I

;i;vi|l!lli|M|l!j III
in iiiiii

iii

>M i

til lllil I

l-iiiltl n'th-l i'il.i'i!M'ii ¦:

JERUSALEM INBIBLfe TIMES
¦<i liiiiii.lfflPj

i;:,>

I

¦

LEWIS B. PATON

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE LIBRARY OF THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL

GIFT Oi
WILLISTON WALKER

JERUSALEM IN BIBLE TIMES

Photograph by Bonjils

THE WAILING-PLACE OF THE JEWS AT JERUSALEM

Jerusalem in Bible Times

LEWIS BAYLES PATON, Ph.D., D.D.
Tin * *
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Criticism in Hartford Theological Seminary
Director of the American School of Oriental Study and
Research in Palestine, 1903-04

[yah mm school
K%tfaven,Co*2>

CHICAGO
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS
LONDON
LUZAC & COMPANY
1908

Copyright 1908 By
The Untvebsity oe Chicago

Published September 1908

Composed and Printed By
The University of Chicago Press
Chicago, Illinois, U. S. A.

TO THE
TRUSTEES OF HARTFORD THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
THROUGH WHOSE GENEROSITY THESE STUDIES
WERE MADE POSSIBLE, THIS BOOK
IS DEDICATED

PREFACE
During the season of 1903-4 it was my privilege to reside in
Jerusalem as director of the American School of Oriental Study and
Research, and to carry on special investigations into the ancient
history of the city. While thus engaged I was constantly reminded
of the lack of a handbook giving in convenient form the results of
the latest archaeological researches. Baedecker's admirable guide
book is necessarily brief, and discusses archaeological matters topo
graphically, rather than in the historical order that is necessary, if
one is to understand their significance. The learned works on Jeru
salem of Professor Adam Smith, and of Dr. Selah Merrill, which
have appeared since this book was written, are to elaborate and ex
pensive to be used by the ordinary student or tourist. Intelligent
travelers in visiting the Holy City are at the mercy of ignorant drago
mans, who can only repeat the worthless traditions of the particular
ecclesiastical bodies with which they happen to be connected. There is
not a guide in Jersusalem who does not believe that the name of the
southwest hill is Zion, yet no scientific archaeologist of today holds
that view. At the time of the meeting of the World's Sunday-School
Convention in Jerusalem hundreds of eager people found it impossible
to get either from men or from books an accurate account of the
remains of the ancient city. To help this difficulty I was invited to
lecture before the convention and to conduct some parties about the
city. At the close of the meeting I was asked to put my addresses
into permanent form, so that it might be possible for those who had
heard them, and for other students of the Bible, to give them more
careful consideration. The result of this request has been the
preparation and publication of this series of studies into the archae
ological history of ancient Jerusalem. During the past year they
have appeared in successive numbers of the Biblical World, and they
are now issued in book form, with corrections and additions, in the
hope of reaching a still wider circle of readers. I trust that they will
prove helpful both to students at home and to travelers in the Holy
Land.
Lewis Bayles Paton
Hartford, Conn.
August, 1908

CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER I
The Location of the Temple  i
CHAPTER II
The Valleys of Ancient Jerusalem .... 17
CHAPTER III
The Springs and Pools of Ancient Jerusalem . . . 29
CHAPTER IV
The City of David ... ..... 45
CHAPTER V
Zion, Ophel, and Moriah . . ..... 59
CHAPTER VI
Jerusalem in the Earliest Times ...... 66
CHAPTER VII
Solomon's Buildings . ..... 77
CHAPTER VIII
Solomon's Wall  89
CHAPTER IX
Jerusalem under Hezekiah and Manasseh . .103
CHAPTER X
Jerusalem est the Time of Nehemiah  116
CHAPTER XI
Jerusalem in the Period between the Old and the New Tes
taments . .  128
CHAPTER XII
Jerusalem in the Time of Christ . . 139
Bibliography. ... .... 151
Index .... .... 155

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
PAGE
Frontispiece.— The. Wailing-Place of the Jews at Jerusalem
The Haram esh-Shertf from the Southwest . . 2
Plan of the Haram esh-Sherlf ... . . 5
Site of the Castle of Antonia 8
Robinson's Arch ... 10
The Triple Gate . . 12
The Inner Platform of the Haram 15
The Valleys of Jerusalem 18
Wady Sitti Maryam .... 19
Wady er-Rababi . . 20
Mouth of the Valley el- Wad . . .21
Cliff on West Side of Tyropoeon Valley . . 26
The Virgin's Fountain . . .29
The Springs and Pools of Jerusalem ... . 30
Job's Well ..... 31
cAin Silwan 32
Birket el-Hamra . . 33
Birket es-Sultan 34
Birket Mamilla 35
The Patriarch's Pool 36
The Zahweleh in the Village of Silwan 38
Birket Israel 42
The Crusaders' Pool of Bethesda 43
The Western Hill of Jerusalem 45
The Hills of Jerusalem 46
The Eastern Hill of Jerusalem 48
The Stairs of the City of David 51
The West Hill— The Traditional Zion 58
Southeast Hill— The True Zion 60
Jerusalem in the Time of David 69
North End of the City of David . 71
Site of the City of David . 72
Ground-Plan of Solomon's Buildings 77
The Sakhra, the Site of Solomon's Altar 78
Solomon's Temple, South Elevation . 79
Solomon's Temple, East Elevation 79
Site of Inner Court of Solomon's Temple . 80
The Golden Gate, Site of East Gate of Temple . . 83

Site of the House of the Forest of Lebanon 86
Site of the Great Court of Solomon 87
The City of Solomon . 90
Tower Phasaelus, now called "Tower of David" 94
Rock Scarp, south of Protestant School 95
Remains of the Valley Gate 98
Rock Scarp Marking Turning of Inner Wall 100
The Walls of Hezekiah and Manasseh . . 102
The Siloam Inscription 104
Remains of Second Wall on the South 108
Wall under Franciscan School no
Ancient Arch at Damascus Gate in
Jerusalem from Mount Scopus 113
Great Stones Inside of Cistern 114
The Line of Nehemiah's North Wall 118
Site of Tower of Hananel 119
Damascus Gate, Site of Fish Gate 120
Site of the Broad Wall . 122
Base of Tower in Protestant School 123
The Dung Gate 124
Site of King's Garden . 126
Jerusalem in New Testament Times 129
Tombs in the Kidron Valley 132
Site of Herod's Palace 134
Plan of Herod's Temple 137
Conjectural Site of Golgotha 145
Stones that may have belonged to Agrippa's Wall 147
Tombs of the Kings . . . 148

CHAPTER I
THE LOCATION OF THE TEMPLE
The Temple was the most important building in ancient Jerusalem.
It was the center, not only of the religious, but also of the political
and social life of Judea. It is more often mentioned in the Old
Testament than any other place, and other places are habitually
described by their relation to it. Accordingly, it furnishes the best
starting-point for an investigation of the topography of ancient
Jerusalem. There is no doubt that Herod's Temple stood on the site of Sol
omon's Temple. Solomon's Temple remained undisturbed until
its destruction by Nebuchadrezzar. This destruction was not com
plete. The walls were partly cast down, so that the place could not
be used as a fortress; but the stones were not carried away, and it
was still easy to see where the ancient edifice had stood. The three
deportations of the Judeans made by Nebuchadrezzar did not strip
the land of its inhabitants. According to Jer. 40:11 ff., there was
a considerable remnant left under the hand of Gedaliah, the gov
ernor. Even after the assassination of Gedaliah and the flight of
many to Egypt (cf. Jer. 43 : 5-7), there was still a considerable number
of the peasantry left. These people knew where the Temple had
stood, and they kept up sacrifice on the site of the old Altar. Jer.
41:5 tells us how "there came eighty men, having their beards
shaven and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves, with meal-
offerings and frankincense in their hand, to bring them to the house
of Yahweh." The exile lasted only fifty years (586-536 b. a), and many of
those who returned had worshiped in the old Temple and knew
exactly where it stood. When the second Temple was built in
520 B. c, there were still some who had seen the Temple of Solomon
in its glory. According to Ezra 3:12, "the old men that had seen

2 SITE OF TEMPLE
the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before
their eyes, wept with a loud voice." Hag. 2:3 inquires: "Who is
left among you that saw this house in its former glory ? and how do
ye see it now ? is it not in your eyes as nothing ? " It is inconceivable,
therefore, that the site of Solomon's Temple should have been lost
during the brief period of the exile. Zerubbabel's Temple must
have been reared on exactly the same spot where its predecessor
stood.

Photograph by L. B. Paton the haram esh-sherif from the southwest
It is certain also that Herod's Temple stood on the same ground
as Zerubbabel's Temple. From Josephus, Ant., xv, 11:2 and
War, v, 5:1, it appears that Herod's work was merely an enlarge
ment of that of his predecessors, and that the Jews would not suffer
a stone of Zerubbabel 's Temple to be taken down until another stone
was ready to put into its place. Accordingly, it may be regarded as
certain that there was no change in the location of the Temple from
the time when it was first built to the time when it was destroyed by
Titus. If, then, we can determine the location of Herod's Temple

TEMPLE PLATFORM 3
we shall also know where Solomon's Temple stood, and shall have
found the key to the problem of the pre-exilic topography of Jerusalem.
Fortunately for archaeology, the location of Herod's Temple
can be determined with certainty. An unbroken tradition of Jews,
Christians, and Mohammedans, existing from the earliest times,
locates the Temple on the site of the Haram-esh-Sherlf, the "Noble
Sanctuary," or "Mosque of Omar," as we are accustomed to call it,
on the eastern hill of modern Jerusalem. The correctness of this
tradition is confirmed by archaeological research, for the description
of Herod 's Temple given by ancient writers corresponds with numer
ous remains still to be seen in and about the Haram area.
Our two main sources of information are the accounts of Josephus
in Ant., xv, n; War, v, 5, and of the Mishna tractate Middoth,
chap, ii.1 Josephus was a priest, who had himself ministered in the
sanctuary, so that his knowledge of the Temple rested upon personal
observation.2 The tractate Middoth was composed, though not
written, within a century after the destruction of the Temple and
embodies the tradition of the priests and Levites. Both of these
works, accordingly, are authorities of the first class in regard to
the original appearance of the Temple.
1. The Platform. — In regard to the Platform on which the Temple
stood Josephus gives an account in Ant., xv, 11 : 1-5 ; xx, 9 : 7 ; War,
i, 21:1; v, 5:1. From these descriptions the following features are
clear: The Temple lay on a narrow, rocky ridge between two deep
valleys that ran north and south. On the east the valley was so
deep that it made one dizzy to look down into it. The city lay
over against the Temple on the west, and curved around in the
manner of a theater. The Temple hill was highest at the point
where the Sanctuary stood, and sloped rapidly to the south and to
the east. The top of the hill was insufficient for a large edifice, and
room could be obtained only by building massive substructures.
The retaining walls of the Platform rose on three sides — the west,
» The Greek text of Josephus is given in the critical edition of Niese, 1887-95;
English translations by Whiston, and by Shilletto. The tractate Middoth is translated
in Barclay's The Talmud, in the Appendix to Fergusson's Temples of the Jews, and in
the Jerusalem Volume of the Palestine Exploration Fund.
2 On the life of Josephus, see Hastings' Dictionary oj the Bible, Vol. V, p. 461.

4 TEMPLE PLATFORM
south, and east. On the south the wall ran all the way from valley
to valley. The walls were joined to native rock at the bottom and
rose to such a height that they were level with the top of the hill.
This necessitated an elevation of 300 cubits, or 450 feet. They
were so lofty that people who fell from them were instantly killed.
The stones were white and of enormous size, some of them being
20 cubits in length and 6 cubits in height. The space inside of the
wall was filled so as to construct a large, level platform, and on the
outside the foundations were covered in order to raise the ground to
the level of the streets of the city.
With all the features of this description the modern Haram area
exactly corresponds. It lies on the narrow eastern hill of Jerusalem,
between the deep valley of the Wady Sitti Maryam on the east and
El- Wad on the west. The western hill, on which the. modern city
lies, curves about it in a semicircle. Borings in the Haram area
disclose that the rocky surface slopes rapidly to the south and to
the east, so that the summit of the hill is naturally inadequate for a
large edifice. The area is inclosed only on the west, south, and
east, and on the north there is level ground connecting with the
northeast quarter of the city. The south wall reaches all the way
from El-Wad to Wady Sitti Maryam. The excavations of the
Palestine Exploration Fund have shown that the foundations of
these walls go down to native rock. At the southeast corner of the
Haram a shaft had to be sunk to a depth of 80 feet before the bottom
of the wall was found, and at the northeast corner there was a depth
of 125 feet. In spite of the vast accumulations of rubbish that now
hide the lower portion of the wall, it still towers to an imposing
height above the valley; and if the rubbish were removed, it would
show the 300 cubits that Josephus mentions. Huge stones may
still be seen at the Wailing-Place of the Jews in the western wall,
and throughout the entire length of the southern and eastern walls;
and they are made of white limestone such as Josephus describes.
In the southeast corner of the Haram area there are immense vaults,
known as "Solomon's Stables," that raise the top of the Platform
to the needed height, and around the southern end of the Platform
the ground has been filled in, precisely as Josephus states. It appears,
accordingly, that in every particular the retaining wall of the Haram

TEMPLE PLATFORM

- // -;>\:\ \\1
'¦t ¦fZflace- of 'Prayer ;,' '11 ?l ; • S, ^
- Solomons |
i^t /.'Throng .

JZ~"' 2436 ^T-
'S'j/cpAt'n's Gate i

V-..

c

dV. bV1

-,A M ASH S.^ljAifiM^FX^- |° A I
Ms! ii -*" ,H *<A l'.\|
43;] :/ .*•* ¦# ,,,» ^>jj
4S;/.v 'SHI y"
3 % «

** n i .''\
r. -^4. '

'irince

O jit-".'"-- L-
lg3^  «lS_

p

CD

.a J sly.

Cutvn.?,  -iiTf. .r5 'JJb. . ^ X*
..^ 1
,.4-J
^.
From Ordnance Survey Map
PLAN OF THE HARAM ESH-SHERIF
/ii
|/i
2416^1
6 TEMPLE PLATFORM
area corresponds with the description of the outer wall of the Temple
constructed by King Herod.
In regard to the size of the Outer Court that stood upon the Plat
form, our authorities disagree. Josephus, Ant., xv, 11:3, states
that it was a stadium, or 400 cubits — i. e., 600 feet square. Middoth,
ii, 1, says that it was 500 cubits — i. e., 750 feet square. The actual
length of the south wall of the Haram is 922 feet. The different
figures given by Josephus and Middoth show that both depended upon
rough estimates rather than upon measurement; consequently,
their lack of correspondence with the actual length of the south
wall constitutes no objection to identifying it with the south wall of
Herod 's Platform. It should be noted also that their measurements
apply to the court within the inclosing wall and are exclusive of the
broad cloisters that encompassed the court on all four sides.
On the north and west Josephus gives the same dimensions for
the Platform as on the south — namely, 400 cubits, or 600 feet. The
present Haram wall measures 1,601 feet on the west and 1,530 on
the east. If this disproportion between the length and the breadth
had existed in Josephus ' day, he could not have spoken of the Temple
area as square. This seems to show a serious lack of agreement
between the Temple and the modern Haram. Explorations show,
however, that the original Haram area did not extend so far north as
the present one. In the south wall of Birket Isracil, the traditional
Pool of Bethesda, which stands at the north end of the present Haram
inclosure, no ancient stones have been found. This shows that
Herod 's Platform did not extend so far north. No corner or straight
joint exists in the face of the east wall at the present northeast corner
of the Haram; consequently the original north line cannot have
joined the east wall at this point. Just beyond the Golden Gate,
however, the character of the masonry changes, and this seems to
show that the ancient northeast corner was at this point. The north
wall of Herod's Temple apparently coincided with the north line of
the present Inner Platform of the Haram. In this case, the original
Platform was nearly square, each side being about 1,000 feet long.
The statements of Josephus and of Middoth, accordingly, are not so
inappropriate to the Haram area as at first sight they appear.
Josephus states that the inclosing wall was entirely the work of

ANTONIA 7
Herod. With this correspond the facts that the foundations are all
in one line, and that the great drafted masonry is all of one class
from the foundation upward. Only in the south wall west of the
Double Gate and in the west wall south of the Magharibe Gate are
stones with rustic bosses. These were designed to be covered by
filling in the foundations, so that their presence does not indicate a
different period of construction. Modern authorities are agreed that
the huge drafted stones that form the lower courses of the Haram
wall belong to the Herodian period. They must be older than the
Moslem era, because they were seen and described by numerous
pilgrims before 530 A. d., and because the Arabs were incapable of
executing such a gigantic architectural enterprise. They cannot be
more ancient than the time of Herod, because they intersect the old
city aqueduct on the southwest. They are of the same general
type as the stones in the so-called Tower of David, which is generally
admitted to have been one of the towers of Herod 's palace, and they
disclose the same kind of marginal drafting and fine adz dressing
that is seen in the remains of the Tyropoeon Bridge, which was
certainly the work of Herod. The Phoenician letters discovered
on the stones near the southeast corner were formerly supposed to
prove that this wall was the work of Solomon, but it is now recog
nized that they may have been written in the Herodian period quite
as well as in the Solomonic.
2. The Citadel of Antonia.— This is described by Josephus in
War, v, 4:2; v, 5:8, as follows:
Those parts that stood northward of the Temple, being joined to the hill,
made it considerably larger, and occasioned that fourth hill, which is called
Bezetha, to be inhabited also. It lies over against the Tower of Antonia, but
is divided from it by a deep valley, which was dug on purpose, in order to hin
der the foundations of Antonia from joining this hill, and thereby affording an
opportunity for getting to it with ease, and lessening its superior elevation, for
which reason also that depth of the ditch increased the elevation of the towers.
.... Now, as to the Tower of Antonia, it was situated at the corner of two
cloisters of the court of the Temple, that on the west, and that on the north: it
was erected upon a rock fifty cubits in height, and was on a great precipice: it
was the work of King Herod  From thence the whole Temple might be
viewed: but on the corner, where it joined the two cloisters of the Temple, it
had passages down to them both, through which on the Jewish festivals, the guard
with arms (for there always lay in this tower a Roman legion) went several ways

8 ANTONIA
among the cloisters, in order to watch the people, that they might not there
attempt to make any innovations, for the Temple was a fortress that guarded
the city, as was Antonia a guard to the Temple; and in that tower were the
guards of those three. There was also a special fortress belonging to the Upper
City, which was Herod's palace; but as for the hill Bezetha, it was divided from
Antonia, as we have already told you; and as that hill on which the Tower of
Antonia stood was the highest of these three, so did it adjoin to the New City,
and was the only place that hindered the sight of the Temple on the north.
The Castle of Antonia is also referred to in the following passages:
Ant., xiii, 16:5: xv, 11:4; xv, 11:7; xviii, 4:3; xx, 1:1; xx, 5:3;

Palestine^!? xploration Fund

SITE OF THE CASTLE OF ANTONIA

War, i, 5:4; i, 21:1; ii, 15:5; ii, 15:6: ii. 16:5; v, 7:3, v, 9:2;
vi, 1:7; vi, 1:8; vi, 2:5; vi, 4:4.
In War, v, 5:2, it is stated that the Outer Court of the Temple
measured six stadia, including the Tower of Antonia. The court
proper, as we have just seen, was only four stadia square; conse
quently the Tower must have stood one stadium north of the Temple
and have been connected with it by a passage guarded on both sides
with walls. To this passage Josephus alludes in War, v, 5:8:

CITY WALLS 9
"On the corner where it joined the two cloisters of the Temple,
it had passages down to them both." This portico leading from
the Temple to the Castle of Antonia is apparently referred to in
Acts 21:40 as the place from which Paul made his defense to the
people. These descriptions of Antonia correspond precisely with the
present site of the Turkish barracks at the northwest corner of the
Haram area. This is about a stadium distant from the north edge
of the inner platform which, as we have seen, corresponds with the
north line of the court of Herod's Temple. It lies upon a rocky
cliff 50 cubits in height; it overlooks the Temple and hinders the
view from the north. The researches of the Palestine Exploration
Fund have shown that it is separated by a deep artificial ditch from
the northeast quarter of the modern city, which corresponds with the
Bezetha quarter or New City of Josephus. There is general agree
ment, therefore, that in the Barrack Rock we see the site of the
Castle of Antonia.
3. The city walls. — According to War, v, 4:2, the first, or inner,
wall of the city on the north began at the tower called Hippicus,
extended as far as the Xystus, and then, joining the Council-House,
ended at the west cloister of the Temple. This statement, in con
nection with the natural features of the ground, shows that the wall
must have joined the Temple about midway in its western side. At
this point traces are still to be seen of the causeway on which the
wall crossed the Tyropoeon Valley at the so-called Wilson's Arch,
600 feet from the southwest corner of the Haram. Wilson 's Arch is
itself a late construction, but beneath it are remains of older arches
of the Herodian period.
In War, v, 4:2, Josephus states that the south wall of the city
joined the Temple at the east cloister. The excavations of Warren
have disclosed a massive wall running in a southwesterly direction
from the southeast corner of the Haram. This wall joins the Haram
with a straight joint, which shows that the two were not built at the
same time. This corresponds with the fact that the south wall was
older than the constructions of Herod. This wall is 14J feet thick
and 75 feet in height. It is buried under rubbish that rises four feet
above its top.

IO

TEMPLE GATES

4. The gates. — In regard to the gates that gave access to the
Temple, Josephus says:
Now in the western quarter of the inclosure there were four gates; the first
led to the King's Palace by a viaduct over the intermediate valley; two more
led to the suburbs of the city; and the last led to the other city, descending
into the valley by a great number of steps, and thence up again by the ascent.
{Ant., xv, 11:5.)
The first of the gates thus described led to a bridge across the

Palestine Exploration Fund

ROBINSON'S ARCH

Tyropoeon Valley to the Upper City. This was built originally by
the Hasmonean kings. According to Ant., xiv, 4:2; War, i, 7:2,
Aristobulus broke it down in order to prevent Pompey's attacking
the Temple. It was subsequently rebuilt by Herod (cf. War, vi,
8:1; 6:2). Remains of it are still to be seen in Robinson's Arch,
which protrudes from the eastern wall of the Haram at a distance of
38 feet and 9 inches from the southwest corner. A pier of this bridge
and fallen stones were discovered in the excavations of Warren so

TEMPLE GATES n
that there is no doubt in regard to the character of the structure.
The arch is 50 feet in breadth and has a span of 50 feet. The breadth
plus its distance from the southwest corner corresponds closely with
the breadth of the Royal Cloister at the south end of the Temple.
It appears, accordingly, that this bridge was designed as an approach
to the Cloister. The excavations of Warren disclosed a pavement
beneath this bridge, and below this pavement was found an arch-stone
of an older bridge. This must have been the one that was destroyed
by the Jews in anticipation of Pompey's attack in 63 b. c. When
the bridge was rebuilt by Herod in 19 b. c, a pavement was laid
over the remains of the older structure, and upon this the new edifice
was erected. As previously remarked, the masonry is identical
with the inclosing wall of the Haram.
The second western gate, according to Josephus, led by a stair
way to the bottom of the valley. This gate must have been near the
southwest corner on account of the necessity of a staircase to descend
to the bottom of the valley. Below the modern Bab el-Magharibe
remains of an older gate, known as Barclay 's Gate, have been discov
ered. This is 270 feet from the southwest corner, and is apparently
the second of the western gates named by Josephus. Within this
gate there must be steps leading up to the top of the Platform, but
these have been walled up by the Moslems and are inaccessible.
The two other gates on the west that Josephus mentions as lead
ing to the commercial suburb must have lain north of the old first
city-wall that joined the Temple in the middle of its western side.
These are found in the Gate of the Chain and the Gate of the Bath,
below which are the remains of ancient entrances. Middoth, i, 3,
names only one gate, Kipinus, on the west. Which of the four
mentioned by Josephus is intended is uncertain.
In regard to the gates on the south Josephus states merely the
fact that there were such gates. Middoth, i, 3, states that there
were two of them, and calls them the two gates of Huldah. These
correspond with the Double and the Triple Gates which are still
to be seen in the southern wall of the Haram area. The Double Gate
lies 350 feet from the southwest angle; the Triple Gate lies 600 feet
from that angle. Both of these are now walled up with late Arab
masonry, but the original outline of the arches is still traceable.

12

TEMPLE GATES

From the Double Gate a double tunnel, accessible from the Mosque of
Aksa, leads up to the top of the Platform. The vaulting in these
tunnels belongs to the time of Justinian, but the lower masonry
probably goes back to the time of Herod. These passage-ways give
us an excellent idea of how the people came up from the lower levels,
through the foundations of the Platform, to the Temple Court on
the summit.
One eastern gate, called the Gate of Shushan, is mentioned in

Palestine Exploration F

THE TRIPLE GATE

Middoth, i, 3. It corresponds with the modern Golden Gate, which
is the only gate in the eastern wall of the Ilaram. This gate was
rebuilt by Justinian, and no Herodian masonry is at present visible;
but it probably stands upon the site of the ancient entrance. This gate
also has been built up by the Moslems, so that it is now inaccesible.
5. The Balustrade. — The Inner Court of the Temple was sepa
rated from the Outer Court by a Balustrade, in regard to which
Josephus speaks as follows :

THE BALUSTRADE 13
Thus was the first inclosure, in the midst of which, and not far from it, was
the. second, reached by a few steps; this was encompassed by a stone wall for a
partition, with an inscription which forbade any foreigner to go in under pain
of death. (Ant. xv, 11:5.)
When one went through this [first court], into the second [court of the
Temple], there was a partition made of stone all around, whose height was three
cubits; its construction was very elegant; upon it stood pillars at equal distances
from one another, declaring the law of purity, some in Greek, and some in Roman
letters, that no foreigner should go within that sanctuary. (War, v, 5:2.)
Titus .... reproached John and his party and said to them: "Have not
you, vile wretches, put up this partition-wall before your sanctuary ? Have not
you put up the pillars thereto belonging, at due distances, and on them engraved
in Greek, and in our own letters, this prohibition, That no foreigner should go
beyond that wall ? Have we not given you leave to kill one who goes beyond it,
though he be a Roman?" (War, vi, 2:4.)
This inclosure is also alluded to in Acts 2 : 28 ff., where the Jews
seek to kill Paul because they suppose that he has brought Tro-
phimus the Ephesian into the inner area. Middoth, ii, 3, speaks
of this Balustrade as follows:
Inside [of the Mountain of the House] was a reticulated wall ten hand-
breadths high, and in it were thirteen breaches broken down by the Greek Kings.
The (Jews) restored and fenced them and decreed before them thirteen acts
of obeisance.
In 1871 Clermont Ganneau discovered one of the Greek inscriptions
of which Josephus speaks, warning gentiles from passing within the
barrier. This reads as follows:
No stranger is to enter within the balustrade and embankment round the
sacred place. Whoever is caught will be answerable for his death which will
ensue. The correspondence of the language of this inscription with the
statement of Josephus is a striking confirmation of the accuracy of
the Jewish historian's observation.
6. The Inner Court. — Within the Balustrade was the Inner
Court, or Sanctuary, into which only Israelites might enter. Jose
phus (War, v, 5:2) describes it as follows :
That second court of the Temple was called the Sanctuary, and was ascended
to by fourteen steps from the first court. This court was four-square, and had
a wall about it peculiar to itself  Beyond these fourteen steps there was
the distance of ten cubits to the wall: this was all level; hence there were other
stairs, each of five steps apiece, that led to the gates.

14 THE ALTAR
Middoth, ii, 3, speaks of it thus :
Inside of it was the Hel ten cubits broad and twelve steps were there. The
height of each step was one-half cubit and the breadth one-half cubit. All the
steps were in height one-half cubit and in breadth one-half cubit, except those
of the porch.
In regard to the location of the Inner Court with reference to the
Outer Court, Middoth, ii, 1, states that "the larger space was on the
south, the second on the east, the third on the north, and the least
westward." This shows that the Inner Court must have lain in
the same position as the southern end of the present Inner Platform
of the Haram. This Inner Platform rises to a height of several feet
above the general level of the Haram area, and its shape is so peculiar in
its departure from rectangularity that it is more likely to be a survival
of an ancient construction than a creation of the Arab builders.
According to Middoth, the Court of the Women was 135 cubits long,
and the Court of the Priests 187 cubits long, making together the
sum of 322 cubits. Between the Court of the Women and the Court
of the Priests lay the Court of Israel. The length of this, unfor
tunately, is not given. (The statement in regard to the "place of
the treading of the feet of Israel" does not apply to this court.)
The present Inner Platform is about 300 cubits in the line from
east to west through the middle. This leaves no room for the Court
of Israel on the present Inner Platform, unless we suppose that the
Court of the Women lay on the lower level east of the present Inner
Platform. On this hypothesis the Court of Israel and Court of the
Priests will coincide with the southern half of the raised Inner
Platform of the Haram.
7. The Altar. — Josephus and Middoth both place the Temple
at the west end of the Inner Court, with the Court of the Priests
and the Court of Israel and the Court of the Women to the eastward
(cf. War, ii, 17:3). The Temple, accordingly, must have stood
close to the western edge of the present Inner Platform of the Haram.
In front of the Temple in the Court of the Priests stood the Altar
of Burnt Offering (cf. Ant., xv, 11:5). In War, v, 5:6, the Altar
is thus described:
Before this temple stood the Altar, fifteen cubits high, and equal both in
length and breadth; each of which dimensions was fifty cubits. The figure it

THE ALTAR

15

was built in was a square, and it had corners like horns; and the ascent to it
from the south sloped backward gently. It was formed without any iron tool,
nor did any such iron tool so much as touch it at any time.
The description of the Altar in Middoth, iii, 1 3, is as follows:
The Altar was thirty-two cubits square  And in the southwestern
corner were two holes as two thin nostrils that the blood poured upon the western
and southern foundations should run into them; and it commingled in a canal
and flowed out into the Kidron. . . . Below in the pavement in the same

Palestine Exploration Fund

THE INNER PLATFORM OF THE HARAM
corner there was a place a cubit square with a marble tablet and a ring fastened
in it. Through it they descended to the sewer and cleansed it.
The Temple was 100 cubits long (cf. Ant., xv, 11:3; Middoth,
iv, 6) ; and since the Altar of Burnt Offering stood in front of it to
the east, it must correspond with the Sakhra, or " rock," that
lies under the center of the dome of the Noble Sanctuary. Sacred
spots are cherished in the Orient with remarkable persistency. The
Altar must have been the first structure reared on the top of the

1 6 CISTERNS AND DRAINS
hill, and the memory of its location has lasted down to our own day
and is the explanation of the sanctity of the Sakhra. This rock is the
original summit of the hill, which appears here only in the entire
Haram area. The highest point would be the one naturally selected
at the outset for the placing of the Altar. Moreover, the description
of the channels and receptacles for blood under the Altar corresponds
with the caves and tunnels under the modern Sakhra. This view
is more probable than that of Moslem tradition, followed by Conder
and some other authorities, which identifies the Sakhra with the site of
the Holy of Holies.
8. The cisterns and drains. — Josephus and Middoth speak of
a large number of cisterns and channels for water that existed beneath
the Temple area. These correspond with the cisterns and channels
that exist beneath the modern Haram area, but a precise identifica
tion of the particular names is at present impossible.
9. Jerome in his commentary on Isa. 2:8, and on Matt. 24:15,
states that Hadrian set up a statue of Jupiter on the site of the Temple.
This statue was seen by the Bordeaux Pilgrim in 333 a. d. The
inscription that stood originally on its base is still to be seen on a
large stone built upside down into the wall near the Double Gate.
On the basis of these facts it is indisputable that the Haram
area corresponds with the site of the Temple of Solomon, of Ze
rubbabel, and of Herod. On this point there is agreement among
all writers, Jewish, Christian, and Mohammedan, Protestant and
Catholic, critical and uncritical. It is the only point in the topog
raphy of ancient Jerusalem in regard to which there is universal
agreement. This, accordingly, we must make our point of departure
in our investigation of the city.

