church of the 
 Resurrection, and an account of the Sepulchre itself. This 
 is rather too long for quotation, but I select the most im- 
 portant parts : 
 
 " In the middle of this inner rotunda is a kind of round liut 
 (tegoriuin), hewn out of one and the same rock, in which thrice 
 three men can pray standing, and from the top of the head of 
 a man not of short stature to the roof of tliat small house is a 
 fojt and a half in measure upwards"." 
 
 He then says that the opening of the cave is to the 
 east, that the exterior is encased with choice marble and 
 supports a golden cross, that within the chamber, on the 
 north side, is the Lord's sepulchre, a recess about seven feet 
 long and about three palms above the level of the floor ; 
 then, as if to prevent any mistake from the use of the 
 terms tegorium and domuncula, and the way in which the 
 seiDulchre is described as standing by itself, he states that 
 it may be correctly called a cave, " speleeum sive spelunca." 
 
 A figure is then given as a rough sketch of the relative 
 positions of the ditferent Holy Places ^ In which we have 
 the sepulchre placed in the middle of the round church 
 (E). The church of Constantine (M) on the east of it, 
 though the line running east and west through the centre 
 of the round church, passes a little to the north of its 
 axis. West of (M) between it and (E) is a small building 
 (F), called Golgothana Ecclesia, and sovith of (F), so as to be 
 south-east of (E) and south-west of (M) is a fourth church 
 (L), called Sanctas Maria^ Ecclesia, the buildings of which 
 extend westward south of (E). Arculf also states that the 
 Golgotha church is on the spot Avhere the cross was placed, 
 and Constantine's basilica or the Martyrium on that where 
 the three crosses were discovered. 
 
 Further on Arculf* mentions a basilica on Mount Sion 
 (in montis Sion superiore campestri planicie) in which 
 
 ^ "Caeterum in illo fanioso loco, uhi quondam templum magnifice con- 
 structum fuerat, in vicinia muri ab oriente locatum, nunc Sarraceiii quad- 
 rangulam orationis domum, qviam subrectis tabulis et magnis trabibus 
 super quasdam ruinarum reliquias vili fabricati sunt opere, ipsi frequentant, 
 quae utique domus tria honiiuutn m'.llia simul (ut fertur) capere potest." 
 
 2 "In medio spatio hujus interioiis rotundae domus rotutidum inest in 
 una eademque petra excisuin tegoriuin, in quo posaunt ter terni homines 
 stantes irare, et a vertice alicujus non brevis staturse stantis hominis usque 
 ad illius domunculaecamaram pes et semipes mensuraxa in altuin exteuditur." 
 
 » Plate III. 
 
 * De Locis Sanctis, p. 508. 
 
23 
 
 were the place of the Lord's supper, the scene of the 
 descent of the Holy Ghost, the column at which our Lord 
 was scourged, and the spot where the Virgin died. 
 
 Before offering any remarks upon this passage and 
 Mr Fergusson's manner of dealing with it, I will quote 
 two other notices of the Holy Places. The first of these is 
 from the account of S. WillibakP, found in a history of his 
 life, written by a Nun. This is neither so minute nor so 
 clear as that of Arculf; but we learn from it that the 
 sepulchre was hewn out of a rock, which stood above 
 ground, and Avas square in the lower part and narrow in 
 the upper "quadrans (i.e. quadrata. marg.) in imo, et in 
 summo subtilis." That the door was on the east side, and 
 the Vjed (lectu.s), on which the Lord lay, on the north, on 
 the right hand to any one who entered in. 
 
 The other testimony is that of Bernard the Monk^ 
 who writes: 
 
 "Thei'e (at Jerusalem) is a» hospice, where all ai^ enter- 
 tained who, sjieakiiig the Latin tongue, approach that place 
 from a motive of devotion ; by which stands a church in honour 
 of Saint Mary, possessing a most noble library, through the eeal of 
 the aforesaid Emperor (Charlemagne), with twelve houses, fields, 
 vineyards, and a garden, in the valley of Jehosliaphat. Before 
 the hospice itself is a market-place, for which each person traf- 
 ficking thei-e pays two aurei annually to the person who main- 
 tains it. Within this city, pa.«sing over other churches, four 
 churches are conspicuous, joined one to another with connect- 
 ing walls; that is to say, one to the eatt, which has Mount 
 Calvary and the place Avhere the Lord's cross was found, and 
 is called the basihca of Coustantiue ; anotlier to the south; 
 a third to the west, in the middle of which is the Lord's sepul- 
 chre, having nine columns surrounding it, between which 
 are walls built of the very best stones. Between the aforesaid 
 four churclies is a jjaradise without a roof, where walls glitter 
 with gold; the pavement, however, is laid with most valuable 
 stone. . . ." 
 