CHAPTER II
THE VALLEYS OF ANCIENT JERUSALEM
Jerusalem lies on a plateau between two deep gorges. The
principal one of these starts north of the city in an insignificant
depression known as Wady el-J6z, or "Valley of the Walnuts.''
In its upper reaches this lies about 2,500 feet above the sea. It
circles around at some distance from the northeast corner of the
city and then falls rapidly in a southwesterly direction, continually
approaching the eastern wall. At a point opposite the southeast
corner of the city, it lies 200 feet below its source. Between this
point and its junction with the other main valley it falls 300 feet
more. In this portion of its course it is known as Wady Sitti Maryam,
or "Valley of the Lady Mary," being so named from the Virgin's
Fountain that lies in its midst. Below its junction with the other
main valley it is known as Wady en-Nar, or "Valley of Fire. " This
falls rapidly between lofty cliffs to the Dead Sea, 1,300 feet below
sea-level. The Wady Sitti Maryam has very precipitous sides. At all
points its banks are so steep that they render the city impregnable
on its eastern side. The cliffs are full of rock-hewn tombs, which
show that once there existed here an important ancient city. The
commanding sepulchral monuments known as the Tomb of Absalom,
the Tomb of James, and the Tomb of Zechariah, near the south
east corner of the Haram, or Mosque area, are conspicuous land
marks. The view of Jerusalem from the lower end of this valley,
looking up toward the Mosque on the left and the village of Silwan
on the right, is very imposing. This valley is dry, except during
the rainy months when a considerable stream flows through it. The
water of the Virgin's Fountain, which must formerly have entered
it, is now diverted through the Siloam tunnel. The result is that
the Wady has a drier appearance at present than it must have had
in ancient times. 17

i8

THE VALLEYS OF JERUSALEM

THE VALLEYS OF JERUSALEM

WADY ER-RABABI

19

The second main valley of Jerusalem begins as a slight depression,
2,500 feet above the sea, west of the modern city, and runs in a
southeasterly direction to a point near the Citadel, where it is joined
by another small depression that comes from the Jaffa Gate; it
then descends rapidly close to. the west wall of the city. At a point
opposite the southwest corner it is 2,300 feet above the sea, and at
its junction with the Wady Sitti Maryam it is 2,000 feet above the
sea. In its lower course south of the citv it runs almost due east.

Photograph by L. B. Paton

WADY SITTI MARYAM

This valley is known at present as Wady er-Rababi, or "Fiddle
Valley." Like the Wady Sitti Maryam, it has very precipitous
sides, and protects the city on the west and the south. The cliffs
on its western and southern sides are full of .ancient rock-hewn
tombs. This valley contains no springs, and. therefore, is dry through
out the year except after an occasional hard rain. It is a smaller
depression than Wady Sitti Maryam, and therefore is properly
regarded as a branch of that valley.

20

EL-WAD

The third in importance of the valleys of Jerusalem is the one
which begins in the -plain north of the Damascus Gate and runs
in a southeasterly direction through the heart of the modern city
to a point near the southwest angle of the Haram area. Here it is
joined by a branch that comes from the Jaffa Gate. It then descends
in a southwesterly direction to the Pool of Siloam. Near this it is
joined by another small branch that comes from the southwest
corner of the city. It then runs in a southeasterly direction until it

Photograph by L. B. Paton

WADY ER-RABABI

joins the Wady Sitti Maryam. This valley is known at present as
El- Wad, or "The Valley." It is the second main tributary of the
Wady Sitti Maryam and its continuation the Wady en-Nar.
A fourth valley begins in the plain north of the city midway between
Wady el-J6z and El- Wad, and runs in a southeasterly direction
across the northeast corner of the city, joining Wady Sitti Maryam
at a point east of the Haram area. This has no distinctive modern
name. The question now arises: With which of these valleys are
the valleys mentioned in the Old Testament to be identified ?

THE KIDRON

21

i. The Kidron. — This is commonly known as the nahal, or
"watercourse" (in our version translated "brook"). Frequently
the name Kidron is omitted, and the valley is described simply as
the ndhal. In Hebrew this term describes a ravine in which water
commonly runs. It is not applied to gorges that are filled only in
the rainy season. The name, consequently, suggests that we are
to identify the Kidron with the Wady Sitti Maryam, since this is the
only one of the valleys of Jerusalem that has a perennial flow.

Photograph by L. B. Paton

MOUTH OF THE VALLEY EL-WAD

This identification is confirmed by all the allusions in the Bible.
In II Sam. 15:23 we are told that, when David was compelled by
Absalom to flee from Jerusalem to the land east of the Jordan, "he
passed over the brook Kidron, and all the people passed over toward
the way of the wilderness." In fleeing eastward from Jerusalem,
the first valley that one would cross would be the Wady Sitti Maryam.
The word of Solomon to Shimei in I Kings 2 : 37, " On the day thou
goest out, and passest over the brook Kidron, know thou for certain

22 THE KIDRON
that thou shalt surely die: thy blood shall be upon thine own head,"
also indicates the valley east of the city, since Shimei would naturally
pass this way in going to his home (cf. II Sam. 16:5). In I Kings
15:13 = 11 Chron. 15:16 we read: "And also Maacah, the mother
of Asa the king, he removed her from being queen, because she had
made an abominable image for an Asherah; and Asa cut down
her image, and made dust of it, and burnt it at the brook Kidron. "
The image was evidently set up in the Temple, and if Asa burned
it at the brook Kidron, this must have been the Wady Sitti Maryam,
which runs close to the site of the Temple. In II Kings 23:4, 6, 12,
we are told that, when Josiah cleansed the Temple of idolatrous
abominations, "he burned them at the brook Kidron and cast the
ashes into the brook." This statement implies that the Kidron lay
near to the Temple, and the mention of the "brook" favors the
identification with the Wady Sitti Maryam. In Jer. 31 : 40 we read:
"All the fields unto the brook Kidron, unto the corner of the Horse
Gate toward the east shall be holy unto the Lord." The Horse
Gate is known to have been an opening in the east wall of the Temple ;
consequently the brook Kidron, which is here associated with it,
must be identical with the Wady Sitti Maryam. II Chron. 29:16
states that idolatrous objects found in the Temple were cast into the
brook Kidron. II Chron. 32:4 says that Hezekiah "gathered much
people together, and they stopped all the fountains, and the brook
that flowed through the midst of the land, saying ,Why should the
kings of Assyria come and find much water?" The statement that
the "brook" contained "much water" is applicable only to the
Wady Sitti Maryam, and the statement that it "flowed through the
midst of the land" is also applicable only to this valley. Wady
er-Rababi, as we shall see presently, was the boundary line between
the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, and therefore could not be spoken
of as "in the midst of the land." El- Wad was in the midst of the
city, and, besides, there is no evidence that it was a running stream
in Old Testament times. In Neh. 2:15 Nehemiah says: "Then
went I up in the night by the brook and viewed the wall; and I
turned back and entered by the Valley Gate, and so returned."
On his night ride Nehemiah set out from a point near the southwest
corner of the present city and descended the Wady er-Rababi until

THE KIDRON 23
he came to the Pool of Siloam. Thence he "went up by the brook
and viewed the wall." This "brook" can only have been the Wady
Sitti Maryam close to the east wall of the city. If he had gone up
through El-Wad, he would have been in the heart of the city and
could not have viewed the wall. The fact that he returned by the
Valley Gate, whence he set out, shows that he made a complete
circuit of the city.
In John 18: 1 we are told that Jesus "went forth with his disciples
over the brook Kidron where there was a garden. " The location of
the Garden of Gethsemane at some point on the west slope of the
mount of Olives east of Jerusalem is undisputed. Consequently the
crossing of the brook Kidron to reach this garden is proof that the
Kidron is to be identified with the Wady Sitti Maryam.
Josephus also identifies the Kidron with this valley. In War,
v, 2:3, he says:
These legions had orders to encamp at the distance of six furlongs from
Jerusalem, at the mount called the Mount of Olives, which 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.
In War, v, 6:1, he says:
John held the Temple and also the parts thereto adjoining for a great way,
as also Ophel, and the valley called the Valley of Kidron.
In War, v, 12:2, he says:
Titus 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 Kidron to the Mount of Olives; it then bent toward the
south, and encompassed the mountain as far as the rock called Peristereon.
In vi, 3:2, he says:
The next day the Romans burnt down the northern cloister entirely as far
as the east cloister, whose common angle joined to the valley that was called
Kidron, and was built over it; on which account the depth was frightful.
From these statements it is certain that he identified the Kidron with
the deep gorge east of the Temple.
It appears, accordingly, thatthere is an unbroken fine of evidence
from the earliest times down to the New Testament period identifying
thaTbrook Kidron with the ravine east of the Mosque of Omar that

24 VALLEY OF HINNOM
is now known as the Wady Sitti Maryam. This is admitted by
practically all modern topographers.
2. The valley named most frequently in the Old Testament
after the Kidron is the Valley of Hinnom, or Valley of the Son (Sons)
of Hinnom. In the Old Testament this is always called the gai,
or "valley," in distinction from the nahal, or "brook," of Kidron.
A gai is a broad, open valley, not necessarily traversed by a running
stream. This name in itself suggests that the Hinnom is to be
identified with the Wady er-Rababi, which is more open than Wady
Sitti Maryam and has no stream flowing through it. All the Old
Testament references to the Hinnom favor this identification.
In Josh. 15:8 we read:
And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the cliff of
the Jebusite southward (the same is Jerusalem): and the border went up to
the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which
is at the uttermost part of the vale of Rephaim northward.
In Josh. 18:16 the same description is given in a reverse order:
And the border went down to the uttermost part of the mountain that lieth
before the valley of the son of Hinnom, to the cliff of the Jebusite southward and
went down to Enrogel.
From these passages it appears that the Valley of Hinnom was the
boundary line between the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, that it ran
south of a cliff known as the Cliff of the Jebusites, and that it came
out at a spring known as Enrogel. The small valley El- Wad,
which runs north and south, is not a natural line between two tribes;
while the deep Wady er-Rababi, which runs east and west, is a
natural boundary. By this division the spring Bir Eiyub was the
property of two tribes — a frequent arrangement in ancient times.
It is well known that the city of Jerusalem lay in the tribe of Benja
min. Thus, in Jer. 6:1 we read: "Flee for safety, ye children of
Benjamin, out of the midst of Jerusalem." The frequent com
bination "Judah and Jerusalem" is due to the fact that Jerusalem
did not lie in the tribe of Judah. The rabbinical tradition that the
boundary line between Judah and Benjamin ran through the heart
of the city is unsupported by Old Testament evidence. Jerusalem
as early as pre-exilic times probably occupied an area as large as
the modern city; consequently, if it lay in the tribe of Benjamin,

VALLEY OF HINNOM 25
the Valley of Hinnom cannot have been El- Wad, in the heart of the
city, but must have been Wady er-Rababi, on the west and south.
The Cliff of the Jebusites is apparently some part of the ancient
stronghold of the Jebusites (cf. II Sam. 5 :6 f.) ; and if the
Valley of Hinnom ran south of this cliff, it can only be the Wady
er-Rababi, since El-Wad does not lie south of any cliff that formed
part of the ancient city. Moreover, El- Wad does not run down to
any spring. Siloam, where it ends, is an artificial pool to which
water was brought by a conduit in Hezekiah 's time from the Virgin 's
Fountain. The only valley, apart from the Kidron, that leads to a
fountain is Wady er-Rababi, which comes out at the spring of
Blr Eiyub.
There are frequent allusions in the Old Testament to the Valley
of Hinnom as the scene of idolatrous rites in which children were
sacrificed to the god Molech (cf. II Kings 23:10; Jer. 2:23; 7:31 f;
19:2,6532:35); but none of these serve to fix the location of the valley.
If, as is probable, El- Wad lay in the heart of the ancient city, as of the
modern city, it is not so likely that shrines would be set up there as in
the Wady er-Rababi, which was outside of the city. Late Jewish
abhorrence of the idolatry practiced in the Valley of Hinnom made the
name Ge-Hinnom = Gehenna a synonym for Hell.
In Neh. 2 : 13, Nehemiah goes out by the Valley Gate. This can
only have been a gate opening upon the "Valley" of Hinnom. The
description of his ride down the valley and the gates that he passed
makes it impossible to believe that he was riding down El- Wad.
Remains of three ancient gates have been found by Bliss along
the southern course of the Wady er-Rababi which correspond with
the Valley Gate, the Dung Gate, and the Fountain Gate of Neh. 2 : 13 f .
If this identification be accepted, it proves that the gai down which
Nehemiah rode was not El- Wad, but Wady er-Rababi.
It may be observed also that the Arabian geographer Idrisi (11 54
A. D.) applies the name Gehennam — that is, Ge-Hinnom, or "Valley
of Hinnom" — to Wady er-Rababi. In 1838 the American traveler
Robinson found this name still attached to it. The identification of
Hinnom with Wady er-Rababi is now accepted by the majority of
topographers. W. Robertson Smith first suggested an identification
with El- Wad, and his authority has led a few to adopt this view;

26

CLIFF IN JERUSALEM

THE TYROPOEON 27
Warren has proposed an identification with the Kidron, but stands
alone in this theory.
A few other minor valleys near Jerusalem are mentioned in the
Old Testament. The Valley of Rephaim (Josh. 15:8; 18:16) lay
on the other side of the hill, west of the Valley of Hinnom, and formed
part of the boundary line between Judah and Benjamin. It is doubt
less to be identified with the modern Wady el-Werd, through which
the railway now runs from Jaffa to Jerusalem. Its upper end, near
the present Jerusalem railway station, is not far from the upper end
of Wady er-Rababi, so that the two valleys together form a long con
tinuous boundary fine. The "valley of the dead bodies and of the
ashes " mentioned in Jer. 31 : 40 is of unknown location. The Valley
of Jehoshaphat (" Yahweh judges"), mentioned in Joel 3 : 12, is prob
ably a place invented as a scene for the final judgment. Its identifi
cation with Wady Sitti Maryam is not found before the fourth century
of the Christian era, and is destitute of authority.
3. The valley called the Tyropoeon is first mentioned by Josephus
in War, v, 4: 1. He says :
Now the Valley of the Tyropoeon, as it was called, was that which we told
you before separated the hill of the Upper City from that of the Lower. It
extended as far as Siloam; for that is the name of a fountain which has sweet
water in it and this in great plenty also.
Since this valley ran through the heart of the city, and since it came
out at the Pool of Siloam, there is no question that it is to be identified
with some part of the modern El- Wad. The only dispute is as to
which of the branches of El- Wad is meant.
The common view is that the main branch, which starts north of
the Damascus Gate, runs under the Damascus Gate, and follows the
modern street El- Wad west of the Haram area, is the Tyropoeon of
Josephus. This view is favored by the fact that this is the principal
valley. In spite of its being filled with sixty feet of debris, the depres
sion is still clearly visible, and if one stands upon the top of the Damas
cus gate and looks southward, the city evidently lies upon two hills
divided by this depression. The people of modem Jerusalem apply
to it the name El- Wad, or "the valley," and they have no names for
the smaller lateral valleys that come in from the Jaffa Gate and from
the southwest quarter of the city. Ideas are very persistent in the

28 THE TYROPOEON
Orient. If the people of ancient Jerusalem had traced the city valley
in a different way, their usage would doubtless have been reflected
in the modern conception. It is not too much to say that the northern .
branch extending from the Damascus Gate is the only valley that one
would naturally think of as the Tyropoeon, and that other identifica
tions are due, not to anything in Josephus' description, but rather
to traditional notions concerning the hills of Jerusalem.
Robinson first suggested that the Tyropoeon is to be identified
with the west branch of the city valley — the one that starts near the
Jaffa gate and runs eastward until it joins El- Wad. This valley
corresponds with the line of the present David Street. It is now so
filled with rubbish that its existence is hardly apparent, but borings
show that in ancient times it must have been considerably deeper.
Nevertheless, even then it must have been an inconsiderable depression
in comparison with the one that starts north of the Damascus Gate,
and it is not likely that it was ever so important as to have had a name
of its own. Robinson himself confessed that the northern arm at
first impressed him as the real Tyropoeon, and that it was only con
siderations in regard to the location of Zion and Akra that forced him
to make a different identification. These considerations have subse
quently shown themselves to be erroneous, so that no reason now
exists for identifying the Tyropoeon with the west branch of the city
valley (see p. 53).
A third theory, first presented by Tobler and since taken up by
Mommert, is that the Tyropoeon is the Uttle valley which starts in the
center of the southwest corner of the city and runs in a southeasterly
direction until it joins El- Wad south of the city wall. This view is
open to all the objections that have been raised against Robinson's
theory. This valley is an insignificant branch of the main gorge
that runs through the heart of the city. It bears no name in modern
times, and it is unlikely that Josephus would have singled it out as a
landmark around which to group the hills of Jerusalem (see p. 55).

CHAPTER III
THE SPRINGS AND POOLS OF ANCIENT JERUSALEM
Closely connected with the question of the valleys of Jerusalem
is the question of the springs and pools. There are only two real

Photograph by Bonfils

THE VIRGIN'S FOUNTAIN

springs in the neighborhood of the city. The first of these is 'Ain
Urn ed-Derej, "Spring of the Mother of Steps," as it is called by the
Moslems; or 'Ain Sitti Maryam, "Spring of the Lady Mary," as it
is called by the Christians. This Hes on the west side of the Wady
Sitti Maryam, a short distance from the southeast comer of the
modem city wall. At present the ground is so filled up with rubbish
that the spring itself can be reached only by descending a flight of

29

3°

THE SPRINGS OF JERUSALEM

THE SPRINGS AND POOLS OF JERUSALEM

JOB'S WELL

31

steps. The rock-cut tunnel which leads from it to Siloam draws off
the surplus water, so that now it never overflows. In ancient times,
however, before the tunnel was constructed, it must have overflowed
into the adjacent valley. Owing to some siphon-hke formation of the
caverns through which the water comes, this spring is intermittent,
and this characteristic causes it to be regarded with superstitious
reverence.

Photograph by L. B. Paton

JOB'S WELL

The second spring is Bir-Eiyub, or "Job's Well." This lies in
the Wady en-Nar, a short distance below the junction of the Wady
Sitti Maryam and the Wady er-Rababi. A deep accumulation of
rubbish has buried it far beneath the present level of the ground, so
that it seems more like a well than a fountain. But in the rainy
season it still overflows, and in ancient times it probably ran at all
seasons of the year.
Job's Well and the Virgin's Fountain are the only places near
modern Jerusalem to which the name "spring" can properly be

32

CAIN SILWAN

applied. All other sources of water are reservoirs or cisterns. There
is no reason to suppose that the conditions were different in ancient
times ; so that whatever springs are mentioned in the Old Testament
will have to be identified with one or other of these two.
cAin Silwan lies at the junction of the middle valley, El- Wad, with
Wady Sitti Maryam. In spite of its name, it is not a true spring,
since it is fed by the tunnel from the Virgin's Fountain. In the

Photograph by L. B. Paton

cAIN SILWAN

Jerusalem Volume of the Palestine Exploration Fund (p. 345) it is
thus described:
The present pool consists of modern masonry, measuring 55 feet north and
south, by 18 feet east and west, and having its bottom at a level 2,086 feet above
the Mediterranean. The average depth is 20 feet, and on the north an archway
5 feet wide appears, leading to a small vault 12 feet long, in which is a descent
from the level of the top of the pool to the level of the channel supplying it. This
vault is modern, and the old mouth of the rock -cut channel has been stopped
up on the east side of the present pool, the water now being admitted farther
west under the vault. The recent explorations of Dr. Guthe prove that the pool

THE RED POOL

33

was originally much larger and cut in rock. On the east it probably extended
to the present rocky scarp, in which a channel is now cut connecting with the
lower pool, formed by a strong masonry dam at the mouth of the Tyropoeon
where it opens into the Kidron valley. The date of the masonry of this dam,
which is about a hundred yards southeast of the pool, is unknown; but it is
extremely massive, and probably of great antiquity.
The lower pool is now known as Birket el-Hamra, "the Red Pool."

Photograph by L. a. Paton

BIRKET EL-HAMRA

It has lately been fenced with a high wall for use as a garden, and
the water of the upper pool no longer flows into it.
Two large pools are formed by dams built across the Wady er-
Rababi, or Hinnom Valley. The lower one, which lies opposite to
the southwest corner of the modern city wall, is 550 feet long by 220
feet broad. It is hewn out of the solid rock that forms the bottom
of the valley, and the dam at the southern end is so massive that it is
traversed by the carriage road that goes from Jerusalem to the railway
station and to Bethlehem. It is now known as Birket es-Sultan, or
"the Sultan's Pool." The other pool, Birket Mamilla, lies at the

¥*te Divimt*. Library
Raw Haven Conn.

34

PATRIARCH'S POOL

head of the Wady er-Rababi in the midst of a Moslem cemetery. It
is 290 feet long by 190 feet broad. It is partly hewn out of the rock
and partly inclosed with walls of masonry. From it a conduit leads
through the depression south of the Jaffa Gate to the so-called Patri
arch's Pool in the heart of the city. There is no trace of springs in the
vicinity of either of these pools, and they are supphed only by the
rain-water which is gathered into them from the slopes of the valleys.

Photograph by L. B. Baton

BIRKET ES-SULTAN

Traditionally they are identified with Upper and Lower Gihon of the
Old Testament.
Birket Hammam el-Batraq, or "the Pool of the Patriarch's Bath,"
lies a short distance east of the Jaffa Gate in the corner formed by the
junction of David Street and Christian Street. It is 240 feet long
by 140 feet broad. In winter it is filled with rain-water gathered in
the Birket Mamilla and brought down thence through the conduit,
but in summer only a little foul-smelling and dirty water remains
that is a choice breeding-ground for the malarial mosquito. The

POOL OF ISRAEL

35

traditional Christian name for this reservoir is "the Pool of
Hezekiah." A sixth main pool lies north of the Haram inclosure and is known
as Birket Isra'il, or "the Pool of Israel." It lies in the bed of the
west arm of the Kidron valley that traverses the northeast quarter of
the city, at a depth of 68 feet below the level of the top of the Haram
platform. It measures 360 feet by 130. Its traditional Christian

Photograph by Boitfils

BIRKET MAMILLA

name is "the Pool of Bethesda." The other pools of Jerusalem are
scarcely more than cisterns and do not need to be enumerated here.
It remains now to determine with which of these springs and pools
the springs and pools of ancient Jerusalem are to be identified.
1. En-Rdgel. — Two springs near Jerusalem are mentioned in the
Old Testament, En-Rogel and the Gihon. These cannot have been
different names for the same place, because in I Kings, chap. 1, the
coronation of Adonijah takes place at En-Rogel, while that of Solo
mon is going on at Gihon. The name En-Rogel has been inter-

36

EN-ROGEL

preted as meaning "the Well of the Spy" or the "Fuller's Well;"
but these explanations are uncertain and, therefore, throw no light
upon its location. According to Josh. 15:7; 18:16, the border-line
between Judah and Benjamin went down the Valley of Hinnom
as far as En-Rogel, whence it passed across the mountain eastward
to En-Shemesh — that is, the "Apostles' Fountain" upon the road
to Jericho. If the Hinnom be identified with the Wady er-Rababi,

Photograph by BohJIIs

THE PATRIARCH'S POOL

as we have seen to be most likely, then En-Rogel must be identi
fied with Bir-Eiyub which lies at the mouth of this valley. It can be
identified with the Virgin's Fountain only upon the hypothesis that
the Hinnom is the Wady Sitti Maryam — a view that it is impossible
to defend. Even if the theory be adopted that the Hinnom is the
modem El- Wad, En-Rogel will still have to be Blr-Eiyub, since this
lies near the mouth of this valley.
According to II Sam. 17:17, "Jonathan and Ahimaaz stayed by
En-Rogel; and a maid-servant used to go and tell them; and they

EN-ROGEL 37
went and told King David : for they might not be seen to come into
the city." These statements are much more consistent with the
location of En-Rogel at Job's Well than at the Virgin's Fountain.
Job's Well is near enough to Jerusalem to be reached easily on foot,
and yet it is out of sight of the city around a turn in the valley. The
Virgin's Fountain, which hes immediately outside of the city, and is
a resort of the citizens who come to draw water, is too public a place
for the spies to have chosen as a rendezvous. Bir-Eiyub, accord
ingly, meets all the conditions in the case, while the Virgin's Fountain
does not meet them.
The same is true of the statement of I Kings 1:9, that "Adonijah
slew sheep and oxen and fatlings by the stone of Zoheleth, which is
beside En-Rogel; and he called all his brethren the king's sons,
and all the men of Judah the king's servants." Adonijah wished to
select a place near enough to Jerusalem for him to gather his forces
easily and to seize the city quickly after he had been proclaimed
king. At the same time, he was anxious to be sufficiently far away to
have his movements unobserved until the coup d'Stat was effected.
Bir-Eiyub meets all the conditions; it is accessible to Jerusalem,
and yet is out of sight of the city. Springs from time immemorial were
holy places in the estimation of the ancient Hebrews, and conse
quently this was an appropriate spot for the killing of sacrifices
and the inauguration of a king. The only objection that can be
made to this identification is the mention of the "stone Zoheleth
which is beside En-Rogel." In the modern village of Silwan, which
lies east of the Virgin's Fountain, Clermont- Ganneau discovered
that a steep rock up which the women carry their water-skins is known
by the name of ZahwSleh, which is etymologically a possible equiva
lent of the Hebrew Zoheleth. On this he based the theory that
En-Rogel is the adjacent Virgin's Fountain. This view has been
followed by Warren and Conder, but the evidence is insufficient to
prove the theory. The name Zahweleh is used by Palestinian vil
lagers for any shde or steep declivity, so that there is nothing to connect
it with the particular stone Zoheleth mentioned in I Kings 1:9.
Moreover, the stone Zoheleth was evidently an altar on which Adonijah
sacrificed sheep and oxen, while the Zahweleh is a sort of staircase
ascending the cliff. Even if the identity of the name Zahweleh with

3»

THE GIHON

Zoheleth can be estabhshed, there are so many instances of the shift
ing of names from one locahty to another that no certain conclusions
can be based upon this identification. There is no reason, therefore,

{

I

tfa ;' ::%''

¦¦<¦:•¦:'¦':.

"Mm.-.

-..:., j

\ &¦:. _
5 v
Photograph by L. B. Paton
THE ZAHWELEH IN THE VILLAGE OF SILWAN
why one should depart from the conclusion demanded by the passages
just cited, that En-Rogel is identical with Bir-Eiyub.
2. The Gihon. — If En-Rogel is Bir-Eiyub, then Gihon must be
the other of the two modern springs of Jerusalem — namely, the
Virgin's Fountain. This identification is confirmed by all the Old
THE GIHON 39
Testament references. The name Gihon means "gusher." This
• is apphcable only to an intermittent spring, such as the Virgin's
Fountain. Nowhere in the Old Testament is Gihon specifically
called a "spring," but its name is sufficient evidence of its character,
and Josephus (Ant., vii, 14:5) calls it a "fountain." It is first men
tioned in I Kings 1 : 33 at the time of Adonijah's attempted revolution,
when David commanded his servants to bring Solomon down to
Gihon and there anoint him king. Near by were Adonijah and his
company at En-Rogel, who heard the shouts of the people with Solo
mon and scattered in confusion. David had no reason for fearing
to send his son to be crowned at the nearest spring, so that, if Adonijah
selected the more remote En-Rogel, he would naturally select the
Virgin's Fountain. This was convenient to the city and was doubt
less just as holy as En-Rogel. The turn in the valley prevented the
conspirators with Adonijah from seeing any thing that went on at the
Virgin's Fountain, but when the new king was greeted with shouts,
the distance was so short that they heard the noise. All the conditions
of the story are met, accordingly, by the assumption that En-Rogel,
where Adonijah was, was Bir-Eiyub, and Gihon, where Solomon was,
was the Virgin's Fountain. The theories of Robinson, Lewin, and
Warren which identify Gihon with the tank of stagnant water known
as Birket es-Sultan or with Birket Mamilla, the other reservoir on
the west side of the city, fail to recognize that Gihon was a spring,
and that these reservoirs are too far away from En-Rogel for Adonijah
to have heard anything that went on at them. These pools are prob
ably both of late origin; but even if they were ancient, there was
nothing about them to make them holy places to which a king would
be taken for coronation.
In II Chron. 32:30 we are told that "Hezekiah also stopped the
upper outflow of the waters of Gihon and brought them straight
down to the west side of the City of David." This passage implies
that the Gihon was a fountain, and hence forbids its identification with
any reservoir. It states that Hezekiah stopped the overflow of this
spring outside of the city and brought the water to the west side of
the City of David. It is impossible to refer this to anything else than
a blocking-up of an old watercourse still visible on the surface of the
ground south of the city wall, and the construction of the tunnel

40 POOL OF SILOAM
through the rock which now conducts the water of the Virgin's Foun
tain to the Pool of Silwan. This tunnel is also referred to in II Kings
18:17; 20:20; Isa. 22:9, 11; II Chron. 32:4 (see pp. 1041!.).
In II Chron. 33:14 we are told that "Manasseh built an outer
wall to the City of David, on the west side of Gihon in the brook."
The ndhal, or "brook," as we have seen, is the name constantly
applied to the valley of the Kidron, or Wady Sitti Maryam. If Gihon
lay in the Kidron valley, it must be identified with the Virgin's
Fountain. 3. The Pool 0} Siloam. — The name Shiloah, or Siloam, is the
exact equivalent of Silwan, the name now applied to the pool at the
mouth of El- Wad that is fed by the tunnel from the Virgin's Fountain.
All the ancient references agree with this identification. Isa. 8:6
speaks of "the waters of Shiloah that go softly." In Neh. 3:15 the
Pool of Shelah, or Siloam, is mentioned as lying between the Fountain
Gate and the King's Garden. The Fountain Gate is known to have
been situated at the southern extremity of the city, and the King's
Garden was the fertile, well-watered tract that hes at the junction
>)i the Tyropoeon Valley with the valley of the Kidron. Siloam is also
mentioned in Luke 13:4 and in John 9:7, but these passages throw
no light upon its location, except that in John the name "Pool of
Siloam" corresponds with the fact that 'Ain Silwan is not a fountain,
but a reservoir fed by the conduit from Gihon. Josephus (War,
v, 4:1) states that Siloam lay at the southern end of the Tyropoeon
Valley, and describes it as a fountain with much sweet water. In
War, v, 9 : 4, he describes it as a spring outside of the city. In War,
v. 4: 2, he names it as the southern point at which the wall bent around
(cf. War, v, 12:2; ii, 16:2; v, 6:1; vi, 7:2; vi, 8:5). These pas
sages all indicate that he located Siloam in the same place as the
modem Pool of Silwan. In regard to this identification there is no
dispute among topographers.
This pool is also referred to in II Kings 20:20, where it is said of
Hezekiah: "He made the pool and the conduit and brought water
into the city." The " conduit " is the Siloam Tunnel, and the " pool "
is the Pool of Siloam into which the tunnel empties. In Neh. 2 : 14
it is called "the King's Pool," either because it was built by King
Hezekiah, or because it was adjacent to the King's Gardens. In

POOL OF BETHESDA 41
Isa. 22:9, 11 it is said: "Ye stopped the waters of the lower pool.
Ye made also a reservoir between the two walls for the water of the
old pool." The "lower" or "old" pool can be only the Birket el-
Hamra, or Lower Pool of Siloam, which, before Hezekiah's tunnel
was made, was filled from the Gihon, or Virgin's Fountain, by a
conduit on the surface of the ground on the west side of the Kidron
Valley. The new "reservoir between the two walls" can be only the
Upper Pool of Siloam, into which the water was diverted from the
"old pool" by Hezekiah's tunnel.
Isa. 7 : 3 speaks of "the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of
the fuller's field." This "upper pool" one would naturally suppose
to be the Upper Pool of Siloam that is fed by the Siloam Tunnel,
except that Isa., chap. 7, belongs to the reign of Ahaz, while the
Siloam Tunnel was constructed by Hezekiah. Unless the writer of
Isa., chap. 7, employs the name "conduit of the upper pooP'prolepti-
cally, we shall have to assume that the "upper pool" here means
the Gihon, from which the old surface conduit that preceded Heze
kiah's tunnel led to the "lower pool." This will also be the meaning
of II Kings 18: 17 = Isa. 36:2 which speaks of Sennacherib's mes
sengers to Hezekiah as standing "by the conduit of the upper pool
which is in the highway of the fuller's field."
4. The Pool of Bethesda. — In John 5 : 2 we are told :
Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep . . . a pool, which is called Be
thesda,1 having five porches. In these lay a multitude of them that were sick,
blind, halt, and withered. And a certain man was there which had been thirty
and eight years in his infirmity. When Jesus saw him lying, and knew that he
had been now a long time in that case, he said unto him, Wouldest thou be made
whole ? The sick man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is
troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth
down before me. Jesus saith unto him, Arise, take up thy bed, and walk.
Our only clues to the location of this pool are, that it was near some
thing connected with sheep; that it had five porches large enough
to hold a multitude of sick people; that its waters flowed intermit
tently; and that it lay outside of the city, so that Jesus was violating
the Jewish sabbath law in telling the lame man to carry his mat to his
house. On the hypothesis that the Sheep Gate in the north wall of
the Temple lay near it, Bethesda has been traditionally identified
1 Some manuscripts read Bethsaida; others, Bethzatha.

Photograph by Bonjils

BIRKET ISRAciL
From the fourteenth century till recent times supposed to be the Pool of Bethesda. See p. 43

POOL OF BETHESDA 43
with Birket Isra 'il north of the Haram area; but it is not at all certain
that the thing connected with sheep was the Sheep Gate, and the

Photograph by Bonjils THE CRUSADERS' POOL OF BETHESDA

traditional identification does not make its appearance until a late
date. The excavations of the White Friars near the Church of St.
Anne north of Birket Isracil have disclosed a large vaulted cistern,
which the Crusaders supposed to be the Pool of Bethesda, and over

44 OTHER POOLS
which they built a church. This cistern lay outside of the city wall
in the time of Christ, but it has not five porches capable of accommo
dating a multitude of people, and its waters never flowed intermit
tently. The Virgin's Fountain is the only intermittent spring in
the vicinity of Jerusalem, and therefore Bethesda is probably to be
located at this point. It is true that no remains of porches are to be
seen here, but excavations have never been made, and it is possible
that such remains exist buried beneath the deep accumulation of
debris that now surrounds this fountain.2
5. The Pool Struthion is mentioned by Josephus (War, v, 11:4)
as lying near to the Tower of Antonia. Apparently it is identical
with Birket Isracil, which hes east of the site of Antonia and north
of the Temple.
6. The Pool Amygdalon. — In War, v, 11:4, Josephus says "that
the tenth legion of Titus' army, after the capture of the two outer
walls on the north, was encamped at a long distance from the Pool
Struthion at the Pool Amygdalon. This seems to indicate that
Amygdalon is identical with Birket Hammam el-Batraq, or "the
Patriarch's Pool. "
7. The Serpent's Pool. — In War, v, 3:2, Josephus states that
Titus "made all the places -level from Scopus to Herod's Monu
ments, which adjoined to the pool called the Serpent's Pool." This
seems to show that the Serpent's Pool is identical with the modern
Birket Mamilla.
2 See the valuable article on " The Pool of Bethesda," by Dr. E. W. G. Masterman,
in the Biblical World, February, 1905.

CHAPTER IV
THE CITY OF DAVID
The two main valleys of Jerusalem, Wady Sitti Maryam, or the
Kidron, and Wady er-Rababi, or the Hinnom, form a wedge-shaped

Photograph by L. B. Baton

THE WESTERN HILL OF JERUSALEM

plateau that is cut off from the surrounding country on the east,
south, and west, and that is connected with the tableland of central
Judea only on the north. This plateau is divided by El- Wad, the
ancient Tyropoeon, into two unequal divisions, which we may call
the west hill and the east hill.
The west hill is three times as large as the eastern one, and at its
highest point, near the southwest corner of the city, rises to a height
of 2,550 feet, so that it overlooks the Temple mount. By the arms of
45

46

HILLS OF JERUSALEM

THE HILLS OF JERUSALEM

HILLS OF JERUSALEM 47
the valley, El- Wad, this hill is subdivided into four smaller hills. The
first lies in the northwest comer of the present city, and may be desig
nated as NW; the second hes between the site of the Church of the
Holy Sepulcher and the main valley El- Wad. It is cut off from NW
by a small arm of the western branch of El- Wad that comes down
from the vicinity of the Church of the Sepulcher. It may be desig
nated as N (the north summit). The third summit hes in the south
west corner of the city, and may be designated as SW. Separated
from it by the southern branch of El-Wad is a fourth slight elevation,
which we may designate as C (central hill).
The smaller eastern hill, on which the Mosque of Omar hes and
on which the ancient Temple stood, is narrow, and curves in a crescent
shape from northwest to southeast and then again to southwest.
Its highest elevation, in the northeast corner of the city on the site of
the Dome of the Rock, is a little over 2,400 feet. It is subdivided by
one of the arms of the Kidron that runs across the upper end of the
Mosque inclosure into two main summits. The northernmost of
these lay outside of the limits of the ancient city. An arm of this
branch, running from west to east across the northern end of the
Haram area, forms two small hills; and the excavations of Guthe
south of the Haram area seem to show that there was another small
valley south of the Temple which separated the southern end of the
eastern hill from the summit on which the Temple stood. There
were, thus, three peaks to that portion of the eastern hill which lay
within the ancient city limits. These may be designated for brevity
as NE (northeast summit), E (the east central summit), and SE
(southeast summit).
The task now before us is the identification of the hills and city
quarters mentioned in antiquity with these seven summits of the
modern city. In this investigation we shall follow the order in which
the hills are first mentioned in the Bible, and in the discussion of each
we shall examine the evidence in chronological order. This is the
only safe method; for it frequently happens that names are shifted
from one locahty to another in the growth of tradition, so that it is
dangerous to start with late references and to work backward from
them. The first hill mentioned in the Old Testament is the strong-

4s

JEBUS

hold of the Jebusites which David captured and renamed after himself.
In II Sam. 5:6-8 =1 Chron. 11 : 5 f. we are told:
And the king and his men went to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhab
itants of the land; which spake unto David saying, Except thou take away the
blind and the lame thou shalt not come in hither: thinking, David cannot come
in hither. Nevertheless David _took the stronghold of Zion; the same is the
City of David. And David said on that day, Whosoever smiteth the Jebusites,
let him go up by the watercourse And David dwelt in the stronghold,
and called it the City of David.

Photograph by L. B. Po

THE EASTERN HILL OF JERUSALEM

The fortress of the Canaanites here mentioned must have lain near a
water supply; in fact, this is indicated by the allusion to the "water
course." Gihon, the modern Virgin's Fountain, is the only spring
in the immediate neighborhood of Jerusalem; it seems certain,
therefore, that ancient Jebus was situated near this spring. This
naturally suggests a position on SE, from which hill Gihon is most
accessible. The allusion to the "water-course," or "gutter" in
II Sam. 5 : 8 is plausibly interpreted as referring to the ancient tunnel
which Warren discovered leading from the top of the eastern hill down

CITY OF DAVID 49
to the Virgin's Fountain. The statement of this same passage, that
Jebus was so strong that the bhnd and the lame could hold it against
an enemy, shows that it had a fine natural location. This is truer of
SE than of any other part of the city. Inaccessible chffs surround it
on all sides, except on the narrow neck at the north which connects
it with the upper ridges of the eastern hill, and this could easily be
protected with a rampart. SW and NE are higher hills, but they are
not so easily defended. Before artillery was invented, SE must have
been well-nigh impregnable, and military authorities are agreed that
it is the most hkely location for the ancient stronghold of Jebus.
David's flight recorded in II Sam., chap. 15, does not mention the
City of David, but implies that he hved on the eastern hill, inasmuch
as his first halting-point was the valley of Kidron (cf. vs. 23).
The statement of I Kings 1 : 33, that Solomon was sent down to
Gihon to be anointed, also suggests the nearness of David's residence
to this spring. In a sudden emergency, when everything depended
upon haste. David would not have been likely to send Solomon to a
remote fountain. If the City of David was located on SE, it was
necessary merely to drop down over the edge of the hill to be at the
sacred place.
In none of the passages where the City of David is mentioned is
one said to "go up" to it. David brings the ark into the City of
David (II Sam. 6 : 10) ; the ark goes in (II Sam. 6 : 16 =1 Chron. 15 : 29) ;
Solomon brings the daughter of Pharaoh into the City (I Kings 3:1).
These statements show that the City of David did not lie on high
ground. They are appropriate to SE, which is considerably lower
than all the other hills; but they are not appropriate, if the City of
David was situated upon SW (its traditional location), or upon any
of the other hills. On the other hand, it is always said that one " goes
up" from the City of David to the Temple and to the Palace which
Solomon built on E adjacent to the Temple. Thus, in I Kings 8:1 =
II Chron. 5:2, "Solomon brought up the ark of the covenant of the
Lord out of the City of David;" I Kings 9:24, "Pharaoh's daughter
came up out of the City of David into her house which Solomon had
built for her" (cf. II Chron. 8:11). This language is explainable
only if the City of David lay on SE, which is considerably lower than
E, the Temple hill.

50 CITY OF DAVID
In Isa. 29:1, 2, 7 we read:
Ho, Ariel, Ariel, the city where David encamped! add ye year to year; let
the feasts come round: then will I distress Ariel  And the multitude
of all the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and
her stronghold, and that distress her, shall be as a dream.
From this it appears that the City of David is identical with Ariel,
"the hearth of God," where the feasts are celebrated; that is, it is
identical with the Temple mountain.
According to Ezek. 43:7, the kings of Judah have defiled the
Temple by putting their sepulchers close to it; but the tombs of the
kings were in the City of David (cf. I Kings 11:43; I4:3I; I5;8;
15:24; 22:50; II Kings 8:24; 9:28; 12:21; 14:20; 15:7; 15:38;
16:20); the City of David, therefore, must have been adjacent to
the Temple on the eastern hill. We know that NE was not built
upon until a late period. Consequently the City of David can have
lain only on SE.
Neh. 3:15 records:
The fountain gate repaired Shallun the son of Colhozeh, the ruler of the
district of Mizpah; he built it, and covered it, and set up the doors thereof, the
bolts thereof, and the bars thereof, and the wall of the pool of Shelah by the
king's garden, even unto the stairs that go down from the City of David.
From this it appears that the stairs of the City of David were adjacent
to the Pool of Siloam and the King's Garden at the mouth of the
Tyropoeon Valley. This shows that the City of David lay on SE,
immediately above the Pool of Siloam. The same conclusion is
demanded by the narrative of the procession of the Levites in Neh.
12:37, who went from the Fountain Gate, which lay in the Tyropoeon
close to Siloam, to the stairs of the City of David, and then onward
to the Water Gate, which lay in the east wall of the city above Gihon.
The excavations of Frederick Bliss on SE have disclosed a number
of steps cut in the rock at the southern end of SE. In all probability
these are identical with the stairs of the City of David mentioned by
Nehemiah. II Chron. 32 : 30 records that Hezekiah " stopped the upper outflow
of the waters of Gihon and brought them straight down on the west
side of the City of David." If, as we have seen, Gihon is the Virgin's
Fountain in the Kidron Valley, this water-course of King Hezekiah

CITY OF DAVID

51

can only be the tunnel which runs under SE from the Virgin's Foun
tain to Siloam. Consequently the City of David can only be SE, on
whose west side the Siloam tunnel empties.
II Chron. 33:14 narrates that Manasseh built "an outer wall to
the City of David on the west side of Gihon in the brook (nahal)."
"Gihon in the brook" is the Virgin's Fountain, and the wall of the
City of David west of Gihon can only be a wall on the eastern side of

Photograph by L. B. Paton THF. STAIRS OF THE CITY OF DAVTD
the eastern hill. These last two passages in Second Chronicles are
derived from ancient sources, and consequently have a higher his
torical value than statements of the Chronicler himself.
In I Mace. 1:33 we read: "They builded the City of David with
a »reat and strong wall with strong towers, and it became unto them
an Akra;" also in I Mace. 7:32, 33: "They fled into the City of
David- and after these things Nicanor went up to Mount Zion and
there came some of the priests out of the sanctuary;" I Mace. 14:36:
"They were taken away also that were in the City of David, they that
were in Jerusalem, who had made themselves an Akra, out of which

52 THE AKRA
they issued and polluted all things round about the sanctuary."
These passages indicate that the City of David which the Greeks
turned into their Akra, or stronghold, was in close proximity to the
Temple. Its precise location is not stated, but it must have been
somewhere on the eastern hill. Since the City of David has been
identified with SE by all previous references, it is natural to under
stand it of the same hill in these passages (see pp. 128 ff.).
Josephus mentions the City of David in Ant., vii, 3:1,2.
Now the Jebusites, who were the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and were by
extraction Canaanites, shut their gates, and placed the blind, and the lame, and
all their maimed persons, upon the wall, in way of derision of the king; and
said, that the very lame themselves would hinder his entrance into it. This
they did depending on the strength of their walls. David was hereby enraged
and began the siege of Jerusalem, employing his utmost diligence and alacrity
therein  So he took the Lower City by force, but the Akra held out
still; whence it was that the king, knowing that the proposal of dignities and
rewards would encourage the soldiers to greater actions, promised that he who
should first go over the ditches that were beneath the Akra, and should ascend
to the Akra itself and take it, should have the command of the entire people
conferred upon him. So they were all ambitious to ascend, and thought no
pains too great in order to ascend thither; .... However, Joab, the son of
Zeruiah, preceded the rest; and as soon as he was got up, cried out to the
king, and claimed the chief command. When David had cast the Jebusites out
of the Akra, he also rebuilt Jerusalem, and named it the City of David, and
abode there all the time of his reign  Now David took possession of
the Upper (some MSS. read "Lower") City: he also joined the Akra to it and
made it one body: and when he had encompassed all with walls he appointed
Joab to take care of them. It was David, therefore, who first cast the Jebusites
out of Jerusalem, and called it by his own name, the City of David.
In this passage Josephus identifies the City of David with the
Akra and regards it as part of the Lower City, which he contrasts
with the Upper City. By the Akra he means the stronghold of the
Hasmoneans, for he quotes First Maccabees in numerous places
where he speaks of it (cf. Ant., xii, 3:3; 6:2; 7:6; 9:3; 9:4; 10:4;
xiii, 1:352:3; 4:9; 5:2; 5:11; 6:6; 6:7; War, i, 2:2). In other
passages also he equates Akra with the Lower City. Thus in
War i, 1:4, we read: "So he ejected them out of the Upper City,
and drove the soldiers into the Lower, which part of the city was
called the Akra;" War, v, 4:1: "The other hill, which was called

THE AKRA 53
Akra, and sustains the Lower City, is of the shape of a gibbous
moon;" War, v, 6:1: "He also held that fountain, and the Akra,
which was no other than the Lower City," Accordingly, it is clear
that, if we can identify either the Akra or the Lower City with one of
the hills of Jerusalem, we shall know where Josephus located the
City of David.
The most important passage on this subject is War, v, 4:1 :
The city was built upon two hills, which were opposite to one another, and
had a valley to divide them asunder, into which the houses on both hills descended
continuously. Of these hills, that which contained the Upper City was much higher,
longer, and straighter. Accordingly, the stronger was called Phrourion by King
David; he was the father of that Solomon who built the first Temple; but by us
it was called the Upper Market-Place. But the other hill, which was called
Akra, and sustained the Lower City, was of the shape of a gibbous moon.
Over against this was a third hill, but naturally lower than Akra, and parted
formerly from the other by a broad valley. However, in those times when the
Hasmoneans reigned, they filled up that valley with earth, having a mind to join the
city to the Temple. They then took off part of the height of Akra, and reduced
it to a less elevation than it was before, that the Temple might be superior to it.
The location of the first of these hills, which Josephus calls the
Upper City, is certain. All modern topographers identify it with
SW. This corresponds with Josephus' description of it as the highest
of the hills, and with what he says about the inaccessible valley which
defended it. The third hill, which Josephus says lay over against
Akra, is not quite so certain. Spiess (Das Jerusalem des Josephus)
thinks that it was NW, but it seems plain, from what Josephus says
in this passage about the cutting-down of the Akra hill until it was
lower than the Temple, that the third hill is the Temple hill. On
this point there is general agreement. In regard to the second hill,
the Akra, or Lower City, there is, however, no consensus of opinion.
Every one of the seven hills except SW has been suggested by some
one as its location.
1. The monk Brocardus in 1283 suggested that the Akra was NW,
and he has been followed by Robinson, Conder, Fergusson, de
Saulcy, Pierotti, Gatt, and many others. This view is open to a
number of insuperable objections. Josephus describes the Akra as
lower than the Upper City; but NW is higher than SW. Josephus
describes Akra as a hill; but NW is not an independent summit,

54 THE AKRA
but is part of the same ridge with SW. Josephus says that both
of the hills of Jerusalem were inclosed with deep valleys; but NW
is not inclosed in this way. Josephus says that a valley between
Akra and the Temple hill had been filled up in his day, so that it no
longer existed ; but the valley between NW and the Temple has not
been filled and is clearly seen to this day. Josephus describes Akra
as shaped like a gibbous moon; but this does not apply to NW.
First Maccabees and Josephus both state that Akra lay so near to
the Temple that it was a constant menace to the worshipers. This
was not true of NW (cf. I Mace. 1:33-40; 14:36; Ant., xii, 7:6; 9:3).
In War, vi, 8:4, Josephus states that when Titus had captured the
Upper City the people fled to Akra ; but by the capture of the second
wall NW was already in his hands, and the Roman soldiers were
encamped there (cf. War, v, 8).
2. Fallmerayer in 1852 identified Akra with N. He has been
followed by Wilhams, Lewin, DeVogiie, Warren, Merrill, and Schick.
This theory is open to nearly all of the objections that have just been
urged against NW. N is not inaccessible from all sides; is not
an independent hill, but is a part of NW; is not gibbous-shaped;
is not so adjacent to the Temple as to be a menace to it; and the
valley between it and the Temple is not filled up. Of all the Akra
theories this is the least plausible.
3. The theory that Akra lay north of the Temple on NE has been
advocated by Wilhams, Schultz, Krafft, and Schafter. This theory
has the advantage of placing Akra near to the Temple, as the state
ments of First Maccabees and Josephus demand. The valley
between this hill and the Temple has also been filled up, as Josephus
asserts. The objections to this view are that NE is not appreciably
lower than SW, and that it is higher than the Temple; whereas
Josephus asserts that, after the capture of Akra by Simon, it was cut
down until it was lower than the Temple. Furthermore, no part
of NE was included in the first wall of the city, as described by
Josephus (War, v, 4:2). Consequently, if, as First Maccabees and
Josephus assert, Akra equals the City of David, Akra cannot have
lain north of the Temple.
Against all three of the theories which place Akra in the northern
part of the modem city, the fact may be urged that this quarter lay

THE AKRA 55
outside of the inner, northern wall of the old city. This wall, accord
ing to Josephus (War, v, 4:2), began at the Tower of Hippicus, near
the Jaffa Gate, and ran straight east along the western branch of the
Tyropoeon to the west cloister of the Temple. When Josephus
asserts that the ancient city lay on two hills, and that it was inclosed
on the north with three walls, he evidently imphes that the two hills
lay inside of the innermost wall. In that case we are to look for the
Lower City as well as the Upper City south of the hne extending
from the Jaffa Gate to the west cloister of the Temple. Accordingly,
Akra cannot be identified either with NW, with N, or with NE.
4. Tobler first proposed to identify Akra with C. In this he has
been followed by Mommert. This view has the advantages of putting
Akra inside of the innermost wall, and of making it adjacent both to
the Upper City (SW) and to the Temple hill (E) ; but it is open to the
following objections: Josephus states that the Akra was cut down
by Simon until it was lower than the Temple; but C is not lower than
E. Josephus also asserts that the valley between Akra and the
Temple was filled up with material obtained by cutting the Akra
down ; this is not true of the valley between C and E, which still forms
a deep gorge. War, vi, 6:2, says that a bridge connected the
Upper City with the Temple, but this bridge ran from C to E.
Consequently, Josephus regarded C as a part of the Upper City.
It cannot, therefore, be identified with the Akra or Lower City.
5. The theory that the Akra was the Temple hill itself, and that
the Lower City lay in a ring around the Temple, has been advocated
by Thrupp and von Alten; but it is impossible, because Josephus
distinguishes the Temple hill as a third hill different from both the
Upper and the Lower City, and because the Lower City was in exis
tence in the time of David, while the Temple quarter was not laid
out until the reign of Solomon.
6. The one theory that remains is to identify the Akra = Lower
City = City of David with SE, where we have found the City of David
to be located by all earlier authorities. This view was first proposed
by Olshausen. It has been adopted by Caspari, Menke, Riess,
Furrer, von Klaiber, Benzinger, Buhl, Guthe, W. R. Smith, G. A.
Smith, and other leading modern authorities. It does justice to all
the statements of Josephus previously quoted. SE is lower than

56 THE AKRA
SW, the Upper City; it is separated from it by a deep valley, the
Tyropoeon; it is lower than the Temple hill; and there is no valley
at present between it and the Temple, although the excavations of
Guthe seem to show that such a valley once existed. Whether
Josephus is correct in saying that the Akra was originally higher than
the Temple, and that there was once a broad valley between the two,
we are not called upon to investigate. The only fact that concerns
us is that in his own time it was lower than the Temple, and that no
valley then existed. The SE hill also answers to the description
of being gibbous-shaped. This hill lies south of the inner wall of
Jerusalem, and consequently does justice to the statement that the
city consisted of two hills at the time when it was inclosed with its
first wall. When one reads that the city of Jerusalem lay upon two
hills, one thinks immediately of SW and SE separated by the deep
El-Wad. Any other identification of the Lower City compels us to
assume that the Tyropoeon is not the principal valley that runs
through the heart of the city, but some insignificant gully that enters
this valley from the west. Tacitus in Hist., v, n, also speaks of
Jerusalem as lying on two hills, and by these he means SW and SE.
Josephus quotes all the passages in First Maccabees that describe
the Akra as near to the Temple. He must, therefore, have located it
upon the east hill. Ant., xiv, 16:2, says that when the outer court
of the Temple and the Lower City fell into the hands of the Romans,
the Jews fled into the inner court and into the Upper City. This
implies that the outer court and Lower City were adjacent. The
same is implied in War, ii, 17 : 5, where it is said that the rebels held
the Lower City and the Temple; and in War, iv, 9:12, where one
of the towers erected at the corner of the Temple controUed the Lower
City. In War, vi, 6:3, Akra is combined with Ophel — a quarter
of the city which is known to have lain immediately south of the
Temple. In War, vi, 7:2, after the taking of the Temple, we read:
"The Romans drove the robbers out of the Lower City and set all
on fire as far as Siloam."
It appears, accordingly, that Josephus located the Akra or City of
David in the same place where it is located by all the earlier references
in the Old Testament and Apocrypha. The one passage which is
supposed to contradict this view is War, v, 4:1, where we are told

THE AKRA 57
that David called the Upper City the stronghold ; but the word used
here is not " Akra," but " Phrourion." In not one passage does Jose
phus put the City of David elsewhere than on SE. There is, accord
ingly, an unbroken tradition in favor of the location of the City of
David on SE, from the earliest times down to Josephus. After the
destmction of Jerusalem the City of David was supposed to have lain
on SW, where today the tomb of David is shown by the Moslems;
but there is no trace of this tradition before the fourth century a. d.,
and it is worthless over against the large body of ancient evidence in
favor of SE.

58

WEST HILL OF JERUSALEM

CHAPTER V
ZION, OPHEL, AND MORIAH
I. Zion. — Another hill mentioned in the Old Testament even
more frequently than the City of David is Zion. In regard to the
location of this hill the views have been as diverse as they have been
in regard to the City of David. The tradition both of the Greek and
of the Latin Church identifies Zion with SW. This is followed by
Robinson, Wilhams, Lewin, and DeVogiie. The first trace of this
view is found in the narrative of the Bordeaux Pilgrim dating from
the fourth century A. D. The monk Brocardus in 1283 followed
this view in his topography of Jerusalem. Aben Ezra, De Lyra,
Lightfoot, Hiller, and others have identified Zion with NW. Fergu
son and Thrupp identified it with NE. Clarke, Buckingham, and
Ritter identified it with the Hill of Evil Counsel southeast of the
city. In recent times the view has become general that Zion is the
name for the entire eastern ridge. This view was first advocated by
Caspari, and has been adopted by Birch, Weikert, Socin, Guthe, Ben-
zinger, Buhl, and G. A. Smith. Even the monks of St. Stephen's
in Jerusalem have come to accept the east-hill theory in opposition to
the tradition of the Latin church. The arguments in support of the
identification of Zion with the eastern hill are as follows :
1. All the early references to the City of David identify it with
Zion in such a way as to show that Zion and the City of David must
have lain on the same ridge. In II Sam. 5 : 7 [= I Chron. 11:5] we
read: "Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion; the same
is the City of David." In I Kings 8 : i[= II Chron. 5 : 2] we are told
that Solomon brought up the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of
the City of David, which is Zion. The City of David, as we have
seen, was located on the southern extremity of the easternTiill. If it
can be explained by saying that it is Zion, this indicates that Zion was
a name for the same hill. 59

6o

ZION

2. The pre-exilic prophets frequently speak of Zion as in a peculiar
sense the abode of Yahweh. This shows that it was the hill upon
which the Temple stood. Thus, Amos 1:2, "Yahweh shall roar
from Zion;" Isa. 2:3, " Many people shall come up to the mountain
of Yahweh, to the house of the God of Jacob. ... for out of Zion
shall go forth instruction;" Isa. 4:5, "And the Lord will create over
the whole habitation of Mount Zion, and over her assemblies, a cloud
and smoke by day;" 8: 18," Yahweh of hosts dwelleth in Mount Zion;"

Photograph by Bonjils

SOUTHEAST HILL— THE TRUE ZION

14:32, "Yahweh hath founded Zion;" 18:7, "A present shall be
brought unto Yahweh of hosts to the place of the name of Yahweh of
hosts, the mount of Zion;" 29:1, 7, 9, "Ariel, the city where David
encamped," and where the feasts of Yahweh are celebrated, is called
Mount Zion; 31:4, "Yahweh of hosts will come down to fight upon
Mount Zion;" 31:9, "whose fire is in Zion;" 33:20, "Zion, the city of
our solemnities." Mic. 3:12 puts into parallelism with the statement,
"Zion shall be ploughed as a field," "the mountain of the house shall
become as the high places of a forest." Mic. 4:7 says: "Yahweh
shall reign over them in Mount Zion." Jer. 8:19 inquires: "Is not

ZION 6 1
Yahweh in Zion? Is not her king in her?" Jer. 31:6, 12 reads:
"Let us go up to Zion unto Yahweh our God." "They shall come
and sing in the height of Zion." These passages indicate that the
Temple, the earthly abode of Yahweh, stood upon Zion. But the
Temple was certainly situated upon the eastern hill; consequently
Zion also must be sought on this hill.
3. The early prophets mention Zion as the residence of the king
and the nobility. We know, however, that Solomon's palace adjoined
the Temple and was inclosed within the same wall; consequently
Zion must be identified with the eastern hill. Amos 6 : 1 describes
the rulers of Judah as "those that are at ease in Zion," and puts them
into parallelism with the rulers of Israel who dwell in Samaria. Isa.
3: 16 f. describes the wives of the aristocracy as "daughters of Zion;"
16:1 tells the distressed Moabites to send a tribute of lambs to the
ruler of Judah unto the mount of daughter Zion. Isa. 28 : 16, describ
ing the condition of the renewed nation, says: "Behold I lay in Zion
for a foundation stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone." Mic.
4:8 says that the former dominion of the kings of Judah shall again
return to Ophel of daughter Zion. In this connection it may be men
tioned that Cant. 3:11 represents the daughters of Zion as going
forth to meet King Solomon on his return to his palace with his bride.
4. The exilic writings connect Zion with the Temple as frequently
as do the pre-exilic writings; thus, Lam. 1:4, "The ways of Zion
do mourn, because none come to the solemn assembly; all her gates
are desolate, her priests do sigh;" 2:6f., "Yahweh hath caused
solemn assembly and sabbath to be forgotten in Zion; he hath cast
off his altar and abhorred his sanctuary;" 4: 1, 11, "The stones of the
sanctuary are poured out;" "Yahweh has kindled a fire in Zion;"
Obad., vs. 17, "In Mount Zion there shall be those that escape, and
it shall be holy" (cf. also Isa. 52:7 f.; 60:14; 64:iof; Jer. 50:5, 28;
51:10). 5. The post-exilic prophets in hke manner speak of Zion as the
dwelling-place of Yahweh (cf. Zech. 2 : 10; 8 : 2, 3 ; Joel 2 : 1, 15 ; 3 : 16,
17, 21; Isa. 24:23).
6. In the Psalter Zion is scarcely ever mentioned except in connec
tion with the Temple and its worship. In a number of passages it is
put into parallelism with the sanctuary ; thus, Ps. 20:2, "Send thee help

62 ZION
from the sanctuary, and strengthen thee out of Zion;" Ps. 78:68,
"Mount Zion which he loved, and he built his sanctuary." As the
site of the Temple, Zion is repeatedly described as "the place that
Yahweh has chosen," or "has loved" (cf. Pss. 78:68; 87:2, 5).
It is also said to be "the place where he dwelleth," or "where he
reigns" (cf. Pss. 48:2; 74:2; 76:2; 99:2; 132:13; 146:10; 9:11,14;
2:6; 87:2). As the dwelling-place of Yahweh, Zion is described as
the source of salvation, life, and blessing for Israel (cf. Pss. 9:14;
14:7; 5°:2; 53:6; iio:2; i28:s; j33:3; w-3)- Zion is als0
repeatedly described as the place where the worship of Yahweh goes
on, which also implies that it was the mountain on which the Temple
stood; thus, Ps. 65:1, "Praise waiteth for thee, O God, in Zion, and
unto thee shall the vow be performed;" Ps. 84:7, "Every one of them
appeareth before God in Zion." In Ps. 137:1, 3 the songs of the
Temple are described as songs of Zion (cf. Ps. 102:21; 147:12;
125:1). Those who follow ecclesiastical tradition in locating Zion
on the west hill explain these passages by assuming that the name
Zion was originally applied to SW, but was subsequently extended to
cover the entire city, and then was limited in the language of rehgion
to the Temple mountain. This theory is so artificial that it has found
no favor among critical historians.
7. The writings of the Apocrypha connect Zion with the Temple
in precisely the same manner as the earlier literature. In I Mace.
4:37, 38 we read: "And all the army was gathered together and they
went up unto Mount Zion. And they saw the sanctuary laid deso
late, and the altar profaned, and the gates burned up, and shrubs
growing in the courts as in a forest or as on one of the mountains,
and the priests' chambers pulled down;" I Mace. 5:54, "And they
went up to Mount Zion with gladness and joy, and offered whole burnt
offerings ; " 7 : 32, " And there fell on Nicanor's side about five hundred
men, and they fled into the City of David; and after these things
Nicanor went up to Mount Zion, and there came some of the priests
out of the sanctuary." In 14:27 it is narrated that it was decided
to set up certain pillars in honor of Simon on Mount Zion. In 14 : 48
we are told that these were set up in a conspicuous place within the
compass of the sanctuary.
The only way in which advocates of the west-Zion theorv can