 ^ Vita S. Willihaldi, Acta Sand. Orel. Bcned. Saec. in. Pars i, p. 375. 
 
 " Bernardus Monachus Dc Loch tianrtis, ihid. p. 524. 
 
 "Ibi habetur ho.'^pitale, in qiui suscipiuntur onmes, qui cau.sa devotionis 
 ilium adeunt locum linraa loquentea Romana : cui adjacyt ecclesia in honore 
 Sanctis Marioe, nobilissimara habens Bibliotliecara studio praedfcti Impera- 
 tons cum Xil mansionibus, agris, vineis et horto in valle Josaphat. Ante 
 ipsum hospitale est forum, pro quo unusquisque ibi negotians in anno 
 Bolvit duos aureos illi, qui illud providet. Infra banc civitatem, exceptis 
 aliis ecclesiis, quatuor eniinent ecclesia?, mutuis sibi parietibus coluBrentes : 
 una videlicet ad Orientem, quic habet montem Galvariue, et locum in quo 
 reperta fuit Crux Domini, et vocatur Basilica Constantini : alia ad meridiem ; 
 tertia ad occidentem in cujus medio est sepulcrum Uomini, habens ix co- 
 lumnas in circuitu sui, inter quas consistunt parietes ex optiiuis lapidibus... 
 Inter praedictas igitur iv ecclesias est paradisus sine tecto, cujus parietea 
 auro radiant : pavimentum vero lapide sternitur pretiosissimo." 
 
24 
 
 We have now to see how far Mr Fergusson's hypotheses 
 fall in with the descriptions which have been quoted. 
 
 Let us first consider the Mary Church of Justinian. 
 The sites assigned to this are not very far apart. Dr 
 Pierotti, with many authors, follows Mr Williams, and 
 supposes it to be incorporated in the Mosque El-Aksa; 
 while Mr Fergusson places it just on the north of the 
 vaults at the south-east angle of the Haram. 
 
 The following is a brief summary of the considerations 
 which have led him to this conclusion: 
 
 (1) "The Aksa is built on the very centre of the area 
 of the Jewish Temple, which site was in ruins 
 and covered with filth when Omar took the city'." 
 
 To this we reply by denying that he has succeeded in 
 proving the statement in the first clause. 
 
 (2) "Arculf describes the Mohammedans as having 
 erected a square house of prayer, capable of con- 
 taining 3,000 persons, in the immediate vicinity 
 of the southern wall within the enclosure of Solo- 
 mon's Temple, on some ancient ruins, and adds 
 the curious architectural peculiarity that the pil- 
 lars were connected by beams, wishing apparently 
 to point out the difference between this practice 
 of the Mohammedans and the arches or archi- 
 traves of Christian edifices ^" 
 
 In answer to this, I for the present call attention to 
 three points. 
 
 (i) "quadrangulam" is assumed to mean necessarily 
 
 square, 
 (ii) " in vicini^ muri ab oriente " is translated " in 
 
 the immediate vicinity of the southern wall" ! 
 (iii) " subrectis tabulis et magnis trabibus " is taken 
 
 to imply " pillars connected with crossbeams " ! 
 
 (3) "It has no apse' and seven aisles." Dr Pierotti 
 and M. De Vogu<? believe that they have discovered 
 traces of an apse, and (with Mr Williams) have 
 shewn that the outer aisles were added at a 
 later date. 
 
 (4) " It faces north and south, which is not the case 
 with any other Christian church in the East." 
 This naay be true, but as there is great variation in 
 the orientation of churches, it of itself is worth 
 very little. 
 
 (5) "The Mohammedan historians one and all de- 
 
 ' Notex, p. 7,0. ' Fs^iny. p. 146. * Notes, 30. 
 
25 
 
 scribe the building of the mosque El-Aksa by 
 Abd-el Malek Ibn Merwan in the year 68 Hejra 
 (a.D. 688) with a minuteness that leaves no doubt 
 either as to the site or as to the dimensions or 
 form of the work : and the style of the architec- 
 ture is exactly what we know it to have been in 
 that early stage of the Saracenic development." 
 