ZION 63
dispose of these statements is to assert that First Maccabees is in error
in its identification. Thus, Mommert (Vol. I, p. 179) remarks: "In
the second century before Christ in Maccabees Zion appears for a
short time as a designation of the sanctuary." As a matter of fact,
Zion has never appeared as anything else than a designation of the
sanctuary from the earliest times onward. This identification is not
peculiar to Maccabees among the books of the Apocrypha, but is
found also in Ecclus. 24:10, "In the holy tabernacle I ministered
before him; and so was I estabhshed in Zion;" I Esdr. 8:81, "He
glorified the temple of our Lord, and raised up the desolate Zion."
8. Josephus never uses the name Zion, but in Ant. i, 13:2; vii.4:2;
13:4, he states that David's tent for the ark was pitched on the same
mountain on which Solomon's Temple was afterward built. David's
tent for the ark, according to II Sam. 6:12, was placed in the City of
David on Mount Zion; consequently Josephus also seems to have
held that Zion was the Temple hill. We find thus an unbroken
tradition identifying Zion with the eastern hill from the earliest times
down to about 100 A. d.
The only objection to this view is that in many passages of the
Old Testament Zion is put into parallelism with Jerusalem. This, it
is claimed, shows that Zion was a name for the whole city, and there
fore forbids our basing any conclusions upon its connection with the
Temple. This parallelism of Zion and Jerusalem is found in the
pre-exilic prophets (cf . Amos 1:2; Mic. 4 : 2 [ =Isa.. 2:3]; Isa. 4 : 3 f . ;
10:32; 31:4^,9; 33:20; 37:22, 32 [ =11 Kings 19:21, 31]; Mic. 3: 10,
12 [= Jer. 26:18]; 4:8; Zeph. 3:14, 16). It is found more frequently in
the exilic and post-exilic literature (cf . Jer. 51 : 35 ; Lam. 1:17; 2 : 10,
13; 4:11 f.; Isa. 40:9; 41:27; 52:1 f.; 62:1; 64:10; Zech. 1:17; 8:3;
9:9; Joel 3 : 16 f.; Ps. 51:18; 76:2; 102:16,21; 128:5; 147:12;
135 : 21 ; Ecclus. 24: 10 f.). In a number of passages Zion and daugh
ter Zion are used as names for the whole of Jerusalem (cf. Isa. i:2j;
10:24; 29:8; 33:5, 14; Mic. 1:13; 4:10 f.; 4:13; Jer. 3:14; 4:6,
31; 6:2,23; 9:19; 30:17; Lam. 1:6, 17; 2:1,4,8,18; 4:22; 5:11,
18; Isa. 12:6; 49:14; 5i:3, n,i6; 61:3; 62:11; 66:8; Zech. 2:7;
Joel 2:23; Isa. 35:10; Ps. 9:14; 87:5; 102:13,16; 126:1; 129:5).
It should be noted that all these passages in which Zion is put inro
parallelism with Jerusalem, or in which it is described as if it were

64 OPHEL
the whole city, are poetical. There is not one instance in prose in
which Zion is identified with Jerusalem. Zion is parallel to Judah or
Israel in a number of passages (cf. Jer. 14:19; Lam. 5:11; Isa. 46:
13; Zech. 9:13; Ps. 48:11, 12; 69:35; 78:68; 97:8; 149:2). Itwould
not be safe to infer from these that Zion is hterally synonymous with
all of Judah or Israel. It is equally unsafe to infer from poetic
parallelism that Zion is hterally synonymous with Jerusalem. When
we consider that in the great majority of passages Zion is connected
with the Temple or with something on the eastern hill, and that in
not one passage is it connected with the western hill, the easiest way
to explain the Old Testament usage is to assume that Zion was
originally a name for the eastern hill, but that its association with the
Temple made it suitable as a poetic designation of Jerusalem or
Judah viewed as a religious community. When, therefore, it is
placed in parallelism with Jerusalem or Judah, it does not indicate
that it had an actual geographical extension to the western hill. This
is a more natural hypothesis than the one which assumes that Zion
was originally the name of the western hill, was then extended to
the whole city, and was finally limited again to the Temple mount,
II. Ophel. — The hill of Ophel is first mentioned in Mic. 4:8,
where it is described as " Ophel of daughter Zion." Since Zion has
been found to lie on the eastern hill, this implies that Ophel was on
the same ridge. Neh. 3 : 26 states that " the Nethinim dwelt in Ophel
unto the place over against the Water Gate toward the east." The
Water Gate opened upon the path which led down from the eastern
hill to the spring of Gihon; consequently Ophel was situated in the
middle of the eastern hill. The same location is assigned to it by the
statements of Neh. 3:27 and 11:21. II Chron. 27:3 mentions the
wall of Ophel in connection with the upper gate of the house of the
Lord. II Chron. 33 : 14 connects the compassing about of Ophel with
the building of an outer wall to the City of David on the west side of
Gihon. Josephus, in War, v, 4:2, says that the eastern wall of the
city ran from Siloam to the Temple and joined the eastern cloister at
a place called Ophel. War, v, 6: 1, connects Ophel with the Temple
and the Valley of Kidron (cf. vi, 6:3). From these passages it is clear
that Ophel must have lain on the eastern hill immediately south of the
Temple.

MORIAH 65
III. Moriah. — Moriah as a name for the Temple mount is given
only in II Chron. 3 : 1. Gen. 22 : 2, 14 (editorial) seems to know this
name, inasmuch as it explains Moriah as meaning the place where
men ought to appear before Yahweh — that is, the Temple. No
traces of this name are found in early hterature, and it is doubtful
whether it was in actual use. In all early writings Zion is the name
for the Temple hill. If Moriah is a real name, then we must assume
that it appUed to one of the smaller peaks of the eastern hill. In that
case Zion was the name of the whole eastern ridge, and its three
smaller peaks extending from north to south were Moriah, Ophel,
and City of David.

CHAPTER VI
JERUSALEM IN THElEARLIEST^TIMES
Concerning the origin of the city of Jerusalem we have no
information. Even the meaning of the name is unknown. Various
Semitic etymologies have been proposed, but all are uncertain, and
it is possible that the name goes back to the primitive non-Semitic
inhabitants of Palestine. Ezek. 16:3 says of Jerusalem: "Thy
birth and thy nativity is of the land of the Canaanite ; thy father was
an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite." This statement may point
to a tradition that the city was originally founded by Amorite colonists,
setthng in Hittite territory.
In Gen. 14:18 we read that Melchizedek, king of Salem, blessed
Abram, and Abram gave him tithes of the spoil taken from the kings
of the East. Tradition identifies Salem with Jerusalem. This
idea first appears in Ps. 76:2, and is followed by Josephus (Ant.
i, 10:2; vii, 3:2), and by other Jewish writers. In favor of this
identification are the facts that Melchizedek bears a name of similar
formation with Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem in the time of Joshua,
and that he holds a conspicuous position among the city-kings of
Canaan analogous to that of the king of Jerusalem in the Tell el-
Amarna letters. The fact that Abram pays tithes to him and recog
nizes him as a priest of the Most High God seems also to indicate a
desire on the part of the writer of Gen., chap. 14, to connect the
sanctity of Jerusalem with the ancient priesthood of Melchizedek.
This story, however, is of very uncertain origin. By most recent
critics it is regarded as a midrash that was not inserted in the Book
of Genesis until after the exile. Upon what basis of historical tradi
tion it rests is unknown. This story, accordingly, can scarcely be
utihzed to throw light upon the early history of Jerusalem.
The first emergence of the city into the light of history is in
the Tell el-Amarna letters. These are dispatches sent to the
66

CANAANITISH JERUSALEM 67
kings of Egypt by petty kings of the land of Canaan. They date
from about 1400 b. c, and are written on clay tablets in the Babylo
nian language and cuneiform script. Seven of these letters were sent
by Abdi-khiba, king of Jerusalem.1 From these letters it appears
that the king of Jerusalem was one of the more important of the
city-kings, and that he had a number of towns tributary to him.
His city was probably walled, because in one of the letters2 he says :
" We will open Jerusalem to the guards whom thou shalt send by the
hand of Khaya." In all these letters he begs for the help of the
king of Egypt against a people known as the Khabiri. The name
is etymologically identical with "Hebrews," and these were appar
ently Bedawin clans of the same stock to which the later Israelites
belonged. We are probably to think of the Jerusalem of Abdi-
khiba as presenting a similar appearance to Gezer of the same period
as it has been excavated by Mr. Macalister. The houses were one-
story structures of rough stone, plastered with mud and covered with
thatched roofs, containing only two or three rooms. The city-wall
was a rampart of earth faced on the inside and outside with
rough stones gathered off of the fields. From the Tell el-Amarna
letters we learn that there was considerable wealth accumulated in
the cities of Canaan at the time of the Egyptian supremacy; that
an active commerce was carried on; and that the country was as
prosperous as at any later period of its history.
After the time of Abdi-khiba Jerusalem disappears from our
view until the Hebrew conquest, about 1200 B.C. According
to Josh. 10:1, Adoni-zedek, its king, united the kings of Hebron,
Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in a confederacy against the Israelites.
He was defeated by Joshua, but the city of Jerusalem was not cap
tured. According to Josh. 15 :63, "As for the Jebusites, the inhabit
ants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out:
but the Jebusites dwelt with the children of Judah at Jerusalem, unto
this day." In Judg. 1 : 1-7 we have a duphcate account of the war
against Adoni-zedek. Here the name appears as Adoni-bezek, but
this is evidently a textual corruption induced by the name Bezek in
vs. 5. In vs. 7 we are told that they (that is, his own people) brought
1 Winckler, Thontafeln von T ell-el- Amarna, Nos. 179-85.
* Ibid., No. 185.

68 CANAANITISH JERUSALEM
him to Jerusalem. This shows that he was the king of Jerusalem,
and makes it evident that he was the same person as Adoni-zedek
of the narrative in Josh., chap. 10. Judg. 1:21 also records that,
although Israel defeated the king of Jerusalem, it was not able to
take his capital: "And the children of Benjamin did not drive out
the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem: but the Jebusites dwelt
with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day." The
truth of these statements is attested by the narrative of Judg. 19:12,
where the Levite is unwilling to turn aside into Jerusalem because
it is a city of ahens. In startling contrast with these statements,
Judg. 1 : 8 records : " The children of Judah fought against Jerusalem
and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword and set
the city on fire." This statement comes from the hand of one of the
late editors of the Book of Judges, and is clearly unhistorical. Jeru
salem remained in the hands of the Canaanites until it was taken
from them by David.
In regard to the location and size of Canaanitish Jerusalem we
have little information. In II Sam. 5 : 6 f . we are told that David took
the stronghold of the Jebusites and renamed it after himself; con
sequently, the acropolis of ancient Jerusalem must have occupied the
site of the later City of David. This, as we have seen, lay on the
southern end of the eastern hill. This is the only natural location
for the Jebusite fortress, since it is close to Gihon, the only spring
that is near the city.
Whether the city was hmited to the eastern hill or also spread
to the western hill is uncertain. It seems to have been a place of
considerable importance. Its king in the time of the Amarna letters
had a number of smaller places tributary to him. Adoni-zedek in
the time of Joshua was the head of a coahtion. In Judg. 1:7 he
boasts that he had cut off the thumbs and great toes of seventy kings,
and had compelled them to gather their food under his table. If
the story of Melchizedek in Gen., chap. 14, has a historical kernel,
it also indicates the importance of the place. It seems hardly hkely
that a city of such prominence, which the Israehtes were unable
to capture during the entire period of the Judges, should have been
limited to the small area of the southern end of the eastern hill.
We are almost forced to believe that it extended to the western hill

JERUSALEM OF DAVID

69

JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF DAVID

70 MILLO
even before its capture by David. In Judg., chap. 19, the Levite in
going from Bethlehem to Gibeah passes by the city of the Jebusites.
The natural road from Bethlehem to Gibeah leads past the western
hill, and the mention of a Jebusite city in this connection seems,
accordingly, to show that the western hill was occupied. The
Priestly Code, Josh. 15:8, speaks of the Chff of the Jebusites as lying
north of the Valley of Hinnom. The only chff that lies north of Hin
nom is the western hill, and the name "Chff of the Jebusites" may
be a survival of an ancient designation. Josephus (Ant., vii, 3:2;
War, v, 4:1) recognizes both the Upper and the Lower City as existing
as early as the time of the Judges.
In II Sam. 5 :6 f. = 1 Chron. n:4f. we read:
And the king and his men went to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhabit
ants of the land: which spake unto David, saying, Except thou take away the
blind and the lame, thou shalt not come in hither: thinking*, David cannot come in
hither. Nevertheless David took the stronghold of Zion; the same is the City
of David. And David dwelt in the stronghold, and called it the City of David.
David chose Jerusalem as his capital, partly because of the strength of
its position, and partly because it was located on the border between
Judah and Benjamin, and therefore was neutral ground. By making
it his residence he did not give offense to either tribe, as he must
have done if "he had selected a site within the territory of the other.
A number of building operations are ascribed to David after his
capture of the city.
1. Millo. — In II Sam. 5:9 mention is made of the Millo as the
starting-point of the wall that inclosed the City of David. The
statement that he built "round about from Millo" suggests that
Millo was already in existence, as a part of the earher Canaanitish
fortification. The name is derived from a root which means "to
fill, " and means a " filling " or " embankment." It is not in common
use in Hebrew, but appears in Assyrian in the forms mulu or tamlii,
which mean an embankment on which a palace or temple stands.
When one considers the extent of Babylonian influence in Canaan
during the third millennium b. c, it seems likely that Millo was a
Canaanitish name formed under Babylonian influence. This view
is favored by the fact that Beth-Millo occurs as a proper name in
the Canaanitish city of Shechem in Judg. 9:6. We meet the Millo

MILLO

71

again in I Kings 9:15, "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, and Hazor, and Megiddo,
and Gezer;" I Kings 9:24, "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;" I Kings n : 27, "Solomon built Millo, and
closed up the gap of the City of David his father;" II Chron. 32:5,

Photograph by L. B. Baton

NORTH END OF THE CITY OF DAVID

"And he took courage, and built up all the wall that was broken
down, and raised it up to the towers, and the other wall without, and
strengthened Millo in the City of David." In all these passages the
LXX translates Millo by Akra, which, as we have seen, was the
name of the Syrian stronghold on the east hiU between the Temple
and the City of David (see pp. 51 ff.).
From these passages we gather that the Millo was a fortress of
some sort that could be successively enlarged by David, Solomon,
and Hezekiah; that it lay in the City of David — that is, somewhere

72

MELLO

on the southern end of the eastern hill; and that it was part of the
inclosing wall of the City of David, and was designed to defend that
city at its weakest point. The only weak point in the fortification
of the southeast hill is the narrow neck which connects it with the
Temple hill on the north. When we remember that Millo is iden
tified by the LXX with the Akra which overlooked the Temple, it
seems probable that we should regard it as a rampart which protected

Photograph by L.B. Paton

SITE OF THE CITY OF DAVID

the northern side of the City of David. Probably it was a wall of
earth faced with stones, such as the excavations have disclosed in
the city of Gezer of the same period. Such a rampart, constructed
by filling in earth between two walls of stone, could be appropriately
described as a Millo, or "filling." It could also easily be enlarged
by later monarchs. The wall at Gezer has been strengthened by
having a new face built and a new filling inserted between it and the
old wall. In some such way David, Solomon, and Hezekiah may
have built out the old Millo of the Canaanites.

DAVID'S WALL 73
2. David's Wall. — In the, same passage which mentions the
Millo (II Sam. 5:9) it is stated that "David built round about from
Millo." This can only refer to a wall which inclosed the City of
David. This wall began at the Millo — that is, the embankment —
across the neck of land toward the north, and followed the eastern
side of the southeast hill at some distance above the bed of the Kidron.
At the southern end of the hiU it stood on the top of the rocky chff
that rises above Siloam, and then followed the western side of the hill
above the bed of the Tyropoeon Valley until it returned to the Millo.
Traces of this wall and of the rock scarps that formed its foundation
were discovered by Bhss on the southern and eastern sides of the
southeast hill. No traces of a wall in the Tyropoeon Valley have
yet been discovered.
3. David's Palace. — In II Sam. 5:9, 11, it is recorded that " David
built him a house in the City of David" (in II Sam. 5:9, instead of
the unintelligible words "and inward" of the Hebrew text, the LXX
reads, "and his house"). Neh. 12:37 speaks of the procession of
the Levites as coming up the steps of the City of David, and then
passing the House of David on their way to the Water Gate which
opened on the east side of the city above the -spring Gihon. This
indicates that the Palace stood on high ground at the north end of the
City of David (cf. II Sam. 11:2). According to II Sam. 5:11 the
Palace was built for David by Tyrian workmen sent him by Hiram,
king of Tyre. The walls were built of stone, and it was roofed with
cedar beams brought from the Lebanon (cf. II Sam. 7:2). The
necessity of bringing Tyrian workmen shows that the native archi
tecture of Israel was not advanced, and the mention of cedar wood
as a curiosity indicates that the use of large beams in architecture
was previously unknown. The royal palace is mentioned also in
II Sam. 11:8, 9, 27; 15:16; 19:11,30; 20:3.
4. The Guard House. — In Neh. 3:16 mention is made of the
"House of the Heroes." This seems to have been a dwelling for
the bodyguard, a list of whose names is given in II Sam. 23:8-39.
In regard to the location of this building all that is known is that
it stood in the City of David on the eastern hill.
5. The Tent of the Ark.— In II Sam. 6:10, 12, 17=11 Chron. 1:4!,
we are told that David prepared a sanctuary for the Ark in the City

74 TOMB OF DAVID
of David. This is mentioned again in J Kings 2:28 and 8:4. This
sanctuary was merely a tent, designed for the temporary accommoda
tion of the Ark, and, consequently, no trace of its location survived
in later times.
6. The Tomb of David. — II Kings 2 : 10 tells us that " David slept
with his fathers and was buried in the City of David." This Sepul
cher of the Kings is mentioned again in the case of Solomon (I Kings
11:43 = 11 Chron. 9:31); Rehoboam (I Kings 14:31=11 Chron.
12:16); Abijah (I Kings. 15:8 =11 Chron. 14: 1) ; Asa (I Kings 15 : 24
= 11 Chron. 16:14); Jehoshaphat (I Kings 22:50=11 Chron. 21:1);
Jehoram (II Kings 8 : 24 =11 Chron. 2 1 :2o) ; Ahaziah (II Kings 9 : 28 =
II Chron. 22:9); Joash (II Kings 12 : 21 =11 Chron. 24: 25) ; Amaziah
(II Kings 14: 20 =11 Chron. 25 : 28) ; Uzziah (II Kings 15:7 =11 Chron.
26 : 23) ; Jotham (II Kings 15 : 38 =11 Chron. 27:9); Ahaz (II Kings
16:20=11 Chron. 28:27); Hezekiah (II Chron. 32:33). Chronicles
differs from Kings in reporting Asa as buried "in his own sepulcher"
instead of "with his fathers," and Jehoram and Joash as buried
"in the City of David, but not in the Tombs of the Kings."
According to the Chronicler, apparently, Ahaziah was buried at
Samaria. The Book of Kings represents all the kings from David
to Ahaz as having been buried with their fathers in the City of
David. Ezek. 43 : 7 speaks of the tombs of the kings as adjoining the wall
of the Temple. Neh. 3:16 mentions "the sepulchers of David"
after the Pool of Siloam and the stairs of the City of David, and before
Ophel and the Water Gate. From these passages it is clear that the
tombs of the kings lay on the southeastern hill near the Temple
and royal residence. Clermont-Ganneau has suggested that the
curious bend in the Siloam tunnel was designed to avoid these sepul
chers, but Ezekiel's statement in regard to the nearness of the tombs
to the Temple indicates a more northerly location. The course of
the Siloam tunnel was probably due to a desire to keep near the surface
of the ground, so that the workmen could inform themselves by
shafts as to their whereabouts. Josephus states that the Sepulcher
of David was opened and plundered by Hyrcanus (Ant., xiii, 8:4;
War, i, 2:5), and that Herod also opened the tomb and gained
additional plunder (Ant., xvi, 7:1). The Tomb of David is also

[{[DAVID'S AQUEDUCTS 75
mentioned in Acts 2:29; but from none of these passages do we gain
any light as to its precise location.
7. David's Aqueducts. — The only other constructions that can be
traced back as far as the time of David are two channels for water
that lead from the spring of Gihon. The first of these is a canal on
the surface of the ground outside of the city wall, above the Valley of
Kidron, that originally conducted the water of the spring to the Lower
Pool of Siloam at the mouth of the Tyropoeon Valley. This chan
nel must be older than the tunnel which Hezekiah constructed to
bring water into the city, inasmuch as the tunnel was a substitute
for it. Isa. 22:9 speaks of the Old Pool as in existence before Heze
kiah's time, and by this doubtless means the Lower Pool of Siloam
to which this aqueduct led.
Another channel cut in the rock leads to a well and subterranean
passage opening inside of the city wall. This must be later than the
channel outside of the city, since it was evidently designed as a substi
tute for it in time of siege. It must be older than Hezekiah's tunnel,
since this is a more elaborate carrying-out of the same idea. Both
the surface channel and the short tunnel are probably as old as the
time of David, and may go back to the period of Canaanitish occupa
tion. It has even been suggested that the "gutter" or "water
course" (II Sam. 5:8), through which Joab made his entrance into
the stronghold was the passage leading to the short tunnel.
In regard to the extent of Jerusalem in the time of David we are
in the same doubt that we are in regard to the extent of the Canaanit
ish city. The City of David, or Zion, certainly lay upon the eastern
hill; but whether Jerusalem extended beyond this hill is uncertain.
If the city of the Canaanites reached over to the western hill, then
the Jerusalem of David was probably equally extensive. Even if
the city of the Canaanites was limited to the eastern hill, it is possible
that in the time of David Jerusalem began to expand. From II Sam.
5:6 f.; 24:18 f., it appears that David spared the lives of the Jebu
sites when he captured their stronghold, and that they remained
settled in Jerusalem. Since he made the stronghold his residence
and garrisoned it with Israelitish troops, it is not likely that the Jebu
sites were permitted to remain on the eastern hill. Probably, there
fore, they were compelled to settle on the western hill. To this cir-

76 SIZE OF CITY
cumstance may be due the name "Cliff of the Jebusites" which,
according to Josh. 15:8 and 18:16, lay north of the Valley of Hinnom.
The threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite, according to II Sam.
24: 16, was the place where David saw the angel stand with his hand
stretched forth toward Jerusalem to destroy it. The description
suggests that the apparition appeared on the western hill over against
the eastern hill where David's palace was located. Only in Chronicles
is it stated that the threshing-floor of Araunah was the place on which
the Temple was subsequently built, and this conception is evidently
due to a desire to legitimatize the site of the Temple.
II Sam. 14: 28 states that Absalom dwelt two full years in Jerusalem
and saw not the king's face. If the Jerusalem of David was limited
to the smaU area of the southeast hill, it is difficult to see how Absalom
could reside there without coming into contact with his father. If,
however, the city extended to the western hill, he might be banished
from the palace-quarter and still reside in the capital. I Chron. 11:8
adds to the statement of II Sam. 5:9, that " David built round about
from Millo," the words: "and Joab caused the rest of the city to
live." This indicates belief on the part of the Chronicler that Jeru
salem in the time of David was more extensive than the City of David.
Josephus (War, v, 4:1) states that the Upper City was taken by
David as well as the Lower City, and that it was called by him the
Phrourion, or "fortress." On the whole, the evidence seems favorable
to the idea that settlements on the western hill were in existence as
early as the time of David, but there is no evidence that the western
hill was inclosed with a wall at this early date. The fact that no
buildings on the western hill are mentioned indicates that this region
was still unprotected.

CHAPTER VII

SOLOMON'S BUILDINGS
With Solomon a new building era began in Jerusalem. David
left a united kingdom and the neighboring nations reduced to tribute,
so that Solomon was free to indulge his splendor-loving tastes. His
entire reign was devoted to the
enlargement and beautification
of his capital. The following
structures are ascribed to him
by the Book of Kings:
i. The Temple. — According
to I Kings 3: 1 ff.; chaps. 5-8;
9:1, 10, 15, Solomon built a new
sanctuary for the Ark in place
of the tent that his father had
pitched on Mount Zion. The
location of this Temple is certain.
It stood on the same site as
Herod's Temple, and Herod's
Tern-pie stood on the summit of
the eastern hill of Jerusalem.
The Sakhra, or " rock," under
the dome of the Mosque of Omar,
marks the location of the Altar
of Herod's Temple and also of
Solomon's Temple. The House,
or Sanctuary, stood on high
ground west of the Altar. The name D'bhir, which is used for the
Holy of Holies, means properly "west," which shows that the holiest
place lay at the west end of the Temple. This is also evident from
Ezek. 8:16, where twenty-five men worshiping the rising sun stand
77

? LT

GROUND PLAN OF SOLOMON'S
BUILDINGS (After Benzinger)
1. Great Court; 2. Other Court; 3. Court of
the Temple; 4. House of the Forest of Lebanon;
5. Porch of Pillars; 6. Porch of Judgment;
7. King's House; 8. House of Pharaoh's Daughter;
g. Temple; 10. Altar.

78

SOLOMON'S TEMPLE

between the Porch and the Altar, with their backs toward the Temple
and their faces toward the east. Accordingly, Solomon's Temple
must have stood on the site of the present inner platform west of the
Kubbet-es-Sakhra or Mosque of Omar.
The Hekdl, or House, was 60 cubits long, 20 cubits broad, and 30
cubits high according to I Kings 6:2. From I Kings 6:16 and the

Photograph by Bonjils THE SAKHRA, THE SITE OF SOLOMON'S ALTAR

statements of Ezekiel it appears that these are inside measurements.
This space was divided by a partition into two rooms — one 40X29
cubits, the Holy Place, and the other 20 X 20 cubits, the D'bhir, or
Holy of Holies. The thickness of the inclosing walls is not given in
the Book of Kings. Ezekiel, who patterns his Temple on the model
of Solomon's Temple, says that the walls are to be 6 cubits thick at
the base.
On the east end of the Sanctuary stood a Porch, the inside
measurements of which were 20 X 10 cubits (I Kings 6:3). The length

SOLOMON'S TEMPLE

79

was thus the same as the breadth of the Sanctuary. The Book of
Kings does not give the height of this Porch, but Chronicles says
that it was 120 cubits. This is an incredible proportion, and it
is probable that its height was 30 cubits, the same as that of the
Sanctuary.

SOLOMON'S TEMPLE SOUTH ELEVATION (After Stade)

SOLOMON'S TEMPLE, EAST ELEVATION (After Stade)
On the north, west, and south the Temple was surrounded with
three stories of chambers, but these did not encompass the east side,
where the Porch stood. Each story was 5 cubits high, so that the
three tiers reached a height of 15 cubits, or half the height of the
Temple. There was thus a space between the roof of the chambers and
the roof of the Temple that was used for clearstory windows (I Kings
6:4). The structure as a whole must thus have borne a rude resem
blance to a Gothic church, with nave and aisles, the most important

8o

THE INNER COURT

difference being that all the roofs were flat. In regard to the breadth
of the wings Kings gives us no information, but in Ezekiel's Temple
the chambers were 5, 6, and 7 cubits broad in the successive stories.
The greater breadth of the upper stories was due to the fact that
there was a rebatement of half a cubit in both walls at each story,
on which to rest the ends of the beams that supported the floors.
The Temple was surrounded with a Court, which, in I Kings 6 : 36;

Photograph by Bonjils

SITE OF INNER COURT OF SOLOMON'S TEMPLE
7:12, is called the Inner Court, to distinguish it from the Great, or
Outer, Court that inclosed all of Solomon's buildings. In Jer. 36: 10
it is called the Upper Court because it stood on a higher level on the
top of the hill. Unlike the Temple of Zerubbabel and the Temple
of Herod, Solomon's Sanctuary had only one inclosing court. Not
until the time of Ezekiel was there any idea of a special sanctity of
the priests that demanded that they should have a court of their
own into which ordinary Israelites might not enter. From II Kings
12:9-12 and Jer. 35: iff.; 36:10, it appears that in pre-exilic times

GATES OF INNER COURT 8 1
laymen had free access to the Inner Court. When II Kings 23:12
speaks of "the two courts of the House of Yahweh," it does not mean
that there was a court of the priests and a court of Israelites, such as
existed in the second Temple, but refers only to the Inner Court and
the Great Court. The Inner Court, according to I Kings 6:36;
7:12, had a wall of three courses of hewn stones and a structure of
cedar beams on the top. In regard to its size and shape nothing is
said. No gates of the Inner Court are mentioned in the narrative of
the building of the Temple, but II Kings 15:35 speaks of an Upper
Gate of the House of Yahweh, and Jeremiah and Ezekiel make fre
quent mention of gates. It is probable that the gates which existed
in the time of Jeremiah were the same as those originally constructed
by Solomon (cf. Jer. 7:2; 22:2-4). From Jer. 52:24=11 Kings
25:18 it appears that there were three keepers of the thresholds of
the House of Yahweh. This indicates that there were three gates
to the Temple. These would naturally be on the north, south, and
east sides, since on the west was the Holy of Holies, which no one but
the high-priest was permitted to enter.
In II Kings 15:35 =11 Chron. 27:3 we are told that Jotham built
the Upper Gate to the Temple (cf. II Chron. 23:20). From Jer.
20:2; 37:13, it appears that the Upper Gate was identical with the
Gate of Benjamin, and from Ezek. 8:3, 14; 9:2 it appears that this
gate was in the north wall of the Inner Court (cf. Zech. 14:10).
In Jer. 26:10; 36:10 this Upper, or North, or Benjamin Gate is
called the New Gate. This is, apparently, an allusion to the fact
that it was rebuilt by Jotham; but it does not show that it was not
in existence in the time of Solomon, since there must always have
been some access to the Temple from the north. In Ezek. 8:5 it is
called the Altar Gate, because it gave easiest access to the Altar. In
Ezek. 46 : 9 it is described as the chief entrance of the proposed second
Temple. This, perhaps, throws some light on its importance in
pre-exilic times. Neh. 12:39 speaks of it as the Sheep Gate. This
corresponds with Ezekiel's designation of it as the Altar Gate. It
was the opening through which victims were commonly brought.
There must always have been a South Gate leading from the
Temple to the court of the Palace, although this is not expressly

82 THE PALACE
named in the account of Solomon's building operations. I Kings
14:271=11 Chron. i2:iof. speaks of shields of brass that Reho
boam committed to the captains of the guard that kept the door of
the King's House, and that they bore before him when he entered the
Temple. This door must have been an opening connecting the
court of the Temple with the court of the Palace. II Kings 11:6 =
II Chron. 23 : 5 (emended text) speaks of a Guard Gate. The guard
leaving the Temple is said to have gone on duty at this point. In
II Kings 11:19 the young king, after being crowned in the Temple,
is escorted through the Guard Gate to the Palace. In Neh. 12:39
the second company of Levites enter by the Sheep Gate on the north
side of the Temple Court and stand still at the gate of the guard on
the southern side.
There must also have been an East Gate to the Temple Court,
since the main entrance to the Sanctuary was on the east side. This
is not mentioned in any early narrative. Jer. 38:14 speaks of the
third entry into the House of Yahweh, and Ezek. 10:19; II:I
mentions the East Gate of the House of Yahweh. In Ezekiel's
plan for a second Temple the East Gate is to be used only by the
king. This corresponds with his desire that the Palace shall be
removed from its proximity to the Temple on the southern side, and
that that quarter shall be given up to the occupancy of the priests.
The old East Gate must have stood approximately on the site of
the modern Golden Gate of the Haram. According to I Chron.
26: 16, there was also a West Gate, but no trace of this appears in pre-
exilic literature. It belonged to Zerubbabel's Temple rather than
to Solomon's. 2. Solomon's Palace. — According to I Kings 3:1; 7:1; 9:1,10,15;
10:4, 5, 12, Solomon built a Palace for himself at the time that he
reared the House of Yahweh. This is mentioned frequently in the later
history under the name of the King's House. This Palace remained
as Solomon had built it until the time of its destruction by Nebu
chadrezzar (II Kings 25:9). Its ruins were still visible in the time
of Nehemiah. It is clear from a number of passages that it adjoined
the Temple. In I Kings 6:36; 7:8, 12 we are told that the Inner
Court which inclosed the Temple, and the Middle Court which
inclosed the Palace, were both included in the Great Court of the

THE PALACE

83

Palace-Quarter. Isa. 1 : 26 ff. ; Ps. 2 : 6, and numerous other passages,
speak of the Palace as situated on Zion; but Zion, as we have seen,
was the hill on which the Temple stood. The constant combination

Paiestme Exploration Blind
THE GOLDEN GATE, SITE OF EAST GATE OF TEMPLE
of "The House of Yahweh" and "The King's House" shows that the
two buildings were a part of one complex (cf. II Kings 12 : 18; 14: 14;
16:8; 18:15; 24:13; 25:9). In Jer. 36:12 ff. and other passages
the royal residence is described as so near to the Temple that the

84 THE PALACE
king and the princes could be summoned quickly in case of any
disturbance arising in the Inner Court. Ezek. 43:8 says: "They
shall no more defile my name .... through setting their thresh
old by my threshold and their doorpost by my doorpost and there
was but the wall between me and them."
The Palace cannot have been adjacent to the Temple on the
north, because the north quarter was not inclosed until a time long
after Solomon. The hill was so narrow that there was no room for
a building east or west of the Temple Court; consequently, if the
Palace adjoined the Temple, it must have lain immediately south of
it. With this agree numerous passages that show that the Palace
was higher than the City of David and lower than the Temple. In
I Kings 8:1 the Ark is "brought up" out of the City of David, and
in 9:24 Pharaoh's daughter "goes up" from the City of David to
the Palace. In I Kings 8:4; 10:5; and Jer. 26:10 people "come
up" from the Palace to the Temple, and in II Kings 11 : 19 and Jer.
22:1 they "go down" from the Temple to the Palace. In Mic.
4:8 Ophel of diughter Zion is described as the seat of government.
This indicates that the Palace lay on the hill of Ophel, south of the
Temple inclosure. The view of Thenius and Furrer, that Solomon's
Palace was situated on the western hill, is thus seen to be contrary
to all the biblical evidence. It is also contradicted by archaeology,
since no substructures of great buildings have been found on the
western hill. If the Palace had stood on this hill, it would have been
impossible to speak of going up from it to the Temple, since this
hill was considerably higher than the east hill on which the Temple
stood. Five buildings are named that stood within the Palace inclosure :
the House of the Forest of Lebanon, the Porch of Pillars, the Porch of
Judgment, Solomon's House, and the House of Pharaoh's Daughter.
The natural configuration of the hill shows that these buildings
must have stood in a line running from northwest to southeast and
descending in terraces toward the south. The crest of the hill was
so narrow that platforms had to be built up to support the courts
and buildings. I Kings 7:10-12 speaks of "great stones, costly
stones" that were used in the foundations; and they are also mentioned
by Josephus in Ant., viii, 3:2. Ezekiel's statement that the House

THE PALACE 85
of the King joined the House of Yahweh (43 : 8) shows that the order
of the buildings in I Kings 7 : 2-8 is from south to north. This is
the order in which they would be traversed by one going up from the
City of David to the Temple.
South of the Temple Court was Solomon's private residence,
which I Kings 7:80 calls "his house where he might dwell." Adja
cent to this, probably on the west, was the House of Pharaoh's
Daughter, or Harem (I King 7:8ft; 9:24). These two buildings
were surrounded by a court, which in I Kings 7 : 8 is called the Other
Court, to distinguish it from the Inner Court which surrounded the
Temple. In II Kings 20:4 this is called the Middle Court, because
it lay between the Inner Court and the Great Court. In Jer. 32:2
it is called the Court of the Guard, because in it were stationed the
royal guards (cf. II Kings 11:5, 19; II Chron. 23:5; Neh. 12:39,
where the gate that led from this court into the Temple Court is called
the Gate of the Guard). In Neh. 3:25 it is described as the "Court
of the Guard that is by the tower that stands out from the Upper
House of the King." The north wall of the Middle Court was the
same as the south wall of the Inner Court. According to I Kings 7:8,
the structure of the entire wall of this court was similar to that of the
Temple Court.
South of the Middle or Palace Court stood the Porch of Judg
ment (I Kings 7:7), which served as an audience chamber for the
king. No particulars are given in regard to its dimensions or appear
ance. In I Kings 10:18-20 it is said to have contained Solomon's
throne of ivory and gold. Adjacent to it on the south stood the
Porch of Pillars (I Kings 7:6), which measured 50X30 cubits.
Apparently it served as a sort of anteroom to the throneroom in which
Solomon held audience. The southernmost building was the House
of the Forest of Lebanon, which is described in I Kings 7 : 2-5. This
was 100 cubits long by 50 broad. Its roof was supported by forty-
five pillars of cedar wood in three rows of fifteen each. According
to I Kings 10:16 f.; Isa. 22:8 (cf. 39:2=11 Kings 20:13), this build
ing was used as a royal armory. The name "House of the Forest
of Lebanon" was given on account of the cedar trunks that formed
its pillars. The old idea that it was located in Mount Lebanon and
served as a summer residence for the kings (cf. I Kings 9: 19) is con-

86 OUTER COURT
tradicted by I Kings 7:12, which puts it into the complex on the
Temple hill, and by 10:16 f., which shows that the shields borne
before the king were kept in it.
The last three buildings, as well as the Inner and the Middle
Courts, were included in the Outer Court, or the Great Court, which
surrounded all of Solomon's buildings (I Kings 7:12). This was

Photograph by Bonjils SITE OF THE HOUSE OF THE FOREST OF LEBANON
inclosed with a wall of three layers of hewn stone, on top of which
was a structure of cedar beams. In regard to its gates we have little
information. There must have been a North Gate corresponding
to the North Gate of the Inner Court. Apparently the two openings
were regarded as forming a single gate, and one name served for them
both. There must also have been an East Gate corresponding
to the East Gate of the Inner Court, and a South Gate leading to the
City of David. These, however, are never mentioned. In II Kings
n:i6=II Chron. 23:15 we read of the Horse Gate. Jer. 31:40

Photograph by Bonjils

SITE OF THE GREAT COURT OF SOLOMON

88 MILLO
locates this near a corner of the city on the east. Neh. 3 : 28 shows
that it lay on Ophel over against the Temple. Josephus (Ant., ix,
7:3) suggests that it opened upon the Valley of Kidron. Accord
ingly, it must have been situated near the southeast corner of the
Temple inclosure. Its name shows that it was the gate through
which the chariots and horses of the king gained access to the open
country. 3. Millo. — In I Kings 9:15; 11:27, it is stated that "Solomon
built Millo and closed up the break in the city of David his father."
Since Millo was already in existence in the time of David, and was
used by him as part of his fortification, this statement must mean
merely that Solomon strengthened Millo. Probably the rampart
which had served as the northern defense of the City of David was
used by him as the southern defense of the new palace-quarter which
he built on Ophel.

CHAPTER VIII
SOLOMON'S WALL
In II Sam. 5 : 9 we are told that David built the wall of the City of
David. In I Kings 3 : 1 we are told that Solomon built the wall of
Jerusalem round about (cf. 9:15). This indicates that "Jerusalem"
is a larger idea than " City of David." Nowhere is it said that David
inclosed Jerusalem, nor that Solomon increased the area of the City
of David. This wall of Solomon cannot be identified with the outer
wall of the Great Court of the Temple, since that is included in the
building of the Temple that is also mentioned in these passages, and
since such a wall could not be called "the wall of Jerusalem." It can
not have been a new wall on the east, since additional fortification in
that direction was unnecessary, and since in the time of Hezekiah
Jerusalem was still touched on that side by the fields of Kidron (II
Kings 23:4). The new wall, therefore, must have inclosed the
western hill, which was the only direction in which the city could
expand. Additional evidence in favor of this view is found in the statement
of I Kings 3:1, that Solomon brought Pharaoh's daughter into the
City of David, until he had made an end of building his own house,
and the house of the Lord, and the wall of Jerusalem round about.
This implies that the City of David was the only fortified place until
the wall of Jerusalem was built; but after it was finished, it was
possible for his wife to leave the City of David.
In I Kings 8:1 =11 Chron. 5:2 we are told: "Then Solomon
assembled the elders of Israel, and all the heads of the tribes, the
princes of the fathers' houses of the children of Israel, unto king
Solomon in Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the covenant of the
Lord out of the City of David, which is Zion." Here Jerusalem is
contrasted with the City of David. The City of David is the place
where the Ark has been kept; it is to be brought up out of this but
it is still to remain in Jerusalem.

9°

SOLOMON'S WALL

THE CITY OF SOLOMON

In II Kings 14:13=11 Chron. 25:23 we read that Jehoash, king
of Israel, after his defeat of Amaziah, king of Judah, "broke down
the wall of Jerusalem from the Gate of Ephraim unto the Corner

SOLOMON'S WALL 91
Gate four hundred cubits." The wall thus broken down must have
been the northern wall, since this was most accessible to the king of
Israel, and since this was the weakest side of the city. The name
"Gate of Ephraim" also suggests a northern location, inasmuch as
Ephraim lay to the north of Jerusalem. This wall cannot have been
the wall of the Temple, since the northern gate of the Temple was
known as the Gate of Benjamin (cf. Jer. 20:2; 37:13), and since no
Corner Gate of the Temple is mentioned. The distance, 400 cubits,
between the Gate of Ephraim and the Corner Gate is also greater
than the distance from the Gate of Benjamin to the corner of the
Temple. Moreover, the king of Israel would not have been likely
to desecrate the Temple; and if he had been rash enough to do so,
this fact would have been mentioned by the historian. Consequently,
we must look for the Gate of Ephraim and the Corner Gate north
of the west hill, rather than north of the east hill. The Corner Gate
must have lain somewhere near the modern Jaffa Gate, and the Gate
of Ephraim midway between it and the west wall of the Temple. In
that case the west hill of Jerusalem must have been inclosed as early
as the time of Amaziah ; and since no building operations are recorded,
or are likely, between the time of Solomon and that of Hezekiah, it
is safe to infer that Solomon's wall included the west hill.
II Kings 9: 28 narrates of Ahaziah: "And his servants carried
him in a chariot to Jerusalem and buried him in his sepulcher with
his fathers in the City of David." II Kings 14: 20 states of Amaziah:
"And he was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the City of
David." In these passages the City of David seems to be distin
guished from Jerusalem as a part from the whole.
Isa. 10:12 speaks of "Zion and Jerusalem." Jerusalem, accord
ingly, cannot be identical with Zion or the eastern hill, but must also
include the western hill. Isa. 10:32 speaks of "the mount of the
daughter of Zion, the hill of Jerusalem." Here, apparently, the eastern
hill is described as a part of the city of Jerusalem. Isa. 22:9,10
contrasts Jerusalem with the City of David. Isa. 30:19 speaks of
the people that dwell " in Zion in Jerusalem." If the text be correct,
this indicates that Zion was a quarter of Jerusalem; and even if the
reading "Zion and Jerusalem" be adopted, a distinction is still made
between the two names.

92 SOLOMON'S WALL
Jer. 51:35 reads: "The violence done to me and to my flesh be
upon Babylon, shall the inhabitant of Zion say; and, My blood be
upon the inhabitants of Chaldea, shall Jerusalem say." Here Zion
is put in poetic parallelism with Babylon, and Jerusalem with Chaldea.
We infer from this that Zion bore to Jerusalem the same relation
of part to whole that Babylon did to Chaldea. The number of
people carried captive by Nebuchadrezzar (Jer. 52:30) is inconsistent
with the idea that Jerusalem was limited to the east hill down to the
time of the exile. Zech. 1 : 14 speaks of Jerusalem and Zion as though
they were distinct from one another. In Neh. 3:15; 12:37, the
City of David is clearly not synonymous with Jerusalem, but is
merely a quarter that is used, like other landmarks, to describe the
course of the wall.
Neh. 2:13 states that Nehemiah set out at the Valley Gate and
rode down toward the Dragon's Well and the Dung Gate and viewed
the walls of Jerusalem which were broken down. II Chron. 26:9
states that "Uzziah built towers in Jerusalem at the Corner Gate,
and at the Valley Gate, and at the turning of the wall and fortified
them." The Valley Gate can only be the gate opening into the
Gai, the Valley of Hinnom. If, as we have seen, the Valley of Hinnom
must be identified with Wady er-Rababi, then the Valley Gate must
have been located somewhere on the western hill. In that case the
pre-exilic wall of Jerusalem inclosed the west hill.
Neh. 3:9, 12 speaks of the "ruler of half the district of Jerusalem."
The division of Jerusalem into two districts suggests that it lay upon
the western as well as the eastern hill. Isa. 24:23; Zech. 12:10;
13:1; Joel 2:32, distinguish between Jerusalem and Zion or the City
of David. I Chron. 8:32 and 9:38 describe certain priests as dwell
ing " in Jerusalem over against their brethren." Most of the priests
dwelt in Ophel on the eastern hill, and the description "over against"
suggests that these other priests were settled on the western hill.
In II Chron. 28:27 we read: "And Ahaz slept with his fathers, and
they buried him in the city, even in Jerusalem; for they brought
him not into the sepulchers of the kings of Israel." Here Jerusalem
is clearly distinguished from the City of David. Ahaz was not
buried in the tombs of the kings on the eastern hill, and yet he was
buried in Jerusalem. II Chron. 33:15 distinguishes between the

SOLOMON'S WALL 93
mount of the house of the Lord and Jerusalem. The same is true
of I Mace. 10:10 f.; 16:20. Josephus' description of the city of
Solomon in Ant., viii, 2:1; 6:1; 7:7, indicates his belief that this
city occupied the west hill as well as the east. Accordingly, there
appears to be a considerable body of evidence, extending from the
earliest times down to Josephus, that indicates that the wall of Solomon
included the western hill. The view of W. Robertson Smith, pre
sented by George Adam Smith in Encyclopaedia Biblica, art. "Jeru
salem," that Jerusalem was limited to the eastern hill down to the
time of the Hasmoneans, is accordingly to be rejected as untenable.
In regard to the course of Solomon's wall we are dependent upon
Josephus' account of the inner wall in his own day. This is described
in War, v, 4:2, as follows:
Now that wall began on the north at the tower called Hippicus, and extended
as far as the Xystus, as it was called; then, joining the Council-House, ended
at the west cloister of the Temple. On the other side at the west, beginning
at the same place, it extended through a place called Bethso, to the Gate of
the Essenes: then, on the south, it made a curve past the fountain of Siloam,
after which it also bent again on the east at Solomon's Pool, and reached as far
as a certain place which they called Ophel, where it joined the eastern cloister
of the Temple.
In this description Josephus starts with the tower called Hippicus
and goes eastward toward the Temple; then he returns to Hippicus
and goes southward around the west hill toward Siloam. This
shows that Hippicus stood at the northwest corner of the inner city.
The same conclusion is necessitated by the description in War,
v, 4:3, 4. These passages lead us to look for Hippicus at a point near
the Jaffa Gate in the west wall of the present city. Here two valleys
— one running south, the other running east — meet ; and here was the
natural northwest corner of the ancient city. From Hippicus the
wall ran eastward to the west cloister of the Temple. It must, there
fore, have followed the brow of the hill above the west arm of the
Tyropoeon. There is general agreement that this first wall on the
north, which Josephus ascribes to the ancient kings of Judah, is to
be identified with the wall built by Solomon. The only remains
that have survived in the heart of the modern city are the Tower of
Phasaelus, or "Tower of David," and certain rock scarps that underlie
the foundations of houses south of the modern David Street. From

94

SOLOMON'S WALL

Hippicus the wall also ran southward and turned around the end of
the western hill. In the grounds of the Protestant Boys' School
and the Protestant Cemetery south of the present city wall great
rock-cuttings are still visible, which are recognized by nearly all

ia_i ¦ .--'¦: ¦ "^AW^W* '

Photograph by Bonjils
TOWER PHASAELUS, NOW CALLED "TOWER OF DAVID"
topographers as having formed the foundations of the old south
city wall.
At a point east of the Protestant Cemetery two lines of fortifica
tion have been traced by Dr. Frederick Bliss.1 One of these foUows
the eastern slope of the western hill in a northeasterly direction; the
other runs in a southeasterly direction along the south slope of the
western hill to the Pool of Siloam. The latter is the course of the
1 Excavations in Jerusalem.

SOLOMON'S WALL

95

wall described by Josephus; but the inner wall is clearly more ancient,
since the outer wall must have been built after an increase of popula
tion demanded the addition of a greater area to the city. Probably,
therefore, Solomon's wall followed the inner line around the eastern
side of the western hill, and then crossed the Tyropoeon near the
point where it is crossed by the present city wall, thus joining the

Photograph by L. £>. Paton ROCK SCARP SOUTH OF PROTESTANT SCHOOL
western wall of Ophel. The upper level was more defensible, and
it is not likely that the difficult task of constructing a wall down the
steep Valley of Hinnom to the mouth of the Tyropoeon would
have been undertaken until the inclosure of this region was rendered
necessary by a great increase of population.
The wall of Solomon cannot have included the Lower Pool of
Siloam, because, if that had been the case, Hezekiah would not
have found it necessary to build a new pool higher up to contain the
water that was brought down through the Siloam tunnel. The upper
line of wall is also suggested by the statement of II Chron. 26:9

96 GATE OF BENJAMIN
that Uzziah built a tower at the turn of the wall. This implies that
the wall on the western hill did not originally run straight to Siloam,
as was the case in the time of Josephus, but that it made a bend,
as the inner wall does, around the southern end of the western hill.
The fortunes of Judah were at a low ebb during the period between
Solomon and Hezekiah and no important building operations are
recorded; consequently we must hold that all the gates mentioned
during this period were situated in the wall of Solomon.
i. The Gate of Benjamin. — In II Kings 15:35=11 Chron. 27:3
it is stated that Jotham rebuilt the Upper Gate of the Temple (cf.
II Chron. 23:20). In Jer. 20:2 it is stated that Pashhur, the captain
of the Temple, put Jeremiah into the stocks in the Upper Gate of
Benjamin in the house of Yahweh. This shows that the Upper
Gate was identical with the Gate of Benjamin. This gate is again
mentioned in Jer. 37:13, where we are told: "When he was in the
Gate of Benjamin, a captain of the ward was there .... and he
laid hold on Jeremiah the prophet." Jeremiah's home was in Ana-
thoth, the modern Anata, which lies north of Jerusalem, and his
most natural way of reaching it would have been through one of the
northern gates of the city. In Jer. 38:7 we read that the king was
sitting in the Gate of Benjamin, and Ebedmelech went out of the king's
house and spoke to the king. This implies that the Gate of Benjamin
lay near to the Palace. Ezek. 9:2 describes it as "the Upper Gate,
which lieth toward the north" (cf. 8:3, 14). Zech. 14:10 says:
"Jerusalem shall be lifted up, and shall dwell in her place from
Benjamin's Gate unto the place of the First Gate, unto the Corner
Gate." This implies that the Gate of Benjamin lay on the opposite
side of the city from the Corner Gate. The Corner Gate, as we shall
see presently, was situated near the modern Jaffa Gate. From
these passages it is clear that the Gate of Benjamin lay in the north
wall of the Temple inclosure, which was at the same time the north
wall of Solomon's city.
2. The Gate of Ephraim. — In II Kings 14:13=11 Chron. 25:23
we are told that Jehoash, king of Israel, after his successful war with
Amaziah, king of Judah, "broke down the wall of Jerusalem from
the Gate of Ephraim to the Corner Gate four hundred cubits."
Since Jehoash came from the north, and since the city was most

GATE OF EPHRAIM 97
accessible on its northern side, we must infer that the Gate of Ephraim
lay in the north wall. This is also implied in the name; the Gate
of Ephraim can only mean the gate through which one passes to
go to the land of Ephraim. As we have just seen, the gate north of
the Temple was known as the Upper Gate, or Gate of Benjamin,
and no corner gate of the Temple is ever mentioned; consequently,
we must assume that the Gate of Ephraim and the Corner Gate
both lay in the wall north of the western hill.
This gate is mentioned in Neh. 8:16, where we read of "the
broad place of the Gate of Ephraim;" and in Neh. 12:39, where
it is stated that the second company of Levites went from the Broad
Wall past the Gate of Ephraim and over the Old Gate. This state
ment is often interpreted as indicating that the Gate of Ephraim lay
in the west wall, so that it still remained one of the city gates after
the second wall on the north had been built; but the passage does not
state that the Levites passed over the Gate of Ephraim, as our English
version suggests. The Hebrew word is by "J, which means "over
against." The same expression is used of the passing of the House
of David by the Levites in Neh. 12:37. All that this passage indi
cates, accordingly, is that the Levites, going along the west wall of
the city, and then along the second wall on the north, passed by the
old Gate of Ephraim, which was on their right in the heart of the city.
3. The Corner Gate.- — The Corner Gate is mentioned in the same
passage with the Gate of Ephraim (II Kings 14: 13 =11 Chron. 25 : 23),
where it is stated that "Jehoash broke down the wall of Jerusalem
from the Gate of Ephraim to the Corner Gate four hundred cubits."
In II Chron. 26:9 it is stated; "Moreover Uzziah built towers in
Jerusalem at the Corner Gate, and at the Valley Gate and at the
turning of the wall." The name "Corner Gate" indicates that
it stood at a corner of the ancient city. Since there was no corner
gate of the Temple, and since the Gate of Ephraim must be sought
in the north wall, the Corner Gate can be located only at the north
west corner of the old city — that is, substantially on the site of the
modern Jaffa Gate. In Jer. 31:38 it is predicted: "Behold the
days come, saith the Lord, that the city shall be built to the Lord
from the Tower of Hananel unto the Gate of the Corner." The
Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the new city, and

98

VALLEY GATE

the Comer Gate is mentioned as lying opposite to it at the northwest

corner.

4. The Valley Gate.— The Valley Gate is mentioned in II Chron.
26:9, where we are told that "Uzziah built towers in Jerusalem at
the Corner Gate and at the Valley Gate, and at the turning of the

Photograph by H. G. Mitchell
REMAINS OF THE VALLEY GATE
wall." Since the Corner Gate lay at the northwest corner of the
city of Solomon, the Valley Gate must have lain south of this in the
west or south wall. The name "Valley Gate " indicates that it opened
upon the gai, or Valley of Hinnom. Hinnom, as we have seen, cannot
be identified with either the Wady Sitti Maryam or El- Wad, but can
be identified only with Wady er-Rababi, the valley on the west side
of the city. At the point where the Wady er-Rababi changes its

VALLEY GATE 99
course from a southerly to an easterly direction, Dr. Frederick Bliss
discovered, on the southwest slope of the western hill, the remains of
an ancient gate. This is probably to be identified with the Valley
Gate of the Old Testament. It lay at the junction of the inner wall
on the south side of the western hill with the outer wall ; and, conse
quently, it was a gate both of the old inner city and of the later outer
city that was formed by the addition of the second wall on -the south.
This agrees with the fact that we meet this gate, not only in the
fortifications of Uzziah, but also in those of Nehemiah. In Neh.
2:13-15 the governor sets out from the Valley Gate to inspect the
ruined walls of Jerusalem:
And I went out by night by the Valley Gate, even toward the Dragon's Well,
and to the Dung Gate, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken
down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire. Then I went on to the
Fountain Gate and to the King's Pool: but there was no place for the beast
that was under me to pass. Then went I up in the night by the Brook, and
viewed the wall; and I turned back, and entered the Valley Gate, and so returned.
From this it appears that Nehemiah started at the Valley Gate, rode
down to Siloam, up the Kidron Valley and then around the north
wall back to the Valley Gate. All this agrees with the view that
the Valley Gate was situated at the southwest corner of the city.
According to Neh. 3:13, the Valley Gate lay between the Furnace
Tower, which is probably to be identified with Maudslay's scarp near
the southwest corner of the modern city, and the Pool of Siloam.
The view of Schick,2 that the Valley Gate is to be identified with
the modern Jaffa Gate, is impossible, because in II Chron. 26:9
the Valley Gate is distinguished from the Corner Gate which must
have stood where the Jaffa Gate now stands, and because the identi
fication of the Valley Gate with the Jaffa Gate will compel us to put
the Old Gate of Neh. 12 : 39 in the new north wall of the city, whereas
its name indicates that it must have lain in the old wall. Moreover,
this leaves too great a distance between the Valley Gate and the Dung
Gate, which lay at the southern extremity of the city. According
to Neh. 3:13, it was 1,000 cubits from the Valley Gate; this corres
ponds with the location of the Valley Gate at the southwest corner
of the city, but not with its location at the northwest Corner.
' Zeitschrijt des Deutschen Paldstina-Vereins, Vol. XIII, pp. 31 ff.

IOO

TURNING OF THE WALL

5. The Turning of the Wall. — II Chron. 26:9 mentions the Turn
ing of the Wall in immediate connection with the Corner Gate. The
name implies that there was a marked change in the course of the
wall at this point. It may naturally be identified with the bend
of the inner wall discovered by Bliss on the eastern side of the west
ern hill. The fact that it is not mentioned in any of the later de
scriptions jof the wall also indicates that it lay inside of the second

Photograph by L. B. Baton
ROCK SCARP MARKING TURNING OF INNER WALL
line of fortifications that ran from the Valley Gate to the Pool of
Siloam. 6. The Horse Gate. — II Kings 11: 16 =11 Chron. 23:15, in des
cribing the downfall of Athaliah, states: "And she went by the way
of the horses' entry to the king's house." This shows that the Horse
Gate was one of the exits from the Palace, which lay on Ophel south
of the Temple. It cannot have been the gate leading from the Palace
into the Temple, since Athaliah was seeking to escape from the
Temple. It must then have been one of the gates in the outer wall of
the city; and since the eastern wall was the only one near to the palace,

HORSE GATE IOI
it must have been in the eastern wall. Jer. 31:40 necessitates the
same view: "And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the
ashes, and all the fields unto the brook Kidron, unto the corner of
the Horse Gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the Lord. " Here
it is distinctly stated that the corner of the Horse Gate was eastward.
Neh. 3 : 28 describes the Horse Gate as lying on Ophel opposite to the
Temple. It was repaired by the priests who dwelt in Ophel. Josephus
(Ant., ix, 7:3) describes this gate as opening upon the Valley of
Kidron. Accordingly, it is evident that the Horse Gate is to be placed
in the east wall near the southeast corner of the modern city.

IQ2 WALLS OF HEZEKIAH AND MANASSEH

THE WALLS OF HEZEKIAH AND MANASSEH

CHAPTER IX
JERUSALEM UNDER HEZEKIAH AND MANASSEH
After the death of Solomon Jerusalem does not seem to have
received any enlargement for nearly two hundred years. The
division of the kingdom so weakened Judah that it was scarcely able
to hold what it already possessed, let alone to attempt expansion.
Jehoshaphat and his successors seem to have been mere vassals
of the powerful dynasty of Omri. They are never mentioned in the
inscriptions of Shalmaneser II, which probably indicates that Judah
was regarded by the Assyrians as a part of Israel. The attempt of
Amaziah to throw off the yoke of Israel was unsuccessful, and after
Jehoash had broken down the north wall of Jerusalem, the city was
reduced to an even more helpless condition than before.
It was not until the northern kingdom began to decline after the
death of Jeroboam II, in 744 b. c, that the fortunes of Judah revived.
Israel was rent by civil war, and was attacked both by Damascus
and by Assyria, so that during this period Judah was able to declare
her independence. Uzziah is the first king after Solomon of whom
any building operations are recorded (cf. II Chron. 26:9 ff.; and
Josephus, Ant., ix, 10:3). His son Jotham, according to II Chron.
27:3, "built the Upper Gate of the House of the Lord, and on
the wall of Ophel he built much. " Josephus (Ant., ix, 11 : 2) ascribes
to him even greater activity. Of neither of these kings is it stated
that they enlarged the area of the city. We must suppose that their
work was limited to repairing or strengthening the wall, so that down
to the time of Hezekiah the city remained the same as it had been in
the days of Solomon. Under Hezekiah and Manasseh, however, new
walls were built; and consequently their reigns mark a new period
in the architectural history of the city.
Shortly before the beginning of the reign of Hezekiah the northern
kingdom was destroyed, and Judah was left the sole inheritor of
i°3

104 THE SILOAM TUNNEL

4? y the glory of ancient Israel.
Jl ^- i^. ^\ * Hezekiah was one of the
T" v A m ^N T~ most vigorous kings of the
s-v \r Vi % ^ ^ dynasty of David, and he
S^» ^^ * * <"*>. ^ became the leader of the
\T\ jLJ b ^" ¦^v? rff Palestinian states in the
^\ T^ *""" T^. ^O) \ struggle with Assyria. In
• V«^ \, Jg i \r order to carry on this struggle,
*~~\\ \A ok) v ^e was comPened greatly
tt r dC »T fc^" ^"~ to increase the fortifications
^r z~ X A ^ jj\ of Jerusalem and to make
> ^— JT m y » a provision for a more abund-
.A 0*~" ' <Hv i— ^ * ant water-supply.
< ^ \I $-" I ^" i- The Siloam tw
V ^- ll T \ y— f ej One of Hezekiah's
^ fl <1 \ . Nj ri m fammic nnrlpTtn Vincr

T/je Siloam tunnel. —
most

^ ^ \ » V \T~" ^ famous undertakings was

< v
\T"\ * ^ /^_ ^ \ b* § the conduit by which he
^ \i m q-~ ^V_ ^. rt brought the water of Gihon
^1 ^ A * ZT T" ^ int0 the City of David- In
*n t ¦* T" " t<c) '* z ¦"••"¦ Kings 2°:2° we read:
5 ^L ^T b  V\ ^ o "He made the pool and the
• \ X ' ^""N * ^1 <<C " conduit and brought water
ff\ v ^ i~- ^\ % into the city-" From this
fc— f f^V ^ Y"-* ^ g ^ appears that the new
* ^\ * ) \\ X N o aqueduct was connected
^^ A S5 with a pool, and that it
\ .' ) . nTV a brought water within the
\^ • ^ city limits. This corresponds
— - N with the rock-hewn tunnel
\T"~ \ T^ leading from the Virgin's
\"Y~" \I \^ Fountain under the east
fe* IL l^ hm to the Upper p°o1 of
\(^— * T"^ \ Siloam. In this tunnel an
^, *"^ "^^N ancient Hebrew inscription
J^— v \ *^"" \A ' has been discovered, stating
> tr \A^ * the circumstances under
*!. \N v. ,k which it was constructed.