 The historical question we will discuss presently; as 
 for the architectural, Mr Catherwood', Dr Pierotti'', and 
 the Comte de Vogiie^, all of whom have personally ex- 
 amined the Aksa, are of opinion that although the build- 
 ing has been greatly altered by the Saracens, it was 
 originally a cruciform church, and that many parts of it 
 belong to the age of Justinian. 
 
 I may add that the words of Procopius appear to imply 
 that the vaults were built solely to support the building, 
 whereas the vaults at the south-east angle of the Haram 
 are outside the walls of the Mary Church, as laid down on 
 Mr Fergusson's plan. 
 
 Mr Fergusson concludes by asking why Justinian chose 
 so bad a site, and one so far removed from the other Holy 
 Places (as now assigned), giving a reply in the following 
 words *: " It appears impossible to give a satisfactory 
 answer to these questions, unless we assume that he chose 
 this spot as the only available spot in the immediate 
 proximity of the Holy Sepulchre and the Golgotha, — 
 among the most holy group of churches on the face of the 
 globe, and which onl}'^ wanted a Mary Church to make it 
 complete, according to the then newly-introduced and 
 fashionable doctrines of Mariolatry." The difficulty of the 
 site is applicable to either position of the church, but 
 perhaps the key may be found in the expression attri- 
 buted to Justinian on the completion of S. Sophia, ' I have 
 vanquished thee, Solomon.' 
 
 With regard to the testimony of Arculf, we may re- 
 mark: — 
 
 (1) That the passage about the temple is quite 
 distinct from the account of the Church of the 
 the Resurrection. 
 
 (2) That the tomb had its door to the east ; the 
 
 ^ Essay, p. ii8. 
 
 ^ Jervsalem Explored, Vol. i. p. So. He found also that the columns in 
 the Aksa, though coated with plaster, were made of red Palestine breccia. 
 ■* Le Temple de Jerusalem, Plate xxx. 
 * Essaij, p. 125. 
 
26 
 
 opening in the Sakharah is to the south-east, 
 rather more to the south than the east. 
 
 (3) Nine men could stand to pray in the cave. This 
 Mr Fergusson says is impossible in the present 
 sepulchre \ Its dimensions are, I believe, about 
 seven feet by five, so that its area is about thirty- 
 five feet, a space Avhich would even now just 
 allow nine men standing room, so that there is 
 no impossibility in that number having stood in 
 prayer (stantes orare) within it, when its size had 
 not been diminished by a lining of marble. The 
 area of the Sakharah cave is about 600 feet I 
 
 (4:) The positions assigned to the churches on Mr 
 Fergusson's plan do not accord at all with that 
 given by Arculf 
 
 (-5) Mr Fergusson^, using Bernard to " correct" Euse- 
 bius, translates his statement thus : " Besides 
 others, there are four great churches connected 
 one with another by walls : one towards the east, 
 in which is Mount Calvary, and one in the place 
 in which the cross was found, which is called the 
 Basilica of Constantine ; another to the south, 
 and a fourth to the west, in the middle of which 
 is the sepulchre of the Lord." To which he 
 appends the following note, " I use Willis' trans- 
 lation, lest I should get into a scrape. — See Archi- 
 tectural Histori) of Holy Sepiddire, p. 136." At 
 page 264 of this work, we do find this translation, 
 but at the same time we have the following note 
 given, which Mr Fergusson ought to have quoted : 
 "I have substituted /"owrf/i for tertia in translating 
 this passage, as the readiest mode of correcting 
 the evident obscurity of it; for as it stands four 
 churches are mentioned, and only three described ; 
 but there are other obvious instances of careless 
 transcription in it which are not worth discus- 
 sion." I must, however, protest against so vio- 
 lent an altei'ation in the text, which not only 
 requires "quarta" to be read for "tertia," but also 
 "altera qua3 habet" to be inserted before "locum." 
 The obscurity is, I venture to think, not very 
 great, although the writer has expressed himself 
 clumsily. His statement in fact amounts to this : 
 " in the city is a great church in honour of S. Mary : 
 
 ^ Essay, p. 151. " Catherwood, BartleWs Walls, p. 167. 
 
 ' Notes, p. 49. 
 
27 
 
 there are four remarkable churches in the cit}' ; 
 oue to the east, called the Basilica of Con- 
 stantine ; another to the south ; and a third to 
 the west, containing the sepulchre." So that, in 
 reality, he includes the church of S. Mary in the 
 four, the la.st three being numbered first, second, 
 and third respectively, because they were in the 
 writer's mind the tirst, second, and third, in the 
 group that he was adding to the first-named church 
 to complete the four. Thus interpreted, the de- 
 scription is plain, and the only difficulty is that the 
 Golgotha is placed in the Basilica instead of in 
 the southern church, a point of no great im- 
 portance, as from a comparison of the accounts, 
 there appears to have been some little confusion 
 about the position of this place. The church of 
 S. Mary, there is no doubt, is the same as, or 
 on the site of, that described by Arculf, and pro- 
 bably identical with that afterwards known as 
 S. Maria de Latina, said by William of Tyre^ to 
 have been founded (i.e. restored) by the Amalfi 
 merchants. 
 
 I have yet to refer to the passages in the Annals 
 of Eutychius, Patriarch of Alexandria, which I omitted in 
 their proper place, in order not to interrupt the course of the 
 argument. He'^ gives an account of the surrender of the 
 city to Omar by the Patriarch Sophronius, of the visit of 
 the Khalif to the Holy places, and of the foundation 
 of a mosque, from which the following extracts are made. 
 
 "The gate of the- city having been opened to him, Omar, 
 with his compauious, sat in the church of the Resurrection, 
 And when the hour of prayer was come, he said to Sophronius 
 the Patriarch, ' I desire to pray.' To whom the Patriarch said, 
 ' O commander of the faithful, pray where you are.' Omar said, 
 'I will not pray here.' Being then conducted out into the 
 church of Constantine, he .spread a carpet in the middle of the 
 church, but Omar said, 'Here too I will not pray'; and having 
 gone out on to the steps at the east duor of the church of Con- 
 stantine, he prayed there on the steps alone." 
 
 Omar then tells the Patriarch the reason why he re- 
 fused to pray in the church, which was through fear that 
 the Mohammedans would, after his death, make it a reason 
 for taking the church from the Christians; and gives him a 
 
 ' Lib. XVIII. c. 4. Cf. Gesta Franc, expugn. Hierus. c. xxiv. 
 * Eatychii Annales, Tom. 11. p. 184 (Oxf. 1656). 
 
28 
 
 deed confirming liim in the possession of the church. The 
 history then continues : 
 
 " Then Omar said also to him, ' There is now a thing due 
 to me from you by the right of the treaty. Grant me a place 
 on which I may build a temple.' To whom the Patriarch said, 
 * I give to the commander of the faithful a site for a temple 
 (which the Greek Emperors were unable to build) that is the 
 rock on which God spake to Jacob, which Jacob called the Gate 
 of Heaven, but the Israelites the Holy of Holies' — it is in the 
 middle of the ground, and was the holy place of the Israelites, who 
 hold it in great veneration, and, wherever they may be, turn their 
 faces towards it when praying; — on this condition, that you 
 write a decree for me that no other house of prayer (Moham- 
 medan) be built in Jerusalem.' Omar then wrote a decree on 
 this matter, which he gave to him (the patriarch). Indeed, 
 when the Romans had embraced the Christian religion, and 
 Helena, the mother of Constantine, had built chui-ches at Jeru- 
 salem, the site of the rock and its neighbourhood had been laid 
 waste, and so left. But the Christians heaped up dust on the 
 rock, so that there was a large dunghill over it. And so the 
 Romans had neglected it, nor given it that honour which the 
 Israelites had been wont to pay it, and had not built a church 
 above it, because it had been said by our Lord Christ in the 
 Holy Gospel, ' Behold, your house shall be left unto you deso- 
 late'; and beside, ' There shall not be left one stone upon ano- 
 ther that shall not be cast down and laid waste.' On this 
 account the Christians had left it deserted, no church having 
 been built upon it. Then the Patriarch Sophronius took Omar 
 by the hand and led him to the dunghill." 
 