THE SILOAM TUNNEL 105
This is the oldest Hebrew inscription that has come down to us. Its
writing corresponds to that of the Mesha inscription, and there is
general agreement that it is as early as the time of Hezekiah. It
reads as follows :
The tunnel. And this was the construction of the tunnel. While yet .
the pick of one was over against the pick of the other, and while yet three cubits
remained to be , . . . , the voice of one called to the other; for there was a
zdh in the rock on the right hand and on the left. And on the day of the tunnel
the quarrymen struck each to meet the other, pick against pick. And the water
went from the outflow of the pool, one thousand two hundred cubits. And
one hundred cubits was the height of the rock over the head of the quarry
men.
No other aqueduct near the city can claim such antiquity as this,
and the fact that it empties into a new pool, designed as a substitute
for the Lower Pool, also favors identification with the conduit of
King Hezekiah.
II Kings 18:17 speaks of Sennacherib's messengers to Hezekiah
as standing by the conduit of the Upper Pool which is in the highway
of the Fuller's Field. These messengers must have come near to
the royal residence at Ophel. If they stood by the spring of Gihon,
whence the tunnel led to the new Upper Pool, they would be beneath
the walls of the royal residence. The "Fuller's Field" must have
been a place where there was abundance of water, and this can only
have been in the Kidron Valley. If En Rogel means "the Fuller's
Fountain," then the Fuller's Field may have been situated in its
vicinity, and the highway of the Fuller's Field may have been the
road that leads down the Valley of Kidron from the southeast
corner of the city.
In Isa. 22:9, 11, the prophet says: "Ye stopped the waters of
the Lower Pool. Ye made also a reservoir between the two walls
for the water of the Old Pool." This can be understood only of a
blocking-up of the old water-course outside the city from Gihon to
the Lower Pool of Siloam, and the bringing-down of the water through
the Siloam tunnel to the new Upper Pool. The two walls between
which this new pool lay were the western wall of the eastern hill and
the new eastern wall of the western hill that, as we shall see
presently, was built by Hezekiah. The name "between the two

106 HEZEKIAH'S WALL
walls" was used for the region at the lower end of the Tyropoeon
Valley (cf. II Kings 25:4; Jer. 39:4; 52:7).
II Chron. 32:4 f. states that Hezekiah "stopped all the fountains
and the brook that flowed through the midst of the land." II Chron.
32 : 30 states that Hezekiah " stopped up the upper outflow of the waters
of Gihon and brought them straight down to the west side of the City
of David." The word "outflow" (SSia) is the same that is used
in the inscription. The "upper outflow" is the old channel on the
surface of the ground outside of the east wall of the city. Gihon is
the Virgin's Fountain, and the "west side of the City of David"
is the west side of the eastern hill where the Siloam tunnel comes
out. In the light of this evidence, there is no room for doubt that
the Siloam tunnel is Hezekiah's conduit.
2. Hezekiah's wall. — In II Chron. 32:5 we read: "And he took
courage and built up all the wall that was broken down, and raised
it up to the towers, and the other wall without, and strengthened
Millo in the City of David." This passage is not found in the parallel
narrative of Kings, but it is not written in the characteristic language
of the Chronicler and must have been derived from an ancient source.
It is confirmed by Isa. 22:10 f. : "Ye saw the breaches of the City
of David that they were many .... and ye numbered the houses
of Jerusalem and ye brake down the houses to fortify the wall. Ye
made also a reservoir between the two walls."
Two new walls are known to archaeologists, one on the north,
the other on the south; one of these must have been the wall that
Hezekiah built. The statement of Isa. 22:11, that the new Pool of
Siloam lay "between the two walls," is good evidence that the wall
of Hezekiah was the second wall on the south. That wall encircled
the lower end of the western hill and ran up the west side of the
Tyropoeon Valley opposite to the wall of the City of David. Before
it was built it was impossible to speak of the Pool of Siloam as lying
"between the two walls," and this phrase never occurs before the
time of Hezekiah.
This wall was thrown down by Nebuchadrezzar at the time of
his capture of Jerusalem; but it was not completely destroyed, and
Nehemiah was able to trace its line when he made his inspection of
the fortifications. In Neh. 2:12-15 Nehemiah follows the linefof

HEZEKIAH'S WALL 107
this wall, setting out from the Valley Gate at the southwest corner
of Solomon's city. He did not ride in a northeasterly direction toward
the Temple, as would have been the case if he had followed Solomon's
wall; but he rode toward the Dragon's Well, which is probably the
same as En Rogel, the modern Bir Eiyub; that is, he rode straight
down the Valley of Hinnom. He then came to the Dung Gate,
which is not named in the old city wall, and must have stood near
the southern end of the new south wall; then to the Fountain Gate,
which must have been near to the Fountain of Siloam; then to the
King's Pool, which is evidently Hezekiah's Upper Pool of Siloam;
and then by the Brook — that is, the valley of the Kidron on the
east side of the city.
The same course for the second wall is described by Neh. 3: 13-15,
where the wall is rebuilt from the Valley Gate to the Dung Gate,
the Fountain Gate, the Pool of Siloam, the King's Garden, and the
stairs of the City of David. In Neh. 12:31-37 the first company
of Levites starts at the Valley Gate, and proceeds thence upon the
wall to the Dung Gate, the Fountain Gate, and the stairs of the City
of David. From these passages it is clear that Nehemiah's south
wall began at the old Valley Gate in the southwest corner of the
city, and ran thence around the lower end of the western hill until
it joined the wall of the City of David at Siloam. This wall must
have come into existence before the exile, since Nehemiah rebuilt
on the ancient line. It is most probably to be identified with the
"other wall without" which Hezekiah is said to have constructed.
This second wall on the south as rebuilt by Nehemiah lasted
down to the destruction of the city by Titus in 70 A. D. It is described
by Josephus in War, v, 4:2:
But if we go the other way westward, beginning at the same place (i. e.,
Hippicus), it extended through a place called Bethso, to the gate of the Essenes:
and after that on the south it made a curve past the fountain of Siloam, after which
it also bent again on the east at Solomon's pool, and reached as far as a certain
place called Ophel where it joined the eastern cloister of the Temple. (Cf. War,
V,6:i.)From Josephus, War, v, 9:4, it appears that the Pool of Siloam
lay outside of this wall. This indicates that it did not cross the
valley of the Tyropoeon from the southern end of the western to

io8

HEZEKIAH'S WALL

the southern end of the eastern hill, but that it followed the cliff on
the western side of the pools to a point above Siloam, and there
crossed the valley to join the wall of the City of David. By the
circumstance that both sides of the Tyropoeon Valley were walled,
is explained the expression "between the two walls" that is used so
frequently of the region round about Siloam (cf. Isa. 22:11; II
Kings 25:4; Jer. 39:7; 52:7).'

Photograph by L. B. Baton REMAINS OF SECOND WALL ON THE SOUTH

This outer wall on the south, as described by Nehemiah and Jose
phus, corresponds with the outer line of fortifications discovered by
Dr. Frederick Bliss in 1894. Remains of this wall have been found
extending all the way from the Protestant Cemetery to the south
end of the west hill. A rock scarp that seems to have been the
foundation for a wall may then be traced on the west side of the
Pool of Siloam to a point above the Upper Pool. The lower courses
1 See my article on " The Meaning of the Expression, ' Between the Two Walls,' "
Journal of Biblical Literature, xxxv, 1906, Part I.

MANASSEH'S WALL 109
of masonry in this wall are ancient, and there is no difficulty in believ
ing that they go back to the time of Nehemiah, or even earlier. Even
if this wall should turn out to be a later construction, it must still
have followed the line of the ancient fortification.
The piece of wall that Bliss discovered connecting the south
ern end of the western hill with the southern end of the eastern hill
is of later origin. It was probably the work of the Empress Eudoxia,
450-60 A.D.
3. Manasseh' s wall. — Hezekiah was succeeded by his son Manas
seh, who reigned fifty-five years — the longest of all the reigns of the
kings of Judah. At first he submitted to the authority of Assyria,
but at the time of the great revolution of Shamashshumukin he
joined the conspiracy, thus necessitating a refortification of Jerusalem.
The Chronicler describes his building operations in II Chron. 33: 14:
"Now after this he built an outer wall to the City of David, on the
west side of Gihon in the Brook and [he built] to the entering in at
the Fish Gate; and he compassed about Ophel, and raised it up a
very great height." The outer wall of the City of David must have
been merely an additional rampart close to the old wall. The mention
of the Fish Gate proves that the new wall built by Manasseh was
the second wall on the north, inasmuch as the Fish Gate is known
to have lain in this wall (cf. Neh. 3:3; 12:39). By this wall a new
quarter was inclosed on the north of the city. The Mishneh, or
"second quarter," mentioned in II Kings 22:14=11 Chron. 34:22,
and in Zeph. 1 : 10, as lying near the Fish Gate, is not named before
the time of Manasseh. Manasseh and his successors are the first
kings who are said to have been buried in Jerusalem, but not in the
City of David, according to II Kings 21: 18 =11 Chron. 33:20;
II Kings 21:26; 23:30=11 Chron. 35:24. This fact suggests that
it was the erection of a new wall that made it possible for these
tombs to be constructed within the city limits.
If the second wall on the north was not built by Manasseh, it
must have been built by one of his immediate successors. Nehemiah's
wall did not follow the line of Solomon's north wall, but a new line
farther to the north. It was a restoration of the pre-exilic wall;
consequently, the second wall on the north must have been built
before the exile. In regard to the course of this wall Nehemiah

no MANASSEH'S WALL
unfortunately, gives no precise information. He mentions a number
of gates and towers, but the location of these is so uncertain that they
give us no help in laying down the line. Josephus' description of
the second wall in War, v, 4:2, is as obscure as that of Nehemiah.
It reads as follows:

Photograph by L. B. Paton
WALL UNDER FRANCISCAN SCHOOL
The second wall took its beginning from that gate which they called Genath,
which belonged to the first wall; it encompassed only the northern quarter of the
city, and reached as far as the tower Antonia.
From this we learn merely that the second wall began at some point
in the first wall, and that it circled around to the northwest corner
of the Temple, but how far north it extended we are not told.

MANASSEH'S WALL

in

In lack of definite historical evidence, we are forced to turn to
archaeology for the solution of the problem. Along the course
of the present north wall numerous ancient remains have been dis
covered. Under the Grand New Hotel there is a line of huge Jewish
stones running in a northwesterly direction. In the cellar of the
Franciscan School, in the northwest corner of the city, a similar
wall is to be seen. Along the entire course of the present north wall,

Palestine Exploration F

ANCIENT ARCH AT DAMASCUS GATE

as far as the Damascus Gate, traces of the same old wall have been
discovered. At the Damascus Gate ancient drafted stones still
appear, and the top of the ancient gate is still seen built into the
foundations. There is good archaeological evidence, accordingly, that
an old Jewish wall followed substantially the line of the present city
wall from the Jaffa Gate to the Damascus Gate. The question then
arises : Which wall was this ? Was it the second wall on the north,
as described by Nehemiah and Josephus ; or was it the third wall,
which was not built until the time of King Agrippa ? This is one

112 MANASSEH'S WALL
of the fundamental problems of Jerusalem topography, and to it
no final answer has yet been given.
Those who hold that the present north wall corresponds with the
wall of Agrippa are forced to hold that the second wall lay within
the present city limits between the north wall and the wall of Solomon.
The objections to this view are numerous.
i . No certain remains of a second wall inside of the present north
wall have ever been discovered. The line of cisterns south and east
of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which Schick1 supposed to
indicate an ancient city moat, is inadequate evidence. On the
other hand, numerous traces of a third wall outside of the present
city wall were observed by Robinson in 1838. 2 Great stones that
may have belonged to this wall have been found from time to time in
digging foundations for houses north of the city, and traces of its
base are perhaps still to be seen in the north side of a cistern north
of St. Stephen's church.3 The archaeological evidence accordingly,
so far as it goes, is more favorable to the view that the present north
wall corresponds with the second wall, than that it corresponds with
the third wall (see pp. 144 ff.).
2. Josephus (War, v, 7:3) states that, after the capture of the
third, or outer, wall,
Titus moved his camp so as to be within at the place called the Camp of
the Assyrians, occupying all the intervening space as far as the Kidron, but
keeping a sufficient distance away from the second wall so as to be out of range
of missiles.
This statement indicates that there was space enough between
the third wall and the second for Titus' army to camp inside of the
third, and still be out of reach of the stones and darts that the Jews
hurled from their military engines on the second wall. No such
space exists between the present wall and Schick's assumed second
wall. The greatest distance between these is not more than 1,000
feet, and at many points they are not more than 500 feet apart.
This argument bears with equal force against all other theories which
locate the second wall inside of the Church of the Sepulcher. They
1 Zeitschrijt des deutschen Palastina-Vereins, 1885, Part 4.
2 Biblical Researches in Palestine, Vol. I, pp. 465 ff.
3 See my article on "The Third Wall of Jerusalem and Some Excavations on
its Supposed Site," Journal oj Biblical Literature, 1905, Part 2.

Photograph by Bonjils

JERUSALEM FROM MOUNT SCOPUS

H4

MANASSEH'S WALL

do not leave enough room between the second and the third wall
to allow for the statements of Josephus.
3. In War, v, 4:3, Josephus states that the circumference of
the city was 33 stadia. If the present wall is the third wall, the
city cannot have measured more than 27 stadia, even if all the bends
and projections of the towers are counted in.
4. The immense population that, according to Josephus, found
shelter in the city at the time of the Passover points to a larger area

Photograph by L. B. Paton

GREAT STONES IN SIDE OF CISTERN

than that included by the present north wall. The calculation of
Cestius from the number of paschal lambs (War, vi, 9 : 3) would give
a population not far from 3,000,000 at the time of the feast. Accord
ing to War, vi, 9:3, 1,100,000 perished at the time of Titus' siege.
5. Ant., xx, 4:3, states that the outer wall was 3 stadia distant
from the monument of Queen Helena. This monument is identi
fied, with a high degree of probability, with the so-called Tombs of
the Kings near the present residence of the Anglican bishop, but
it is at least 4 stadia from the present city wall.

MANASSEH'S WALL 115
6. According to War, ii, 19:4, and v, 2:3, Titus pitched his
camp on Scopus, 7 stadia distant from the city. Scopus is doubtless
the high plateau north of Wady el-J6z, and it is considerably more
than 7 stadia from the present north wall.
Those who identify the third wall with the present north wall
are compelled to assert that in all these passages Josephus exaggerates
the size of the city; but no reason for exaggeration appears, and
the consistency of his statements with one another indicates rather
that he has told the truth.
It appears, accordingly, that the weight of evidence is in favor
of the view that the remains near the present north wall are to be
identified with the ancient second north wall. This would probably
never have been questioned but for the bearing of the discussion upon
the genuineness of the traditional Holy Sepulcher. According to
Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:20; John 19:17, 20, 41; Heb. 13:12, Christ
was crucified and buried outside of the city wall — that is, outside of
the second wall on the north, since Agrippa's wall had not yet been
built. If the second wall be identified with the present north wall,
then the Church of the Holy Sepulcher lies inside of the second wall,
and cannot be the genuine site of the crucifixion and entombment.
It is this fact which has led so many writers to struggle against the
identification of the old second wall with the present north wall.
All their efforts, however, have proved unavailing to produce valid
archaeological evidence of the existence of an ancient wall inside of
the Church of the Sepulcher. I assume, accordingly, that the north
wall of Nehemiah, which I suppose to have been first erected by
Manasseh, started at the old Corner Gate— that is, the modern
Jaffa Gate; followed the line of wall under the Grand New Hotel;
ran thence in a northwesterly direction parallel to the present city wall
to the ruins known as Qalcat-Jalud, near the northwest corner of the
city; and then followed the present line of the city wall as far as the
Damascus Gate. Thence it ran probably over the high cliff east
of the Damascus Gate, and thence in a southeasterly direction to the
northeast corner of the Temple. The quarter north of the Temple
known as Bezetha is distinctly stated by Josephus to have lain out
side of the second wall (Ant., xvii, 10:2; War, ii, 3:1; v, 4:2);
consequently, that wall cannot have followed the course of the present
city wall around the northeast corner of the city (cf. p. 144).

CHAPTER X
JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF NEHEMIAH
After the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar and his
three deportations of the Jews (II Kings 24:10-19; 25:3-22; Jer.
52:30), a remnant of the nation was still left in the land, and this
continued to sacrifice on the site of the ancient Temple (Jer. 41:5).
According to the chronicler in Ezra, chaps, i-iii, Cyrus in his first
year (538 B.C.) issued an edict allowing the Jews to return from
Babylon and to rebuild their Temple. Acting on this permission, a
number proceeded to Jersualem, and set up the altar in its ancient
place. The following year they laid the foundations for a new
Temple. The historicity of this story has been doubted by many.
because no return is mentioned by the contemporary writers Haggai,
Zechariah, and Nehemiah. However this may be, it is clear that
nothing had been accomplished toward rebuilding the Temple as
late as the second year of Darius (520 B.C.). In that year the
prophets Haggai and Zechariah came forward with an appeal to
suffer the Sanctuary to lie waste no longer. Incited by their
oracles, Zerubbabel, the governor, and Joshua, the high priest,
began the work, and finished it in the sixth year of Darius
(516 b. a), according to Ezra 6: 15.
In regard to this second Temple we have little trustworthy informa
tion. In the apocryphal letter of Darius (Ezra 6:3) permission is
• given to build it 60 cubits high and 60 cubits broad, but the text must
be corrupt, since this is more than twice the dimensions of Solomon's
Temple (I Kings 6:2). The contempt recorded in Hag. 2 : 3 indicates
that the second Temple was smaller than the first. Like Ezekiel's
Temple, and unlike Solomon's Temple, this edifice had two courts;
but the people were not yet excluded from the inner court (I Mace.
4:38-48; Josephus, Ant., xiii, 13:5). Pseudo-Hecataeus, quoted by
Josephus (Cont. Ap., i, 22) gives the following account:
There, about the middle of the city, is an inclosing-wall of stone, in length
about 500 feet, in breadth 100 cubits, with double-doored gates. Within is a
116

NEHEMIAH'S WALL 117
square altar constructed of selected unhewn white stones, each side of which is 20
cubits broad and 10 cubits high. Beside it there is a large building, in which stand
an altar and a candlestick, both of gold weighing two talents. Upon these there is
a fire that is never suffered to go out by day or by night. There is no image, nor
votive offering, nor anything planted, nor a grove, nor anything of that sort.
Beyond this we have no information concerning the size or appear
ance of Zerubbabel's Temple. The second great architectural under
taking of this period was the rebuilding of the city wall.
The best account of the waU of Jerusalem as enlarged by Hezekiah
and Manasseh and as rebuilt by Nehemiah, is found in the third
chapter of the Book of Nehemiah, where we are told in regular order
how this wall was portioned out between the inhabitants of Jerusalem
and was repaired by them. This account is supplemented by the
narrative of Nehemiah's night ride in Neh. 2:12-15, and of the
procession of the Levites in Neh. 12:27-40. In this latter narra
tive the Levites start at the Valley Gate at the southwest corner of
the city, half of them proceeding along the south wall to the Temple,
the other half along the north wall to the Temple.
1. The Sheep Gate.- — The account of the rebuilding of the wall
in Neh. 3 : 1 begins with the statement that Eliashib, the high-priest,
and the priests built the Sheep Gate. To this point the narrative
returns in 3 : 32 with the account of the completion of the wall. Accord
ing to 12:39, it was the last point passed by the northern company
of Levites before they met their brethren in the court of the Temple.
It must, therefore, have been the northern entrance to the Temple
inclosure, and have been identical with the Upper Gate or Gate of
Benjamin in Solomon's wall mentioned in II Kings 15:35 =11 Chron.
27:3; Jer. 20:2; 37:13; 38:7; Ezek. 8:3; Zech. 14:10.
2. Tower of Hammeah. — This is mentioned in Neh. 3:1 as the
next important point of the wall beyond the Sheep Gate going West.
In Neh. 12:39 the northern company of Levites pass the Tower of
Hammeah just before reaching the Sheep Gate. This tower seems
to have stood on the site of the later castle of Antonia, which com
manded the Temple on the north, and is represented by the modern
Turkish barracks at the northwest corner of the Haram area. Accord
ing to Josephus (Ant., xiii, 11:2), this tower was in existence as early
as the time of the Hasmoneans.

Photograph by Bonjils

THE LINE OF NEHEMIAH'S NORTH WALL

TOWER OF HANANEL

119

3. The Tower of Hananel. — Neh. 3:1 mentions this tower as the
next point west of Hammeah, and Neh. 12:39 says that the northern
company of Levites after leaving the Fish Gate passed by the Tower

A .A

Palestine Exploration Fund SITE OF TOWER OF HANANEL

of Hananel and the Tower of Hammeah. Jer. 31 : 38 says : " The city
shall be built to the Lord from the Tower of Hananel unto the Gate
of the Corner." This indicates that Hananel was a corner of the city

120

THE FISH GATE

opposite to the Corner Gate. Zech. 14:10 says: "She shall dwell in
her place, from Benjamin's gate unto the place of the First Gate, unto
the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel unto the king's
wine-presses." Here the lines are drawn from the Gate of Benjamin
on the east to the Corner Gate on the west, and from the Tower
of Hananel on the north to the king's wine-presses, which must have
been near the king's garden, on the south. Hananel, accordingly,

Photograph by Bonjils

DAMASCUS GATE, SITE OF FISH GATE

must have stood at the north angle of the second wall on the cliff
east of the present Damascus Gate.
4. The Fish Gate. — According to Neh. 3:3, the Fish Gate lay
between the Tower of Hananel and the Old Gate. According
to Neh. 12:39, the north company of Levites went from the Old
Gate over the Fish Gate to the Tower of Hananel ; but according to
II Chron. 33 : 14, the Fish Gate lay in the new wall built by Manasseh,
which we have found reason to identify with the second north wall.
Zeph. 1:10 connects the Fish Gate with the "second quarter" — that

THE OLD GATE 121
is, apparently, the new district added by the second wall on the north.
These passages indicate that the Fish Gate is to be sought in the
modern Damascus Gate, in the middle of the north wall of the city.
Ancient stones are still to be seen in the foundations of this gate.
The Middle Gate, mentioned in Jer. 39 : 1-3 as the place where the
king of Babylon sat after the capture of Jerusalem, is apparently
to be identified with the Fish Gate. It was so called because it lay
midway in the north wall.
5. The Old Gate.— hi Neh. 3:6 the Old Gate is mentioned next
to the Fish Gate. A large number of builders are named as working
between the two gates, so that it seems reasonable to suppose that
the Old Gate was a considerable distance from the Fish Gate. In
Neh. 12:39 the northern company of Levites passed the Old Gate in
going from the Broad Wall to the Fish Gate. The name suggests
that the gate lay in the first wall of the city and was identical with the
Corner Gate, at which point the second wall on the north joined the
earlier wall. This view is confirmed by Zech. 14: 10, where we read:
"Jerusalem shall be lifted up from the Gate of Benjamin unto the
place of the First Gate unto the Corner Gate." The First Gate is
mentioned nowhere else and it is natural to regard "pyj^,
"first," as a textual corruption of ™"\ "old." If this view be
correct, the Old Gate is explicitly identified with the Corner Gate.
6. The Broad Wall.— According to Neh. 3:8, the Broad Wall
lay next beyond the Old Gate. It is noteworthy that in this account
the Gate of Ephraim is not mentioned. This is what we should
expect, if this gate belonged to the old north wall. After the second
wall was built, it stood in the heart of the city, and therefore did not
need to be rebuilt. In Neh. 12:39 it is mentioned, but it is not
stated that the Levites passed over it in their procession around the
top of the wall, but merely that they passed over against it. It was
only 400 cubits distant from the Corner Gate, and consequently
was an ancient landmark that was easily recognized from the top
of the wall. It is mentioned in the same way in which the House
of David and the House of the Heroes are mentioned as passed by
those who marched upon the eastern wall. The outer wall on the
north would naturally be repaired first, and then subsequently the
inner wall would be repaired as an additional defense to the northern

122

THE BROAD WALL

quarter of the city. In Nehemiah, however, no mention is made of a
repairing of the inner wall. The broad wall, accordingly, must have
been part of the earliest fortifications of the city on the western side,
since Nehemiah's wall coincided with Solomon's wall from the Cor
ner Gate to the Valley Gate. The Valley of Hinnom is only a shallow
depression at the Corner Gate, and, consequently, at this point a
wall of unusual strength was needed to defend the city. This is

Photograph by Bonjils

SITE OF THE BROAD WALL

probably the reason why this was known as the Broad Wall. Appar
ently this was the same piece that was strengthened by Uzziah, accord
ing to II Chron. 26:9.
7. The Tower of the Furnaces. — At the southern end of the Broad
Wall lay the Tower of the Furnaces, according to Neh. 3:11 and
12:38. It is naturally identified with the great rock-cutting known
as Maudslay's Scarp in the English Protestant School, south of the
southwest corner of the modem city. This scarp was evidently
designed to form the base of a tower that protected the corner of
the ancient city.

THE VALLEY GATE 123
8. The Valley Gate. — Neh. 3:13 locates the Valley Gate between
the Tower of Furnaces and the Dung Gate. According to Neh.
2 : 13, it was the point from which Nehemiah set out to ride down the
Valley of Hinnom toward Siloam, and according to 12:31, 38, it
was the point from which the two companies of Levites set out, one
to encircle the city on the north, and the other on the south, until
they met in the court of the Temple. This gate lay in the old wall

Photograph by L. B. Paton BASE OF TOWER IN PROTESTANT SCHOOL

of Solomon, according to II Chron. 26:9; and its location at the
southwest corner of Solomon's city has already been discussed in
speaking of Solomon's wall. In Jer. 19:2 the command is given
to the prophet: "Go forth unto the valley of the son of Hinnom,
which is by the entry of the Gate Harsith." The Gate Harsith,
or Gate of "Potsherds," is not mentioned elsewhere, but since it
opened upon the Valley of Hinnom, it is reasonable to suppose that
it is the same as the Valley Gate. At the upper end of the Birket
es-Sultan, the large modern pool in the Valley of Hinnom, potsherds

124 THE DUNG GATE
are still pounded up to be used as cement for repairing roofs. It
is possible that this place was used for the same purpose in antiquity,
and that the Valley Gate was known as the Gate of Potsherds because
it opened upon this spot.
9. The Dung Gate. — Neh. 3:13 locates the Dung Gate at a dis
tance of 1,000 cubits from the Valley Gate. If, as we have seen,
the Valley Gate is to be identified with the opening discovered by

Photograph by L. B. Patau THE DUNG GATE
Bliss at the southwest corner of the old city, then the Dung Gate
must be identified with the other opening discovered by Bliss at the
southeast end of the western hill below the Pools of Siloam. The
distance between these two points is not more than 1,000 cubits, or
1,500 feet. Neh. 2:13 and 12:31 also name the Dung Gate as lying
next to the Valley Gate. The south gate of the modern city in El-
Wad is known today as the Dung Gate, and all the refuse of the city
is dumped outside of it. Customs are so persistent in the Orient
that it is reasonable to suppose that the south gate of Nehemiah's
city had the same name and the same use.

THE FOUNTAIN GATE 125
10. The Fountain Gate. — Neh. 3:15 names the Fountain Gate
as lying next beyond the Dung Gate and as near to the Pool of Siloam
and the stairs of the City of David. Neh. 2 : 14 mentions it as lying
between the Dung Gate and the King's Pool — that is, the Upper
Pool of Siloam built by King Hezekiah. Neh. 12:37 states that
the southern company of Levites marched along the wall from the
Dung Gate to the Fountain Gate, and thence to the stairs of the
City of David. These passages all show that the Fountain Gate
was in the immediate neighborhood of the Upper Pool of Siloam.
.Its name was derived from the fact that it gave access to the Fountain
of Siloam. As we have seen, the second wall on the south did not cross
the lower end of the Tyropoeon Valley below the Old Pool, but fol
lowed the cliff on the west side of the valley and crossed above Siloam.
Hence, the Fountain Gate has to be sought at the point where the wall
crossed the valley. In II Kings 25:4; Jer. 39 : 4; 52 : 7, it is stated that,
at the time of the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar, Zedekiah
fled "by the way of the gate between the two walls which was by the
king's garden." Nebuchadrezzar captured the city from the northern
side, and, consequently, Zedekiah must have fled toward the south.
The gate between the two walls must, therefore, be identified with
the Fountain Gate which lay between the wall of the City of David
on the east side of the Tyropoeon Valley and the wall of Hezekiah
on the west side of that valley. This identification is also demanded
by the fact that the gate between the two walls led to the King's
Garden. From other passages this is known to have lain at the mouth
of the Tyropoeon Valley.
11. The Pool of Siloam. — In Neh. 3: 15; 2: 14 the Pool of Siloam
is named between the Fountain Gate and the stairs of the City of
David. In 2:14 it is called the King's Pool. Its location at the
southern end of the Siloam tunnel has already been discussed, so
that nothing more needs to be said here (see p. 40).
12. The King's Garden.— This is mentioned in Neh. 3:15; II
Kings 25:4; Jer. 39:4; 52:7, as lying near to the Fountain Gate.
According to Zech. 14:10, "Jerusalem shall be lifted up from the
tower of Hananel unto the king's wine-presses." Hananel is the
most northern point of the city, and the king's wine-presses seem to
be mentioned as the extreme southern point. They must, there-

126

STAIRS OF CITY OF DAVID

fore, have been located in or near the King's Garden. This garden
was irrigated by the overflow of water from the Pools of Siloam.
At the present time the market-gardens of Jerusalem are situated
at the mouth of the Tyropoeon Valley.
13. The Stairs of the City of David are mentioned in Neh. 3:15
and 12:37 as lying close to the Pool of Siloam. They are doubtless

Photograph by L. B. Baton

SITE OF KING'S GARDEN

to be identified with the steps cut in the rock that are still visible at
the southern extremity of the eastern hill.
14. The Ascent of the Wall (Neh. 3:19 and 12:37) is evidently
the steep ascent by which the wall climbed up the eastern side of
the City of David.
15. The Turning of the Wall mentioned in Neh. 3: 24, corresponds
with the change in the course of the wall as discovered by Bliss and
Guthe at a point west of the spring of Gihon.
16. The Tower Standing Out, mentioned in Neh. 3:26 as situated

THE WATER GATE 127
in Ophel, corresponds to the great tower whose foundations Guthe
discovered immediately south of the Temple.
17. The Water Gate is mentioned in Neh. 3:26 as situated on the
east side of Ophel near the great tower. In Neh. 12 : 37 it is mentioned
as lying between the House of David and the Temple. In 8: 1, 16, it
was the place where the assembly was held to which Ezra read the
Book of the Law. It evidently lay near to the southeast corner of
the Temple, and was called the Water Gate from the fact that it
gave access to the spring of Gihon below in the Kidron Valley.
18. The Wall of Ophel mentioned in Neh. 3:28 is doubtless to
be identified with the ancient wall, whose remains Warren and
Guthe have uncovered, running in a southwesterly direction from
the southeast corner of the Temple.
19. The Horse Gate, mentioned in Neh. 3:28 and Jer. 31:40,
we have already met as a gate in the wall of Solomon (II Kings 11 : 16;
II Chron. 23:15). As we have seen, it was situated in the eastern
wall of the Temple inclosure near the southeast corner (see p. 100).
20. The Gate Miphkad, mentioned in Neh. 3:31, must have been
situated near the northeast corner of the Temple area, and have
been identical with the East Gate. It is not called by this name
elsewhere in the Old Testament.
21. The Ascent of the Corner, which Neh. 3:31 names as lying be
tween the Gate Miphkad and the Sheep Gate, must, as its name implies,
have lain near the northeast corner of the Temple. It was probably
a portion of the wall that climbed the hill in a northwesterly direction
from the corner of the ancient city. This brings us back to the Sheep
Gate from which we set out, and completes the circuit of the outer
wall of Jerusalem as it existed in the time of Nehemiah, and as it
remained until the year 40 a. d., when the third wall on the north was
built by Agrippa.