 It is then described how Omar and his followers 
 cleansed the rock, until it appeared in a clear space. 
 Then when some proposed to build the temple, so that 
 the rock should be in the direction of the Kiblah (i.e. 
 south of the structure), Omar replied that it should be 
 built so that the rock should be behind it^ 
 
 Mr Fergusson makes the following remarks^ upon the 
 Mohammedan buildings which he conceives are supported 
 by the passage quoted above and the statements of other 
 historians. " I assert that the Sakrah which Omar dis- 
 
 1 This is still the Arab tradition of the Sakharah. Jerusalem Explored, 
 Vol. I. p. 291. 
 
 * The Latin translation of this passage is "vernm ita templum stm- 
 emus ut petram ad partem ipsius posteiiorem colloceinus." Mi' Fergusson 
 has misunderstood this passnge in ta]<ing it to imply that the rock was 
 inside the mosque. It was no doubt just outside, on the North, so that it 
 did not interfere with the kiblah of Mecca. I do not understand Aral)ic, 
 but I have enquired from a friend who does; he informs me that I have 
 given tiie correct meaning of the original. 
 
 •* K-<srn/ p. 130. 
 
29 
 
 covered was not this Sakrah ; that the mosque he built 
 still exists to the eastward of the mosque el-Aksa, and 
 bears his name to this day, that the Aksa is the building, 
 and only one of Abd-el-Malek ; and, further, that no 
 eastern author to whom I have had access, who wrote 
 before the time of the Crusades, ever ventures to assert 
 that either Omar or Abd-el-Malek or any other Moslem 
 had anything to do with the building of the Dome of the 
 Rock." In reply to this, I must observe that the descrip- 
 tion of Eutychius appears to me to require Omar's mosque 
 to have been erected by (probably to the south of) a 
 rock, of some size, projecting above the ground with a 
 tolerably level space around it. The greater part of the 
 Aksa stands on vaults; and the adjacent mosque of Omar 
 (some seventy feet by twenty, a poor thing for the only 
 Mohammedan temple in Jerusalem) has no rock in it, 
 and can never have had, as it is close to the south wall of 
 the city. Moreover, Eutychius says that Abd-el-Malek Ibn 
 Merwan 
 
 " enlai'ged the temple at Jerusalem until he brought the 
 rock within it, and ordered men to make pilgrimage to Jeru- 
 salem, but forbad them to go to Mecca because of Abdullah 
 Ibn Tobar'." 
 
 And again, that Al-Waled Ibn Abd-el Malek 
 
 " built up the temple at Jerusalem, and adorned it with 
 plaster, the rock being placed in the middle of the temple, which 
 (rock) he surrounded with a building which he overlaid with 
 marble ; and also he pulled down and then put up over the 
 rock the dome, made of copper and gilded, which had belonged 
 to the Christians, on the church of Balbec ; he ordered men to 
 make pilgrimages to the rock^" 
 
 As I suppose that no one will deny that this last 
 passage refers to the Sakharah, and as it seems in the 
 highest degree improbable that the historian can be 
 speaking of more than one rock (for he would surely have 
 explained that the rock mentioned in one passage was not 
 the same as that mentioned in a former), I think that 
 a comparison of these three passages shews that the tes- 
 timony of Eutychius renders Mr Fergusson's theory in the 
 highest degree improbable. 
 
 It may be asked how it is that so little is said about 
 the Aksa in the Christian writers. I imagine that the 
 reason is that the bviilding was soon appropriated by the 
 Mohammedans, who infringed upon Omar's compact ^ and 
 
 ^ Annaks, Vol. ii. p. 364. ^ Hid. p. 372. ' Hid. p. 291. 
 
30 
 
 that it then ceased to be of any interest to the Christian 
 pilgrim. It is remarkable how insignificant in their eyes 
 even the memorials of the Jewish religion seem to have 
 been ; a brief allusion is, at most, all that is given to the 
 ruins of the temple ; by which they hurry to the goal of 
 all their toil and travel, the scene of the Passion and 
 Resurrection of their Lord. 
 
 I might go on to quote from Sgewulf^ William of Tyre, 
 and other medieval authors, to shew that their accounts 
 harmonize perfectly with those cited above, and contain 
 nothing that would lead us to suspect that the Holy Places 
 had ever occupied any other site than that reverenced by 
 them, which unquestionably is the same as that now in 
 possession of the Christians; but their testimony would 
 perhaps be unavailing, as Mr Fergusson would probably 
 impute to them either ignorance or fraud ^. 
 