CHAPTER XI
JERUSALEM IN THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE OLD AND THE
NEW TESTAMENTS
The rebuilding of the Temple and of the ancient city-wall are the
only recorded architectural achievements of the Jews in the Persian
period. The population of Jerusalem was scanty, even after Nehe
miah had drafted a tenth of the colony to help fill up the vacant space
within the walls (Neh. u : i). The poverty was great, and constant
feuds with their neighbors left no opportunity for building operations.
Under Greek rule the conditions were little better. The Akra, or
Citadel, was fortified and occupied alternately by the Egyptians and
the Syrians. In 198 b. c. it was in the hands of Scopas, the general
of Ptolemy Epiphanes, but was captured from him by Antiochus the
Great (Josephus, Ant., xii, 3:3). In 168 B.C. Apollonius Thrasaei,
the general of Antiochus Epiphanes, captured Jerusalem, broke down
the walls and the houses, defiled the Temple, and set up an altar of
the Olympian Zeus upon the altar of burnt-offering. The observance
of the Jewish religion was prohibited, and multitudes perished in
the ensuing persecution. At this time the Akra was rebuilt out of
material taken from the ruined walls and houses, and was filled with
a large Syrian garrison that dominated both the city and the Temple
(I Mace. 1:33-40; 3:45; Josephus, Ant., xii, 5:4; 6:2). In 164 b. c.
when Judas Maccabaeus defeated the Syrians and occupied Jerusalem
he was unable to dislodge this garrison (I Mace. 4:36-41; Josephus,
Ant., xii, 7:6). The Syrians and renegades continued to maintain
themselves here, harassing the Jews and interrupting the Temple
services, so that Judas made a strenuous, but unsuccessful, effort to
drive them out (Ant., xii, 9:3,4). During the subsequent wars the
Akra served as a center of Syrian agitation in Judea and as a refuge
for unsuccessful Syrian armies (Ant., xii, 10:4). In 161 b. c. it was
strengthened by the Syrian general Bacchides (Ant., xiii, 1:3), and
with Bethsura remained untaken when all the other fortresses of the
128

THE AKRA

129

land had been captured by the Jews (Ant., xiii, 2:1). Numerous
negotiations were conducted between the Hasmonean princes and the

JERUSALEM IN NEW TESTAMENT TIMES

130 THE TEMPLE
claimants for the Syrian throne with a view to its surrender, but
nothing came of these (Ant., xiii, 2:3; 5:2), and in 146 B. c. Jona
than began to lay siege to it (Ant., xiii, 4: 9). A wall was built through
the midst of the city to exclude the garrison from access to the market
place (Ant., xiii, 5:11), no help came to the Syrians (Ant., xiii, 6:6),
and they were reduced to the greatest straits (I Mace. 13:49), so that
they were compelled to surrender to Simon in 161 B. c. (I Mace. 13: 50).
According to Josephus, the Akra was razed to the ground, and even
the hill upon which it stood was cut off and thrown into the valley,
so that it was no longer higher than the Temple mount (Ant., xiii,
6:7; War, i, 2:2; v, 4:1).
In regard to the location of the Akra the numerous references in
I Mace, and Josephus leave no room for doubt. It was in the City of
David, or Lower City, on the southeast hill immediately south of the
Temple. The LXX version identifies it with the Millo of David,
Solomon, and Hezekiah (II Sam. 5:9; I Kings 9:15, 24; II Chron.
32:5). It was probably the same as the "fortress which belongs to
the house" of Neh. 2:8.*
In the wars with the Syrians the chief stronghold of the Maccabeans
was the Temple. In 164 Judas took refuge there and successfully
resisted Antiochus Eupator until his provisions gave out. Antiochus
was so impressed with its strength that he cast down part of its wall
before leaving Jerusalem (Ant., xii, 9 : 5-7). This damage was repaired
by Jonathan in 146 b. c, who greatly strengthened the ou'.er wall by
the addition of lofty towers (Ant., xiii, 5:11). After the fall of the Akra
in 141 b. c. the Temple became the citadel of Jerusalem, and all the
Hasmonean princes labored to make it impregnable. The enemies
of Hyrcanus II intrenched themselves there (Ant., xiv, 1:2). Aris-
tobulus was besieged there by Aretas and Hyrcanus II (Ant., xiv, 2:1,
2 ; 4:1,2). When Pompey advanced to settle the dispute between the
two brothers, he was compelled to lay siege to it. He found it defended
on the north by a strong wall with lofty, well-built towers, in front of
which were a ditch and a deep natural ravine. In order to take it he
was compelled to construct a wall of circumvallation with towers that
overtopped those of the Temple inclosure. Even these efforts would
probably have been unsuccessful but for the unwillingness of the Jews
r For a full discussion of the location of the Akra see pp. 51-59.

HASMONEAN PALACE 131
to fight on the Sabbath (Ant., xiv, 4:2-4; War, ii, 7:1, 3-6). In
37 b. c. Herod besieged the Temple in a similar manner, constructing
a wall and towers over against it, and filling up the ditch that lay in
front of it (Ant., xiv, 15:14; 16:2; War, i, 17:8).
Another construction of the Maccabean age was the Palace that
was occupied as a residence by the Hasmonean high-priestly kings.
In Ant., xx, 8:11, Josephus states that it was built "of old" (irdXat)
by the Hasmoneans, but he gives no precise information as to its
origin. Apparently it was already in existence when Hyrcanus I
built the Baris (Ant., xviii, 4:3). It was used by Aristobulus as a
royal residence (Ant., xiv, 1:2; War, i, 6:1), and was subsequently
occupied by Pompey after the surrender of the city (Ant., xiv, 4:2,
War, i, 7 : 2). In it Herod and Phasaelus took refuge from the party
of Antigonus (Ant., xiv, 13:3, 4; War, i, 13:2, 3). According to
Ant., xx, 8 : 11, it was near the Xystus, upon an elevation that afforded
a delightful prospect. According to War, ii, 16 : 3, it lay in the Upper
City at the end of the bridge which crossed the Tyropoeon Valley to
the Temple. These statements show that it must have been situated
on the top of the central hill of Jerusalem, in substantially the position
now occupied by the Synagogue of the Ashkenazim Jews. It occupied
a commanding site and was strongly fortified so that it served as a
sort of citadel for the Upper City.
From the time of Hyrcanus I (135-105 b. c.) dates the Baris (Heb.
Bird "fortress"), which stood upon the site of the Tower of Hammeah
in Nehemiah's wall (Neh. 3:1), and of the later Antonia (Ant., xviii,
4:3; xv, 11:4), in the place now occupied by the Turkish Barracks
at the northwest corner of the Haram.2 By this fortress the northern
side of the Temple was greatly strengthened, and it formed a safe and
convenient residence for the Hasmonean princes at the times when
they were obliged to perform high-priestly duties in the Temple.
Hyrcanus I dwelt here much of the time, and kept here the high-
priestly vestments; and his example was followed by all of his succes
sors (Ant., xviii, 4:3; xv, 11:4). Here Aristobulus murdered his
brother Antigonus (Ant., xiii, 11:2; War, i, 3:3-5). Here the wife
and children of the rebellious Aristobulus were imprisoned by Queen
Alexandra (Ant., xiii, 16:5). Here Hyrcanus II took refuge from
2 See pp. 7-9.

132

MONUMENT OF JOHN

the attack of his brother Aristobulus (Ant., xiv, 1:2; War, i,
6:1). Hence Antigonus, the last of the Hasmoneans, went out
to fall at the feet of the Roman general Sosius (Ant., xiv, 16:2;
War, i, 18:2).
Besides the Baris the high-priest John Hyrcanus constructed for
himself a sepulchral monument that remained a conspicuous landmark

Photograph by Bonjils

TOMBS IN THE KIDRON VALLEY

in Jerusalem. War, v, 6:2, states that Titus made it the objective
point in his plan to break through the three northern walls of the city.
War, v, 7:3, says that after the fall of the third, or outer wall on the
north, John and his party defended the Tower of Antonia and the
north cloister of the Temple, while Simon and his party defended the
ground that was near the Monument of John as far as the gate where
water was brought into the Tower of Hippicus. According to War,
v, 9:2, after the fall of the second wall, Titus proposed to capture the
Upper City at the Monument of John, and the Temple at the Tower
of Antonia (cf. v, 11:4). These references lead us to look for the

TOWER OF ANTONIA 133
Monument on the north side of the Upper City, just inside of the old
first wall on the north.
When Alexander Jannaeus was on his deathbed he advised his
queen, Alexandra, to come to terms with the Pharisees, his lifelong
enemies. In honor of this conduct the Pharisees built him a splendid
monument (Ant., xiii, 15:5; 16:1). According to War, v, 7: , it
lay outside of the second wall on the north, in the vicinity of the Tower
of Antonia and the north cloister of the Temple.
Other tombs of the Maccabean age are the so-called Tomb of
Absalom, Tomb of James, and Tomb of Zechariah that are still to
be seen hewn in the cliff on the east side of the gorge of the Kidron
east of the Haram. Perhaps this is the place called by Josephus
Peristereon, or "Dove-cote" (War, v, 12:2), and the name maybe
due to the numerous tombs excavated in the rock.
The only other architectural undertaking of the Maccabean age
that is known to us is the bridge across the Tyropoeon Valley that con
nected the Temple with the Upper City. Josephus tells us that Aris
tobulus broke it down in anticipation of Pompey's attack (Ant., xiv,
4:2; War, i, 7 : 2), but how long before his day it was erected he does
not inform us.3
With Herod a new building era began in Jerusalem. From Nehe
miah to the end of the Hasmonean period there had been little change,
but now alterations were undertaken on a magnificent scale. In the
early part of his reign, certainly before the battle of Actium in 31 b. c,
Herod rebuilt the Baris, or fortress of Hyrcanus I, near the northwest
corner of the Temple inclosure and named it Antonia after his friend
Marcus Antonius, the Triumvir. The slopes of the hill on which the
tower stood were covered with slabs of polished stone that rendered
access impossible. Around the top of the cliff was a breastwork three
cubits high, and within this inclosure stood the fortress, forty cubits
in height, with a tower at each of the corners. The interior was fitted
up like a palace with rooms of all sorts, courts, baths, and quarters
for troops, so that it seemed like a little city. On the north and east,
where there were no natural declivities, the tower was protected by a
deep ditch and by the Pool Struthion. By this tower the north wall
of the city was greatly strengthened, and a vantage ground was gained
3 See pp. 10 f.

134

HEROD'S PALACE

for controlling the Temple quarter. A legion of Roman soldiers was
stationed here, and at the least sign of disorder it ran down into the
Outer Court and seized the offenders.4
In the year 26 b. c. Herod constructed a theater in Jerusalem. Its
location is not clearly defined by Josephus, but he seems to indicate
that it was in the Upper City in the vicinity of the Maccabean Palace.

Photograph by L. B. Paton

SITE OF HEROD'S PALACE

It was built in the most magnificent style, and was adorned with silver
and gold. Plays were presented here on a splendid scale, and con
demned criminals were compelled to fight with wild beasts. The
waUs were adorned with trophies of Augustus' victories, which gave
great offense to the Jews who supposed that the suits of armor con
tained heathen images (Ant., xv, 8:1-4).
In 22 b. c. Herod undertook the building of a new palace for him
self. It lay in the northwest corner of the Old City on the site of the
modem Turkish Citadel and Armenian Gardens. One of its towers,
4 See pp. 7-9.

HEROD'S PALACE 135
Hippicus, formed the northwest corner of the first, or inner wall of
the city (War, v, 4:2).5
Another tower, Phasaelus, still survives in the so-called "Tower
of David" near the modern Jaffa Gate (cf. War, ii, 3:2; v, 3:5;
v, 4 = 4; vi, 8: 1, 4; Ant., xvii, 10:2). These two towers, together with
a third one, Mariamne, guarded the north wall of the Palace, which
was at the same time the north wall of the Inner City. They were
built of huge blocks of hard, white limestone. Hippicus was 25 cubits
square and 80 cubits high; Phasaelus, 40 cubits square and about
90 cubits high; Mariamne, 20 cubits square and 55 cubits high.
Josephus dwells at length on the interior arrangement of these towers
as one of the most magnificent features of the Palace (War, v, 4 : 3, 4).
Within the inclosure formed by the city walls on the north and west
and the Palace walls on the south and east stood the Palace itself.
According to Josephus (War, v, 4:4; i, 21:1; Ant., xv, 9:3) the
magnificence of this edifice was beyond description. It rose to a height
of 30 cubits, and was flanked on all sides by towers at regular intervals.
It contained apartments and banquet-halls for hundreds of guests.
The walls were decorated with rare marbles, and the ceilings were
remarkable for the length and the ornamentation of their beams.
The furniture was of the most costly sort, and the household vessels
were of gold and silver. Round about the Palace lay exquisite gardens
and groves containing fountains and statues.
Herod's greatest architectural undertaking was the rebuilding
of the Temple, which was begun in the year 20 b. c. The immense
constructions that were necessary in order to secure room for the
Outer Court, and the size and location of the other courts, have already
been described in the discussion of the location of Herod's Temple.6
The new Outer Court was fully twice as large as that of Zerubbabel's
Temple. On the north, east, and west it was inclosed with a porch
30 cubits wide, formed by two rows of white marble columns 25 cubits
high supporting a cedar roof. On the south there were four rows of
columns and the porch was two stories high. This was known as the
Royal Porch. That on the east was known as Solomon's Porch.
On the roofs of these porches Roman sentries from the Castle of
5 See pp. 93 f.
6 See pp. 3-16.

136 HEROD'S TEMPLE
Antonia continually went the round in order to keep watch upon the
multitude wi; h:n. The Inner Court, including the Court of the Priests,
the Court of Israel, and the Court of the Women, was surrounded
with a balustrade 3 cubits high. Within this fourteen steps led up to
the higher inner platform. Then came the Htt, or "Terrace,"
10 cubits wide, and then a series of gateways opening between exedra
that inclosed the court on all sides. These gateways were nine in
number, four on the north, four on the south, and one on the east.
They had double doors 30 cubits high and 15 cubits broad that were
adorned wiih gold and silver. The gate on the east that led into the
Court of the Women was specially magnificent. It was made of Cor
inthian bronze and was so heavy that it could scarcely be shut by
twenty men. The chambers around the inner walls of the Court of
the Women were used as treasuries, and in front of them stood boxes for
collecting the money-offerings of the woi.-h'pers. Between the Court
of the Women and the Court of Israel lay the Beautiiul or Nicanor
Gate, 50 cubits high, with two doors 40 cubits in height covered with
massive gold and silver ornaments. The Court of Israel, that was
open only to male Israelites who were ceremonially clean, was sur
rounded with exedra like the Court of the Women, and was entered
by three gates on the north and three on the south, besides the gate
leading from the Court of the Women. At its western end was the
Court of the Priests, inclosing the Sanctuary and the Altar, and
separated from the Court of Israel by a beautifully ornamented stone
balustrade 1 cubit in height. The main body of the Sanctuary was
100 cubits long, 60 cubits broad, and 100 cubits high. The front on
the eastern end was expanded with wings 20 cubits square, so that it
formed a sort of propylaeum 100 cubits long and 100 cubits high. The
Sanctuary was thus more than twice as large as that of Solomon.
It was built of immense blocks of white marble, covered on the front,
and perhaps all around on the lower courses, with pUtes of gold. The
wealth spent in its adornment was enormous, and made it one of the
wonders of the world. Its white courts, porches, and buildings rose
tier upon tier, so that it looked like a great snow-covered mountain,
and its marble and gold gleamed so brilliantly in the sun that the eye
could scarcely bear to look upon them (Ant., xv, 11; War, v, 5;
Babylonian Talmud, Middoth, ii). The best and most recent recon-

HEROD'S TEMPLE

J37

SITE OF THE
CASTLE ANTONIA

M

A. 1-8 Gates of Inner Court.
A. p. The Beautiful or Nicanor Gate.
A. 10. The Gate of the women's court ( ?).
B. i-8. Gates of Outer Court.
C. A conjectural porti- i with steps forming the en
trance to the bridges or causeways leading to the fortress
Antoma. , ,„D- *• The chamber of Lepers. D. 2. The chamber
of Wood. D. 3. The chamber of Oil. D. 4. The Cham
ber of Nazirites.
E. The Holy of Holies.
t. u,F' r T,he Siractuary, containing the Candlestick, the
lable of Shewbread, and the Altar of Incense.
Q. Hel. A passageway or terrace.
R. The wall or partition; Soreg.
T. Conjectural position of the council-chamber
where the Sanhedrin met.

1 B2

jEjEgasy^r--

COURT OF THE GENTILES

ROYAL

PORCH

I 1 1 ¦ ¦

¦^^¦^» ¦ 1 ¦ 1 1 1 I I

B3.

PLAN OF HEROD'S TEMPLE
From "Sacred Sites o the Gospels" by Sanday and Waferhouse

138 HEROD'S BUILDINGS
struction of the ground-plan of Herod's Temple is that of Sanday and
Waterhouse.7 With the courteous permission of the publishers it is
reproduced on the preceding page.
The Xystus, or Forum, is not mentioned before the time of Herod,
and was probably laid out by him. According to War, v, 4: 2, it lay
near the inner wall on the north at the point where it crossed the
Tyropoeon Valley to join the west porch of the Temple. According
to War, ii, 16:5, it was near the end of the bridge that led from the
Upper City to the Temple (cf. vi, 6:2). It was the final point of
attack of the Romans after the outer and middle walls on the north
had fallen. According to War, ii, 16 : 3, it was used as a meeting-
place for public assemblies.
The Hippodrome, which is first mentioned in the year 4 b. c, was
probably also the work of Herod. It was occupied as a stronghold by
the Jews in their fight with the quaestor Sabinus whose headquarters
were in Herod's Palace. It seems, therefore, to have stood upon
high ground on the western hill. Spiess8 plausibly conjectures that
it lay on the site of the modern Haret el-Maidan or "District of the
Racecourse" (cf. Ant., xvii, 10:2; War, ii, 3:1, 2).
The Council House and Archives were probably also the work of
Herod, since they are not mentioned before his time. They lay near
together, since both were set on fire by the Romans at the same time
(War, vi, 6:3). The Council House, according to War, v, 4:2,
lay near the inner wall on the north, between the Xystus and the west
porch of the Temple. Both buildings, apparently, were situated in
the Tyropoeon Valley close to the west wall of the Temple, and were
south of the inner wall on the north, since they were not burned by
the Romans until after the Upper City had been captured.
The Serpent's Pool (Birket Mamilla), the Pool Amygdalon
(Birket Hammam el-Batraq), and the Pool Struthion (Birket Israel)
are not mentioned in the Old Testament, nor by Josephus before the
time of the siege of Jerusalem. It is possible, therefore, that they also
may have been the work of Herod, and may have been designed to
supply his Palace and the Castle of Antonia with water.9
7 Sanday, Sacred Sites of the Gospels (Oxford, 1903), p. 116.
8 Das Jerusalem des Josephus, p. 30.
' See pp. 35-44-

CHAPTER XII
JERUSALEM IN NEW TESTAMENT TIMES
In spite of Herod's undertakings the general appearance of the
city remained the same as it had been in earher times. The southeast
hill, or Lower City, was inclosed with its original line of fortifications,
and was known as the City of David, or the Akra. In it the Tomb of
David was still shown (Ant., xiii, 8:4; xvi, 7:1; War, i, 2:5; Acts
2:29). The name Ophel still clung to the region immediately south
of the Temple (War, v, 4:2; 6:1; vi, 6:3). The Temple stood on
the same spot as Solomon's Temple, and was defended on the north
with the wall that Solomon had built. The southwest hill, or Upper
City, was still inclosed on the north and west with Solomon's wall
(No. 2) and on the south with Hezekiah's wall (No. 3). The ancient
gates were still in use, although their names seem to have changed.
The Mishneh, or Second Quarter, added by Manasseh's second wall
on the north (No. 4), was still a distinct part of the city and was known
as the Fore-City or Suburb (irpodcrTeiov). Many of the Old Testa
ment names for places in the vicinity were still in common use . Among
these may be mentioned Kidron (John 18:1; War, v, 2:3; 6:1; 12:2;
vi, 3:2), Gihon (Ant.,\\i, 14:5), Siloam <Lukei3:4; John 9:7; War,
v, 4:1; 9:4; 12:2; vi, 7:2; 8:5 et al.), Solomon's Pool (War, v,
4:2), and the Mount of Olives (Matt. 21:1; 24:3; Mark 13:3; 14:26;
Luke 19:29, 37; 21:37; 22:39; John 8:1; Acts 1:12; Ant., xx, 8:6;
War, v, 2:3, 4, 5; 3:5). On the whole, Jerusalem in the time of
Christ was still practically the same city that it had been in pre-exilic
times, and was full of interesting associations for one familiar with
the Old Testament. As Jesus walked its streets, or looked down
upon it ¦ from the surrounding hills, he must often have been
reminded of the kings, prophets, and psalmists of ancient Israel.
On account of the hostility of the Jewish authorities, Jesus never
took up his abode in Jerusalem. Nazareth remained his home, and
J39

140 JESUS IN JERUSALEM
he came to the capital only for occasional visits. For this reason the
connections of the gospel history with the holy city are fewer than
might have been expected. The first three references are to the
Temple. Luke 2 : 22-39 records that when Jesus was thirty-four days
old he was brought to be presented in the Temple with a sacrifice of a
pair of turtle-doves according to the law of Lev. 12:6, and was
blessed by the aged Simeon and Anna who recognized in him the long
expected Messiah. This presentation must have taken place in the
Court of the Women. It probably occurred at the Beautiful Gate,
where a flight of steps led up to the Court of Israel. Here the priest
received the offerings from the mother and carried them to be sacrificed
on the altar.
The second visit, as narrated in Luke 2 : 41-50, was at the feast of
Passover, when Jesus was twelve years of age. On this occasion he
must have entered the Court of the Men of Israel with Joseph, and
have performed the ceremony by which he assumed the obligations
of an adult Israelite.
The third visit is the one narrated in John 2:13-22 immediately
after Jesus' first appearance as a teacher in Galilee :
And the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
And he found in the Temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the
changers of money sitting: and he made a scourge of cords, and cast all out of
the Temple, both the sheep and the oxen; and he poured out the changers' money,
and overthrew their tables; and to them that sold the doves he said, Take these
things hence; make not my Father's house a house of merchandise  The
Jews therefore answered and said unto him, What sign showest thou unto us,
seeing that thou doest these things ? Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy
this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. The Jews therefore said, Forty
and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three days ?
The stalls of the traders and money-changers must have been situated
in the Great, or Outer Court of the Temple, the Court of the Gentiles,
and were probably near the chief entrances. If, as is commonly sup
posed, the concluding words of the Jews refer to the literal Temple and
not to Jesus' body, they are an indication that this event occurred in
26 A. d., since the Temple was begun by Herod in 20 b. c.
The fourth visit, as recorded in John 5, was at the time of an
unnamed feast. On this occasion Jesus healed a lame man at the
Pool of Bethesda. In a previous discussion of the location of the Pool

JESUS IN JERUSALEM 141
of Bethesda,1 reasons were given for holding that Bethesda is to be
identified with the Gihon of the Old Testament, the modern Virgin's
Fount in the Kidron Valley south of the Temple.
The fifth visit (John 7:1 — 10: 2 r) was at a feast of Tabernacles.
Entering into the Temple be taught "in the treasury" (John 8:20).
The expression "treasury" seems to refer to the large boxes with
trumpet-shaped mouhs for gavher'ng alms that blood on either side
of the Court of the Women. As he was 1 living ifae Temple Jesus saw
a man blind from h'<- birth, and afi-r anoint 'tv* h'- eyes with clay, he
said to him, "Go, wash in the Pool of Siloa-p.'' The man went and
washed, and returned with his eyesight restored (John 9 : 1-7). Siloam
is the pool, so often mentioned in the Old Testament, that lay at the
mouth of the Tyropoeon Valley.2
The sixth visit (John 10:22-/12) was at the feast of the Dedication
in winter. Jesus was waging in Solomon's Porch, -he eastern cloister
of the Outer Court of the Temple, when the Jews came to him and
began to discuss the old subject of his messianic c1 ;ms. His asser
tion of oneness with the Father so enraged them that they sought to
kill him, and he was compelled to withdraw himself beyond the
Jordan. The seventh and final visit of Jesus to Jerusalem was at the time
of the last Passover. On Palm Sunday he made h;s triumphal entry
into the city, coming from Bethany over the Mount of Olives. The
gate by which he would naturally enter the Temple would be the
eastern one. This was the Gate Shushan that lay on the site of the
modern Golden Gate.3 On Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday of
Passion Week Jesus taught in the Temple.
On Wednesday he rested at Bethany, and on Thursday he once
more entered Jerusalem to eat the Last Supper .with his disciples.
The place chosen was an "upper room" (Mark 14:15; Luke 22:12).
The subsequent mention of the young man who accompanied Jesus
to the Garden of Gethsemane, and who left his garment in the hands
of the rabble and fled naked (found only in Mark 14:51 f.) suggests
1 See p. 41.
2 See pp. 40 f.
3 See Schick, Zeitschrijt des deutschen Paldstinavereins, Vol. XXII (1899),
pp. 94-101; and above, pp. 82 f.

142 THE UPPER ROOM
that the young man was Mark the evangelist, and that the "upper
room" was in the house of Mary, the mother of Mark. The place
where the disciples met during the interval between the crucifixion
and the ascension (Luke 24 : 33 ; John 20 : 19 ; Mark 16 : 14) is in Acts
1 : 13 called "the upper room where they were abiding." There is no
reason to doubt that it was the same "upper room" in which the Last
Supper was eaten. Here "all with one accord continued stedfast in
prayer, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with
his brethren" (Acts 1:14). Here Matthias was chosen to fill the
place of Judas (Acts 1 : 26). Here the Spirit descended on the day of
Pentecost (Acts 2 : 1-4). Subsequently (Acts 12:12) we are told that
Peter, after his escape from prison, "came to the house of Mary, the
mother of John whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered
together and were praying." This confirms the conjecture that the
Last Supper was celebrated at the house of the mother of Mark, and
shows that it continued to be used as a meeting-place by the infant
church in Jerusalem. Now Epiphanius4 declares that when Hadrian
visited Jerusalem (in 132 a. d.),
He found the whole city cast down to the ground, and the Temple of God
trodden under foot, except a few buildings and the little church of God on the
spot where the disciples, returning after the ascension of the Savior from the
Mount of Olives, had gone up to the upper room; for there it had been built,
that is, in the quarter of Zion, the church which had survived the destruction and
parts of the building on Zion.
There is no difficulty in supposing that memory of the location of the
mother-church of Christendom survived the fall of Jerusalem; and that
when the Christians returned to the city, they held their assemblies on
the ancient site. The church seen by Hadrian may well have been
the lineal descendant of the original church. From this time onward
there is an unbroken chain of tradition identifying the so-called Cenacu-
lum, at the southern end of the western hill, with the first church of
Jerusalem and the "upper room" of the disciples. In this case, at
least, ecclesiastical tradition seems to be trustworthy, and it is probable
that in the Cenaculum we have the genuine scene of the Last Supper.
The building now lies outside of the city-wall, and is in the hands of
the Moslems, who call it the Tomb of the Prophet David. In the
4 De Pond, el Mes., xiv (ed. Dindorff, iv, 17).

THE PRAETORIUM 143
center of the complex of Arab buildings are remains of an ancient
Christian church.5
From the Last Supper Jesus went out across the brook Kidron to
the Garden of Gethsemane (John 18:1). Kidron is the stream so
often mentioned in the Old Testament as lying east of the Temple,
and the Garden of Gethsemane must have been one of the numerous
olive groves that covered the western slope of the Mount of Olives.
The traditional Greek and Latin Gethsemanes have no ancient tra
dition in their favor, but are doubtless in substantially the correct
position. In the garden Jesus was arrested and was taken to the palace of the
ex-high-priest Annas (John 18:12), and thence to the palace of
Caiaphas, the actual high priest (John 18:24). Tradition finds the
palace of Annas in the vicinity of Herod's Palace, and the palace of
Caiaphas a little north of the Cenaculum. This is substantially
correct, since the high priests of this period are known to have had
their residences on the southwest hill. The house of Ananias, son
of Annas, was burned at the same time with the Maccabean Palace
(War, ii, 17:6).
From Caiaphas Jesus was taken to the Praetorium to be tried
before Pilate (John 18:28 ff.; 19:9; Matt. 27:27; Mark 15:16).
Tradition identifies this with the Castle of Antonia at the northwest
corner of the Temple inclosure, but the best modern authorities are
agreed that it is rather to be identified with Herod's Palace. All the
Roman procurators of whom we have any record occupied the Palace
when they were administering the government in Jerusalem. Thus
Sabinus was quartered here in 4 b. c, during the interval between the
death of Herod and the confirmation of Archelaus (Ant., xvii, 9:3;
War, ii, 2 : 2). In like manner in 66 a. d. Florus was stationed here.
It is highly probable that it was also the residence of Pilate. In fact,
the description of the trial of Jesus bears the closest resemblance in its
local color to the trial of the Jews before Florus (War, ii, 14:8 f.).
The Pavement (John 19: 13) was doubtless the open place in front of
5 See Zahn, " Die Dormitio Sanctae Virginis und das Haus des Johannes Mar-
kus," Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, Vol. X C1899), pp. 377 ff.; Mommert, Die Dor
mitio und das deutsche Grundstuck auf dem traditionellen Zion; Sanday, Sacred Sites
of the Gospels pp. 77-87.

144 GOLGOTHA
the Palace. In this case the Via Dolorosa, leading from Antonia to
the Church of the Sepulchre, must be regarded as spurious.6
From the Praetorium Jesus was sent by Pilate to Herod Antipas,
king of Galilee (Luke 23:6-12). After Judea became a Roman
province, and the procurators took possession of Herod's Palace, the
princes of the Herodian family resided in the old Palace of the Has
moneans whenever they visited Jerusalem. Here dwelt Agrippa II
in 66 A. D., when he came up to try to p.. cii'y the Jews (Ant., xx, 8 : 1 1 ;
War, ii, 16:3). Here also we must suppose that Herod Antipas was
quartered when he visited Jerusalem at the time of the Passover.
Herod Antipas sent Jesus back to Pilate at Herod's Palace, and
Pilate sentenced him to death. Jesus was then led outside of the city
wall to be crucified (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:20; John 19:17-20;
Heb. 13:12), and was buried "in the place where he was crucified"
(John 19:41). The traditional site of the crucifixion and entombment
is the Church of the Holy Sepulcher on the northern hill of Jerusalem.
The historical evidence for this site is neither very old nor very trust
worthy. Eusebius7 tells us that Constantine (in 326 A. d.) sent orders
to Macarius, bishop of Jerusalem, to search for the true cross. He
nowhere tells us that Macarius knew a tradition in regard to the loca
tion of Golgotha; in fact, he expressly informs us that the tomb of
Christ was found "contrary to expectation;" and later historians
assert that the discovery of the spot was miraculous. When one con
siders ihe ease with which holy places have been identified and are
still identified by interested ecclcs;astics, one is not sure that Macarius
must have had the best of historical evidence before he gratified the
emperor by informing him that the True Cross and the Holy Sepulcher
had been discovered. From the time of Constantine onward there is
an unbroken chu'i of evidence connecting the basilica that Constan
tine reared over the supposed Sepulcher with the modern Church of
the Holy Sepulcher, but that does not help to bridge the gap between
Constantine and the time of Christ. The traditional evidence here
is evidently of a very different sort from that which is offered in support
of the Cenaculum. All that can be said is, that if the site of the Church
6 See Spiess, Das Jerusalem des Josephus, p. 23; ICreyenbiihl, Zeitschrift fur die
neutestamentliche Wissenschajt, Voi. Ill (1902), pp. 15—22.
' Life of Constantine, iii. 25 f.

GOLGOTHA

J45

of the Sepulcher lay outside of the second wall on the north, which
was the outer wall in the time of Christ, then it is possible that it
marks the scene of the crucifixion and entombment. This is more than
doubtful, since no satisfactory archaeological evidence has yet been
produced of the existence of a second wall on the north inside of the
Church of the Holy Sepulcher. In 1884 Schick, in the service of the
Russian Palestine Society, traced a hypothetical second wall inside

Photographby L. B. Paton

CONJECTURAL SITE OF GOLGOTHA

of the Sepulcher. This wall has found a place on a number of recent
maps, but the most competent Jerusalem archaeologists are agreed
that there is no proof that the masonry which Schick found ever
belonged to a city wall. In a previous discussion of the course of
Manasseh's wall8 the evidence has been presented which goes to
show that the second wall on the north (No. 4 on the plan) followed
substantially the line of the present north wall of the city. In that
case the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher lay inside of the
8 See pp. 109-15.