 His objections to the present sepulchre as being within 
 the former circuit of the walls, and as being entirely con- 
 structed of masonry, have been disposed of by Professor 
 Willis, Mr Williams and Dr Pierotti. The last named 
 found the rock in two places under the marble with which 
 the structure is cased. There is still a niche in the north 
 wall of the so-called tomb, which marks the site of that 
 described by early travellers, and it is a curious fact, that 
 according to the plans the tomb-chamber is placed un- 
 symmetrically with regard to the outer walls of the build- 
 ing: a most singular arrangement if the tuhole building is 
 a mere structure of masonry. 
 
 In tlie above remarks I have entirely passed over the 
 architectural part of Mr Fergusson's argument for two 
 reasons ; first, because I have never seen the places my- 
 self, and second, because Mr Fergusson says"\ "In so 
 
 ^ Apropos of this authors name I must point out another instance of 
 Mr Fergusson's reckless manner of making assertions. In his Jissai/, p. 103, 
 he says of the Dome of the Rock. "It is not now wanted to prove tliat the 
 building was or was not built by Hadrian, or Constantine, or Justinian, but 
 wliether it was erected by Constantine or the Mahometans. No one I 
 believe, claims or can claim it for the first of these Emperors, and no one, 
 that I know of, except Srewulf, ever claimed for the latter." SiEwulf's words 
 are: "Quidam autem dicunt civitatem fuisse a Justiniano Imperatore 
 restauratam et templum Domini similiter sicut est adhuc : sed illi dicunt 
 secundum opiniovem et von secundum verifatem." Again Essay, p. 183, he 
 translates: " Descenditur autem de Sepulcro Yiovami quantum arcus balista 
 bisjactare potest ad Templum Domini " by two boic shots. 
 
 ^ £ssai/, p. 182. 
 
 •' Notes, p. 54. I should however mention that Catherwood, Dr 
 Pierotti, and Count De Vogii^, who have seen the place, consider that the 
 columns in the Dome of the Rock bear evidence of having been brought 
 from some other building ; and the latter attributes the older parts of the 
 Aksa and the Golden Gate to Justinian. 
 
31 
 
 far as the argument is concerned I would be prepared, if 
 necessary, to waive the architectural evidence^ altogether, 
 and to rest the proof of what is advanced on any one of 
 the four following points : 
 
 (1) The assertion of Eusebius that the new Jerusa- 
 lem, meaning thereby the building of Constan- 
 tino, was opposite to and over against the old 
 city. 
 
 (2) The position assigned to the Holy Places by the 
 Bordeaux Pilgrim. 
 
 (3) The connexion pointed out by Antoninus between 
 the Bir Arruah and Siloam. 
 
 (4) The assumed omission by Arculfus of all mention 
 of the dome of the rock, and, I may add, the 
 building of a Mary Church by Justinian, within 
 the precincts of the Haram area." 
 
 To these four points I have mainly confined myself, 
 with what success an impartial reader may judge. I have 
 endeavoured to prove that not only cannot any one of these 
 points be established in Mr Fergusson's favour, but that 
 the site which he proposes cannot have been outside the 
 city walls, and the cave in the Sakharah cannot have been 
 a tomb; while the words of Eutychius render it plain 
 that Omar built his mosque by the sacred rock, nearly 
 on the site of the present Kubbet es-Sakharah. I have 
 done my best to represent fairly the meaning of the 
 authors whom I have quoted. I have not intentionally 
 omitted anything that I thought could possibly be of im- 
 portance, or striven to wrest the meaning of the original; 
 
 ^ Even in architectural matters I fancy Mr Fergusson sometimes errs. 
 A professional friend writes to me, " In Fergusson's Handbook, Vol. ir. 
 p. 722, there is a woodcut of 'Spires of the Chapel of St Sang, Bruges. 
 From a sketch by the author.' At the top of page 723 a description is 
 given of these spires ; they are said to take tlie Eastern form. He argues 
 thence that it is only one, however, of the numerous instances that go to prove 
 how completely art returned at the period called the Renaissance to the 
 point from which it starteil some four or five centuries earlier. XJnfortu- 
 nate'y for this theory, my note- book says that in Flandria Illustrata, 
 Antonio Sandero, Folio, Cologne, Vol. I. 1641, the towers of the Chapel 
 of the Holy Blood are shewn in two views, diiTerent from what they 
 are now ; the heights and plans vary. Wlien in Bruges, I was not con- 
 tent with merely walking the streets and looking at the buildings, T 
 ascended to the roof of the Hotel de Ville (which adjoins the Chapel of the 
 Holy Blood) and had a distinct view of the spires given in Fergusson. I 
 observed that they were compounded of fragments of various work and 
 vaiious styles ; upon enquiry I learnt that they were rebuilt a few years 
 previously; and the mason employed used up fragments from various places, 
 but chiefly from the magnificent church of S. Donat, which had been pulled 
 down in the vicinity." 
 
32 
 
 above all, I have endeavoured to write temperately and 
 courteously. Truth is not likely to be elicited by reckless 
 imputations , nor can invective, in the long run, take the 
 place of argument. Though Mr Fergusson may be confident 
 in the justice of his cause, he certainly weakens it by 
 his intemperate advocacy. However, I cannot but think 
 that in his calmer moments he will regret the persecution 
 (for I can call it by no other term) to which, acting too 
 hastily upon suspicions of plagiarism^, for the most part 
 unfounded, he has subjected Dr Pierotti, who, as a stranger 
 and a poor man, was entitled to consideration and for- 
 bearance. If I have shewn that he is not infallible him- 
 self", he will do well for the future to be more lenient to 
 the faults of others. 
 
 ^ Mr Fergusson does not seem to be quite the man to throw stones at 
 others for appropriating the labours of other workers without proper acknow- 
 ledgment. Will he explain the following 'suspicious circumstances.' At a 
 Discussion before the Royal Institute of British Architects {Tranmctions 
 Session 1854 — 55, pp. 18, 19) a particular theory of the construction of 
 domes was brought forward by Mr Papworth. In the Dictionary of Archi- 
 tecture, published by the Architectural Publication Society, 1859, we find, 
 under Article 'Dome* (signature J. W. P.) the following, 'These diagrams 
 and calculations with considerable portions of the reasoning and inferences 
 were subsequently adopted by Fergusson, p. 422.' On turning to Mr Fer- 
 gusson's Handbook of Architecture, we seek in vain for any hint that the 
 theory is not the author's own. 
 
 ^ These two passages which I print below, shew that even among 
 men 'of such calibre' as Messrs Fergusson and Grove, where, of course, 
 we expect at any rate to have our doubts set at rest, differences of opinion 
 may exist. 
 
 Of the Mosque at Hebron : 
 
 The wall which encloses the 
 Haram, or sacred precinct in which 
 the sepulchres are reported, and 
 probably with truth, still to lie — 
 and which is the only part at 
 present accessible to the Christians — 
 is a monument certainly equal, and 
 probably superior, in age to anything 
 remaining in Palestine. — G. Grove, 
 in Dictimiain/ of the Bible. Art. 
 Machpelah. 
 
 There are not any architectural 
 mouldings about this wall which 
 would enable an archaeologist to 
 approximate to its date ; and if the 
 bevelling is assumed to be a Jewish 
 arrangement (which is very far from 
 being exclusively the case), on the 
 other hand it may be contended 
 that no buttressed wall of Jewish 
 masonry exists anywhere. There is, 
 in fact, nothing known w-ith suf- 
 ficient exactness to decide the ques- 
 tion, but the probabilities certainly 
 tend towards a Christian or Sara- 
 cenic origin for the whole structure 
 both internally and externally. — Jas. 
 Fergusson, in Dictionary of the 
 Bible. Art. Tomb. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE ; PRINTED AT THE UNIVEHSITY PRESS. 
 
Plate I. 
 
 o-^ 
 
 .g-. 
 
 'Si 
 
 '"vi 
 
 .SAKHARAH. 
 
 (^OT^t^^^-r^eeHasikca. o^?i^ 
 
 CAUSEWAY 
 
 
 o 
 
 CISTERNf 
 
 1 
 
 Bridge- 
 
 V 
 
 I 
 
 
 1~ 
 
 VAULTS 
 
 602 
 
 Conduits discovered hy Pieroiii 
 
Plate n. 
 
 Vim 
 
 Old WfflLs accordinq to Plsrotti i-i 
 
 Plate in 
 

 SLAVERY AS AFFECTED BY CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 " Christianity never began by external alterations : for these, wherever they 
 did not begin from the inward man and fix there their first and firm foundation, 
 would always have failed in their salutary designs." Neander. 
 
yi 
 

 ?^M*m 
 
 ^:im