146 AGRIPPA'S WALL
city-waU in the time of Christ, and, therefore, cannot be the true
scene of the crucifixion and entombment.9 Where the real place
was must always remain a matter of conjecture. Many have thought
that the bare rocky hill north of the city, outside of the Damascus gate,
which bears a singular resemblance to a skull, is the true Golgotha, or
"Place of the Skull," where the crucifixion took place, and that a
rock-hewn tomb at the foot of this hill was the place of burial. All
that can be said in support of this theory is, that this hill looks like a
skull and that it lay outside of the city-wall in the time of Christ.
The final scene of our Lord's earthly life was the ascension.
According to Acts 1:12 this took place from the Mount of Olives
("over against Bethany," Luke 24:50). This is the well-known
mountain on the east side of Kidron opposite to the Temple.
During the period between the death of Christ and the fall of Jeru
salem the most important architectural undertaking was the erection
of the third waU on the north in 40-41 A. d. by Agrippa I. This
wall is described by Josephus (War, v, 4 : 2) as beginning at the Tower
Hippicus at the northwest corner of the Old City, running thence to
the Tower Psephinus, thence past the monument of Helena, queen of
Adiabene, through the Royal Caverns, past the Fuller's Monument,
to the northeast angle of the Temple. If, as we have seen, the second
wall on the north must be identified substantially with the present
north wall of the city, then Agrippa's wall must be sought outside of
this line. In 1838 Robinson found numerous large stones that he
believed to have belonged to it still extant in the fields north of Jeru
salem, and he was able to plot its course from the northwest corner of
the city to the Nablus Road. Old residents of Jerusalem well remember
the time when great drafted stones such as Robinson observed were
to be seen in the open country to the north. The growth of the modern
city has, however, obliterated all these remains. For a distance of a
third of a mile from the present north wall the land has been thickly
covered with houses, and the ancient stones have been broken up to
use as building material. Yet, in spite of this work of destruction,
traces of this wall still occasionally turn up, and in the side of a cistern
5 See Wilson, Golgotha and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre; Paton, "The
Third Wall of Jerusalem and Some Excavations on Its Supposed Site," Journal of
Biblical Literature, Vol. XXIV (1905), pp. 199-205.

THE NEW CITY 147
east of the Nablus Road and back of St. Stephen's Church three great
drafted stones are still visible that may have belonged to it. On the
strength of this evidence I have followed Robinson in plotting the
course of this wall (No. 5) on the map.10
The region added to the city by this wall was known as the New
City, and included the Bezetha quarter north of the Temple. In it
were situated the Camp of the Assyrians, where Titus encamped after

Photograph by L. B. Paton
STONES THAT MAY HAVE BELONGED TO AGRIPPA'S WALL
the capture of the outer wall (War, v, 7:3), the Wood Market (War,
ji, 19:4), the Wool Market, the Bazaar of the Smiths, and the Clothes
Market (War, v, 8:1), in regard to whose precise location nothing
very definite can be said.
Other buildings of the same period as Agrippa's wall were the
Palace of Bernice, the sister of Agrippa II (War, ii, 17:6), which
10 See Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, Vol. I, pp. 465 ff.; Merrill,
"A Section of Agrippa's Wall," Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly Statement,
1903, pp. 158 f.; Paton, "The Third Wall of Jerusalem and Some Excavations on its
Supposed Site," Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. XXIV (1905), pp. 205-n.

148

BUILDINGS OF HELENA

was situated near the Palace of the Hasmoneans ; the Palace of Helena,
queen of Adiabene, a convert to Judaism, who took up her abode on
the southeast hill in 46 A. D. (War, v, 6:1; vi, 6:3); the Palace of
Monobazus, her son, in the same quarter (War, v, 6 : 1) ; and the Palace
of Grapte, a relative of King Izates of Adiabene, also on the south
west hill, but near the Temple (War, iv, 9:11). Agrippa also
enlarged the Maccabean Palace by the addition of a great banquet-

Photograph by L. B. Paton

TOMBS OF THE KINGS

hall, from which he could observe all that went on in the Temple.
To prevent this the Jews built a high wall on the west side of the
Temple. Agrippa and Festus, the procurator, tried to have it
removed, but Nero at the request of Poppaea allowed it to remain
(Ant., xx, 8:11). The tomb erected by Helena of Adiabene for
herself and her family lay near the third wall on the north (War, v,
4:2; Ant., xx, 4:3). It is doubtless to be identified with the so-
called " Tombs of the Kings " near the residence of the Anglican
bishop. In 66 a. t>. the war of rebellion against the Romans broke out, and

FALL OF JERUSALEM 149
in 70 A. d. the siege of the city was begun by Titus. After a long and
stubborn resistance, which necessitated that every waU and every
quarter of the town should be conquered separately, the city at last
fell in September, 70 a. d. The Temple and other principal build
ings were burned, and Titus gave orders that the city should be razed
to the ground, except the wall inclosing Herod's Palace, that was left
as a fortress for the Roman garrison. With this event ancient Jeru
salem came to an end. Up to this time the life of the city h:d been
uninterrupted, in spite of all the disasters that had befallen it, and
the thread of historical tradition in regard to localities had not been
severed; but after this event there was no longer any continuity with
the past. When, sixty years later, Hadrian built Aelia Capitolina upon
the site of Jerusalem, there was little left to remind one of the former
city, and no c ne to transmit the memory of its greatness. Aelia was
a new city without connection with its predecessor. At this point,
accordingly, which coincides with the latest references in the New
Testament, it is proper that we should conclude our study of Jerusalem
in Bible times.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Albony, A., Jerusalem et les sanctuaires de la Judee, 1894.
Barclay, J. T., The City of the Great King, 1858.
Benzinger, I., Baedecker's Palestine and Syria*, 1906.
Bergmann, J., Bibel und Josephus iiber Jerusalem und das Heilige Grab, 1862.
Besant, W., and Palmer, E. H., Jerusalem, the City of Herod and Saladin*,
1899.
Bliss, F. J., Excavations at Jerusalem, 1898.
Brandt, E., "Studien iiber das alte Jerusalem," Deutsche Evang. Blatter, 1888.
Caspari, E., Die Topographie von Jerusalem, Beilag zu chronologisch-geo-
graphische Einleitung in das Leben Jesu Christi, 1869.
Conder, C. R., Article "Jerusalem" in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, 1899;
Article "Jerusalem" in Encyclopedia Biblica, 1901.
Fallmerayer, J. P., Denkschrift iiber Golgotha und das Heilige Grab, 1852;
Vier Wochen in Jerusalem, 1861.
Fergusson, J., An Essay on the Ancient Topography of Jerusalem, etc., 1847;
Notes on the Site of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, 1861; The Holy
Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem, 1865; The Temples of the Jews,
1870.
Feval, P., "El Cods," Revue de la Terre Sainte, 1892.
Furrer, K., Wanderungen durch Paldstina, etc., 1865.
Gatt, G., Die Hiigel von Jerusalem, 1897; Sion in Jerusalem, 1900.
Gottheil, R. H., Article "Jerusalem" in Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903.
Guerin, V., Jerusalem, son histoire, sa description, ses establissements religieux,
1899; La Terre Sainte, Jerusalem, et le nord de la Judee, 1897.
Guthe, H., Ausgrabungen bei Jerusalem =Zeitschrift des deutschen Paldstina-
Vereins, 1882; Article "Jerusalem" in Realencyclopddie filr Theologie
und Kirche, 1896.
Huppeld, H., Die topographische Streitfrage iiber Jerusalem, etc., 1861.
Hutten, L., Literary Landmarks of Jerusalem, 1895.
Journal of Biblical Literature, see Index Volume for numerous articles on indi
vidual points connected with the topography of Jerusalem.
Rraeft, W., Die Topographie Jerusalems, mil Inschriften, Planen und Karlen,
1846.
Krohn, C, Del gamle Jerusalem, 1895.
Kuemmel, A., Von Gethsemane nach Golgotha, eine topographisch-historische
Studie iiber AU Jerusalem, 1899.
Langlois, V., Un chapitre inidit de la question de Lieux Saintes, 1861.
Lees G. R., Jerusalem Illustrated, with an Appendix Illustrating the Models
of H err Baurath von Schick, etc., 1893. 151

152 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lewin, T., The Siege of Jerusalem by Titus, etc., 1863.
Lewis, H., The Holy Places of Jerusalem, 1888.
Menke, T., Bibelatlas in acht Bldttern, 1868.
Merrill, Ancient Jerusalem, 1908.
Meyer, M., Article "Jerusalem" in Jewish Encyclopaedia, 1903.
Mitchell, H. G., "Nehemiah's Wall," Journal of Biblical Literature, 1903,
Pt. II.
Mittheilungen und Nachrichten des deutschen Palastina-Vereins, for numerous
articles on individual points see the Index Volume.
Mommert, C, Topographie des alien Jerusalem, 1900-3.
Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly Statement, numerous articles on individual
points of topography, see Index Volume.
Paton, L. B., "The Third Wall of Jerusalem and Some Excavations on its
Supposed Site," Journal of Biblical Literature, 1905, Pt. II; "The Meaning
of the Expression 'Between the Two Walls,'" Journal of Biblical Literature,
1906, Pt. I; Article "Jerusalem" in Standard Bible Dictionary, 1908.
Pierotti, E., Jerusalem Explored, 1864.
von Raumer, C, Palastina*, i860.
Revue Biblique, numerous articles on the topography of Jerusalem.
Ritter, C, Die Erdekunde, Theil XVI, pp. 297-508, 1852.
Robinson, E., Biblical Researches in Palestine, 1838; Later Biblical Researches,
1852.
Rosen, G., Das Haram von Jerusalem und der Tempelplatz des Moria, eine
Untersuchung iiber die Identitdt beider Stdtten, 1866.
Ruckert, C, Die Lage des Berges Sion, 1898.
Sanday, W., Sacred Sites of the Gospels, 1903.
De Saulcy, Jerusalem, 1882.
Schapter, A., Die dchte Lage des Heiligen Grabes, 1849.
Schick, C, "Die Baugeschichte der Stadt Jerusalem," Zeitschrift des deutschen
Palastina-Vereins, 1894, and numerous other articles in this magazine and
in the MDPV and PEFQ.
Scholz, J. M. A., Commeniatio de Golgothae et sanctissimi Domini nostri Jesu
Christi sepulchri, 1825; Abhandlung iiber die Lage des heiligen Grabes, 1826;
Handbuch der biblischen Archdologie, 1834; Commentatio de Hierosolymae
singularumque illius partium, 1835.
Schultz, E. G., Jerusalem, eine Vorlesung, 1845.
Schwarz, J., Das heilige Land nach seiner ehemaligen und jetzigen geograph-
ischen Beschaffenheit, 1852.
Sepp, J. N., Jerusalem und das heilige Land2, 1873-75.
Smith, G. A., Article "Jerusalem" in Encyclopedia Biblica, 1901; Articles on
"Jerusalem" in Expositor, 1902, 1905-6; Jerusalem, 1908.
Smith, W. R., Article "Jerusalem" in Encyclopedia Britannica, 1878; Article
"Jerusalem" in Encyclopedia Biblica, 1901.
SociN, A., Baedecker's Palestine and Syria, first edition, 1890.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 153
Spiess, F., Das Jerusalem des Josephus, 1881.
Thrupp, J. F., Ancient Jerusalem, a New Investigation into the History, Topog
raphy, and Plan of the City.
Tobler, T., Lustreise im Morgenlande, 1839; Grundriss von Jerusalem nach
Catherwood und Robinson, mil einem neu eingezeichneten Gassennetze, 1853;
Golgotha, seine Kirchen und Kloster, 185 1; Die Siloahquelle und die Oelberg,
mil einem Plan von Jerusalem zur Zeit der Kreuzfahrer, 1852; Denkbldtter
aus Jerusalem, mil Ansichten und Karten, 1853; Zwei Biicher Topographie
von Jerusalem, 1854; Beitrag zur medicinischen Topographie von Jerusalem,
1855; Planographie von Jerusalem, 1858; Dritte Wanderung durch Palds-
tina, 1859; Meine vierte Wanderung im Jahre 1865, in Peschel's Ausland,
1866; Bibliographia Geographica Paleslinae, 1867; Itinera Hierosolymitana,
1879.
Unger, F. W., Die Bauten Constantin des Grossen am heiligen Grabe zu Jeru
salem, 1863.
Wallace, E. S., Jerusalem the Holy, 1898.
Warren, C, Underground Jerusalem, 1876.
Warren, C, and Conder, C. R., Jerusalem, Work of the Palestine Exploration
Fund from 186J-1882.
Williams, G., The Holy City, Illustrative and Topographical Notices of Jeru
salem2, 1849.
Wilson, C, Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem, 1867-70; The Recovery of Jeru
salem, 1871; Jerusalem, the Holy City, 1888; Article "Jerusalem" in
Smith's Dictionary of the Bible2, 1893; Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre,
igo4=Pal. Expl. Fund, Quarterly Statement, 1902-3.
Wolfe, P., Reise in das gelobte Land*, 1866.
Zeitschrift des deutschen Palastina-Vereins, numerous articles on Jerusalem, see
Index Volume.
Zimmermann, K., Karten und Plane zur Topographie des alten Jerusalem, 1876.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Abdi-Khiba, 67
Aben Ezra, 59
Abijah, 74
Abram, 66
Absalom, 21, 76
Absalom, Tomb of, 17, 133
Adoni-bezek, 67
Adonijah, 37, 39
Adoni-zedek, 66, 67, 68
Aelia Capitolina, 149
Agrippa I, 112, 115, 146
Agrippa II, 144, 148
Agrippa, wall op, 111-15, 146
Ahaz, 41, 74, 92
'Ahaziah, 74, 91
Ahimaaz, 36
<Ain Silwan, 32, 40
cAin Sitti Maryam, 29
cAin Um ed-Derej, 29
Akra, 28: equals Lower' City and City
of David, 51-53; theories of location,
S3—SS; was situated on southeast hill,
55-57; see also 128, 139
Aksa, Mosque of, 12
Alexander Jannaeus, 133
Alexandra, 132, 133
Altar, 1, 14, 77, 78, 81, 116, 132, 136
Altar Gate, 81
von Alien, 55
Amarna letters, 66, 68
Amaziah, 74, 90, 91, 96, 103
Amorite, 66
Amygdalon, Pool of, 44, 138
Ananias, 143
Anata, 96
Anathoth, 96
Anna, 140
Annas, palace op, 143
Antigonus, 131, 132
Antiochus Epiphanes, 128
Antiochus Eupator, 130
Antiochus the Great, 128
Antonia, 7, no, 117, 131, 132, 133, 136,
143. *44

Antonius, Marcus, 133
Apollonius Thrasaei, 128
Apostle's Fountain, 36
Aqueduct on the surface op east
hill, 75, 106
Araunah, the Jebusite, 76
Archelaus, 143
Archives, 138
Aretas, 130
Aristobulus, 10, 130, 131, 132, 133
Akk, 73, 77, 89
Armenian Gardens, 134
Asa, 22, 74
Ascension, 146
Ascent of the corner, 127
Ascent op the wall, 126
Assyria, 103, 104, 109
Athaliah, ioo
BAb el MaghAribe, ii
Babylonian influence in Canaan, 70
Bacchides, 128
Balustrade of Temple, 12
Barclay, 3
Barclay's Gate, ii
Baris, 131, 133
Barracks, 9, 117, 131
Bazaar op the smiths, 147
Beautiful Gate, 136, 140
Benjamin Gate, 81, 91, 96, 117
Benzinger, 55, 59
Bernice, palace of, 147
Bethany, 141
Bethesda, Pool of, 6, 35, 41, 43, 140
Bethlehem, 70
Beth-Millo, 70
Bethso, 93, 107
Bethsura, 129
Bezek, 67
Bezetha, 115, 147
Birch, 59
Bir Eiyub, 24, 25, 32, 36, 37, 39, 107
Birket el Hamra, 33, 41
Birket HammAn el Batraq, 34, 44, 138

155

i56

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Birket Israel, 6, 35, 43, 138
Birket Mamilla, 33, 35, 39, 44, 138
Birket es-SultAn, 33, 39, 123
Bliss, 25, 50, 73, 94, 99, 100, 108, 124,
126
Bordeaux pilgrim, 16, 59
Bridge across the Tyropoeon Valley,
7, I0, 55, 131. I33. J38
Broad wall, 97, 121
Brocardus, 53, 59
Brook, 21, 22, 40, 51, 99, 106, 107, 109
Buckingham, 59
Buhl, 55, 59
Caiaphas, 143
Camp of the Assyrians, 23, 112, 147
Caspari, 55, 59
Cenaculum, 142, 143
Chambers of Temple, 79
Christian Street, 34
Church op the Holy Sepulcher, 47,
112, 115, 144
Cisterns in Temple, 16
Citadel, 19, 134
City of David, 39, 40: earliest references
locate on southeast hill, 48-51; iden
tical with the Akra or Lower City,
51-53; theories of the location of the
Akra, 53-55; true location on south
east hill, 55-57; see also 59, 68, 70, 71,
72, 73, 74, 84, 89, 91, 92, 104, 106,
i°9. 13°. J39
Clarke, 59
Clermont-Ganneau, 13, 37, 74
Cliff of the Jebusites, 24, 25, 70, 76
Cliff on Tyropoeon in Jerusalem, 26
Clothes market, 147
Conder, 16, 37, 53
Conduit: see Siloam tunnel
Constantine, 144
Corner gate, 91, 92, 96, 97, 98, 115, 121
Council-house, 9, 93, 138
Court op Israel, 14, 136, 140
Court of the Gentiles, 140
Court of the Guard, 85
Court of the Priests, 14, 136
Court of the Women, 14, 136, 140
Crucifixion, 144
Damascus, 103
Damascus Gate, 20, 27, in, 115, 121

Darius, 116
David, 21, 37, 39, 48, 52, 70, 73, 75, 76
David's buildings: Millo, 70-72; wall,
73; palace, 73; guard-house, 73; tent
of Ark, 73; tomb, 74; aqueducts, 75
David Street, 28, 34, 93
David, tomb op, 57, 74, 139, 142
David, tower of, 7, 93, 135
Dead Sea, 17
DebhIr, 77, 78
Division of the kingdom, 103
Double Gate, 7, n
Dragon's Well, 92, 99, 107
Drains in Temple, 16
Dung Gate, 25, 92, 99, 107, 124
East Gate, 82, 86, 127
East hill of Jerusalem, 45
Ebedmelech, 96
Eglon, 67
Egyptian supremacy, 67
Egyptians, 128
Eliashib, 117
El-WAd, 4, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 32, 40,
45, 9«
En-Rogel, 24, 35, 36, 39, 105, 107
En-Shemesh, 36
Ephraim Gate, 91, 96, 121
Epiphanius, 142
essenes, gate of, 93, 1 07
eudoxia, wall of, 1 09
eusebius, 144
EXILE, I, Il6
Ezekiel, 78, 80, 82, 84, 116
Fallmerayer, 54
Fergusson, 3, 52, 59
Festus, 148
Fiddle Valley: see Wady er-Rababi
First gate, 96, 121
First wall on north, 9; see also Wall
of Manasseh
Fish Gate, 109, 120
Florus, 143
Fore-City, 139
Fountain Gate, 25, 40, 50, 99, 107, 125
Franciscan School, iii
Fuller's Field, 105
Fuller's Fountain, 105

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

157

Fuller's Monument, 146
Fuller's Well, 36
Furnace Tower, 99
Furrer, 55, 84
Gai, 24, 92
Gate Harsith, 123
Gate of Benjamin: see Benjamin
Gate of Ephraim: see Ephraim
Gate of the Bath, ii
Gate of the Chain, ii
Gate op the Essenes, 93, 107
Gate op the Guard, 82, 85
Gate Miphkad, 127
Gate Shushan, 12, 141
Gates of Herod's temple, 10
Gates op Solomon's temple, 81, 86
Gates of Hezekiah's wall, 25
Gates of Nehemtah's wall, 117-27
Gates of Solomon's wall, 96
Gedaliah, i
Gehenna, 25
Genath, no
Gethsemane, 23, 141, 143
Gezer, 67, 72
Gibeah, 70
Gihon, 34, 35, 38, 39, 40, 41, 48, 49, 50,
51, 68, 73, 75, 104, 105, 106, 109, 126,
127, 139, 141
Golden Gate, 6, 12, 82, 141
Golgotha, 144, 146
Grand New Hotel, iii, 115
Grapte, palace of, 148
Great Court, 80, 82, 85, 86
Greek rule, 128
Guard, 82, 85
Guard house, 73
Guthe, 32, 47, 55, 59, 82, 126
Gutter, 75
Hadrian, 16, 142, 149
Haggai, 116
HammAm el-Batraq: see Birket Ham-
mam el-Batraq
Hammeah, tower of, 117, 131
Hamra: see Birket el-Hamra
Hananel, tower of, 97, 119
Haram-esh-SherIp, 2, 3, 5
Harem, 85

HAret el MaidAn, 138
Harsith, 123
Hasmoneans, 130 ff.
Hasmoneans, palace of, 10, 131, 143,
148
Hastings, 3
Hebrews, 67
Hebron, 67
Hekal, 78
Hel, 14, 136
Helena, palace of, 148
Helena, tomb op, 148
Herod, i, 2, 8, 10, n, 12, 77, 131, 134,
138, 143, J44, 149
Herod's buildings: Antonia, 133;
theater, 134; palace, 134; its towers,
Hippicus Phasaelus and Mariamne;
135; Temple, 135-137; Xystus, 138,
Hippodrome, 138; Council House,
138; archives, 138; pools, 138
Herod Antipas, 144
Hezekiah, 22, 25, 39, 40, 50, 71, 74, 75,
95, i°4, 139
Hezekiah's Pool, 35
Hezekiah, wall of: see Wall
Highway of Fuller's Field, 105
Hiller, 59
Hill of Evil Counsel, 59
Hills of Jerusalem: two main ridges,
45; minor subdivisions, 47; method of
identification, 47; City of David, or
Akra, or Upper City, 48-57; Zion,
59-64; Ophel, 64; Moriah, 65
Hinnom, valley of, 24, 25, 33, 36, 45,
70, 76, 92, 95, 98, 107, 122, 123
Hippicus, tower of, 9, 55, 93, 107, 135,
146
Hippodrome, 138
Hittite, 66
Holy of Holies, 16, 77, 78, 81
Holy Sepulcher: see Church of the
Holy Sepulcher
Horse Gate, 22, 86, 100, 127
House of David, 97, 121: see Palace of
David
House of Pharaoh's Daughter, 85
House op the Forest of Lebanon, 85
House of the Heroes, 73, 121
House op Yahweh, 83: see Temple
Huldah Gate, ii
Hyrcanus I, 74, 131, 133

158

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Hyrcanus II, 130, 132
Idrisi, 25
Inner Court of Temple, 80, 82, 85, 136
Inscriptions on balustrade of Tem
ple, 13
Izates of Adiabene, 148
Jaffa Gate, 17, 19, 20, 55, 91, 96, 99,
in, 115, 135
James, tomb of, 17, 133
Jarmuth, 67
Jebus, 48
Jebusites, 24, 25, 48, 52, 68, 70, 75
Jehoash, 90, 96, 97, 103
Jehoram, 74
Jehoshaphat, 74, 103
Jehoshaphat, valley of, 27
Jeremiah, 96
Jeroboam II, 103
Jerome, 16
Jerusalem: location, 17; in tribe of
Benjamin, 24; its springs and pools,
29-44; its hills, 45-65; in poetic paral
lelism with Zion, 63; origin of name,
66; identity with Salem, 66; inAmarna
Letters, 67; at time of Hebrew con
quest, 67; not captured by Hebrews,
68; first taken by David, 68; extent
of city, 68; made capital by David, 70;
inclosed with wall by Solomon, 89;
extended to west hill in time of Solo
mon, 89—93; history after Solomon,
103 ; size at time of siege by Titus, 114,
destruction by Nebuchadrezzar, 116;
restoration under Zerubbabel, 116;
restoration by Nehemiah, 117-121;
history during Persian and Greek
periods, 128; under Hasmoneans, 129-
133; under Herod, 133-138; appear
ance in time of Christ, 139; destruction
by Titus, 149
Jesus: relation to Jerusalem, 139; visit
to Temple in infancy, 140; visit when
twelve years old, 140; at first Passover,
140; at unnamed feast, 140; at feast of
Tabernacles, 141; at feast of Dedica
tion, 141; at last Passover, 141
Joab, 52, 76
Joash, 74
Job's Well, 31, 37: see Bir Eiyub
John Hyrcanus : see Hyrcanus I
Jonathan, 36, 130
Josephus, 3

Joshua, 66, 67
Joshua the high-priest, 116
Josiah, 22
Jotham, 74, 81, 96
Judah, part of Israel, 103
Judas Iscariot, 142
Judas Maccabaeus, 128, 130
Jupiter, statue of, 16
Justinian, 12
Khabiri. 67
Khaya, 67
Kidron, valley of, 15, 21, 22, 23, 33,
4°, 41, 45, 75, 88, 99, 101, 105, 107, 112,
127, 139. H3
King's Garden, 40, 50, 107, 125
King's House, 82: see Palace
King's Pool, 40, 99, 107, 125
King's wine-presses, 125
von Klaiber, 55
Krafft, 54
Kubbet-es-Sakhra, 78
Lachish, 67
Last Supper, 141, 142
Lewin, 39, 54, 59
Lightfoot, 59
Lower City, 27: equals Akra and City
of David, 51-53; theories of location
53-55; was situated on southeast hill,
55-57; als° 7°, 76> I3°, 139
Lower Gihon, 34
Lower Pool of Siloam, 41, 75, 95, 105.
de Lyra, 59
Maacah, 22
Macalister, 67
Macarius, 144
Magharibe Gate, 7
Mamella: see Birket Mamilla
Manasseh, 40, 51, 109, 139, 145
Manasseh, wall of: see Wall
Mariamne, tower of, 135
Mark, the Evangelist, 142
Market place, 130
Mary, the mother op Jesus, 142
Mary, the mother of Mark, 142
Masterman, 44
Matthias, 142
Maudslay's scarp, 99, 122

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

159

Melchizedek, 66
Menke, 55
Merrill, 54, 147
Mesha inscription, 105
Middle Court, 82, 85
Middoth, 3, 6, n, 12, 13, 14, 15, 136
Millo: first built by the Canaanites, 70;
strengthened by David, 70; enlarged by
Solomon and Hezekiah, 71; identical
with Akra, 72; probably a rampart,
72; see also 88, 106, 130
Miphkad Gate, 127
Mishneh, 109, 139
Molech, 25
Mommert, 28, 55, 63, 143
Monobazus, palace or, 148
Monument of Helena, 114, 146
Monument op Herod, 44
Monument of John, 132
Moriah, 65
Mosque of Omar, 3, 77, 78
Mount of Olives, 23, 139, 141
Nahal, 21, 40, 51
Nazareth, 139
Nebuchadrezzar, i, 92, 106, 116
Nehemiah, 116
Nehemiah, wall of: see Wall
Nero, 148
Nethtnim, 64
New City, 8, 23, 147
New Gate, 81
Nicanor, 51
Nicanor Gate, 136
Niese, 3
North Gate, 81, 86
Old Gate, 97, 121
Old Pool, 41, 75, 125
Olshausen, 55
Omri, 103
Ophel, 23, 56, 61, 64, 74, 84, 88, 92, 93,
95, 101, 103, 105, 107, 109, 127, 139
Other Court, 85
Outer Court, 6, 80, 86, 134, 135, 140:
see Great Court
Palace of Annas, 143
Palace of Bernice, 147
Palace op David, 73

Palace of Grapte, 148
Palace of Hasmoneans, 10, 131, 143,
148
Palace of Helena, 148
Palace of Herod, 8, 134, 138, 143,
144, 149
Palace of Monobazus, 148
Palace of Solomon, 61; adjoined
Temple, 82; lay south of Temple, 84;
its court, 85; adjacent buildings, 85;
great court, 86; gates, 86
Palestine Exploration Fund, 3, 4,
9, 32
Pashhur, 96
Paton, 146, 147
Patriarch's Pool, 34, 44
Pavement, 143
Peristereon, 23, 133
Persian period, 128
Pharisees, 133
Phasaelus, 131
Phasaelus, tower of, 93, 135
Phoenician letters on foundations
of Temple, 7
Phrourion, 53, 57, 76
Pierotti, 53
Pilate, 143, 144
Place of the Skull, 146
Plateau on which Jerusalem stands,
45
Platform of Temple, 3
Pompey, 10, n, 130, 131, 133
Pools of Jerusalem: cAin Silwan, 32;
Birket el-Hamra, 33; Birket Mamilla,
33; Birket es-Sultan, 33; Birket Ham-
mam el-Batraq, 34; Birket Isractl, 35;
identity of Siloam with cAin Silwan, 40;
identity of Bethesda with Virgin's
Fountain, 41; identity of Struthion
with Birket Israc!l, 44; identity of
Amygdalon with Patriarch's Pool, 44;
identity of Serpent's Pool with Mamilla,
44
Poppaea, 148
Porch of Judgment, 85
Porch of Pillars, 85
Porch of Temple, 78
Portico leading from the Temple to
Antonia, 9
Praetorium, 143
Protestant Cemetery, 94, 108
Protestant School, 94, 122

i6o

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

psephtnus, tower of, 146
Ptolemy Epiphanes, 128
Qalcat-Jalud, 115
Red Pool, 33
Rehoboam, 74
Rephaim, valley of, 24,27
Return from Babylon, 116
Riess, 55
RlTTER, 59
Robinson, 25, 28, 39, 53, 59, 112, 146,
147
Robinson's Arch, 10
Royal Caverns, 146
Royal Porch, ii, 135
Russian Palestine Society, 145
Sabinus, 138, 143
Sakhra, 15, 16, 77
Salem, 66
Sanctuary, 77, 136
Sanday, 143
de Saulcy, 53
Schafter, 54
Schick, 54, 99, 112, 141, 145
Schultz, 54
Scopas, 128
Scopus, 44, 115
Second quarter, 109, 139
Second wall on the north, 112
Second wall on the south, 108
Sennacherib, 105
Sepulcher of the Kings, 74, 91, 92, 109
Serpents' Pool, 44, 138
Shallun, 50
Shalmaneser II, 103
Shamashshumukin, 109
Shechem, 70
Sheep Gate, 41, 81, 82, 117
Shelah, 40, 50
Shilletto, 3
Shiloah, 40
Shimei, 21
Shushan Gate, 141
Siege op the city by Titus, 149
Siloam Inscription, 104, 105
Siloam, pool of, 20, 23, 25, 27, 31, 40,
5°, 56> 73, 74, 93, 96, 99, io5, IO°, 107,
108, 125, 139, 141

Siloam Tunnel, 17, 31, 40, 51, 74, 75,
95, IQ4, 125
SilwAn, pool of, 40
SilwAn, village of, 17, 37
Simeon, 140
Simon, 130
Smith, G. A., 55, 59, 93
Smith, W. R., 25, 55, 93
SOCIN, 59'
Solomon, 21, 39, 49, 59, 71, 74
Solomon's buildings: the Temple, 77-
82; the palace, 82; Porch of Judgment,
85; Porch of Pillars, 85; House of the
Forest of Lebanon, 85; Great Court, 86;
Millo, 88; Wall, 89-101
Solomon's Pool, 93, 139
Solomon's Porch, 135, 141
Solomon's Stables, 4
Solomon's Throne, 85
Sosius, 132
South Gate, 81, 86
South Wall, 9
Spiess, 53, 138 ,
Spring op the Lady Mary, 29
Spring op the Mother of Steps, 29
Springs as holy places, 37
Springs of Jerusalem: Virgin's foun
tain, 29; Job's Well, 31; identity of
En-Rogel with Job's Well, 35-38;
identity of Gihon with Virgin's Foun
tain, 38-39
Stairs of the City of David, 50, 74,
107, 126
Struthion, pool of, 44, 133, 138
Suburb, 139
Sultan's Pool, see Birket es-Sultan
Syrians, 128
Tacitus, 56
Tell el Amarna letters, 66, 68
Temple of Ezekiel, 78, 80, 82, 84, 116
Temple of Herod: importance of, 1;
identity of site under Solomon, Zerub
babel, and Herod, 2; same as modern
Haram esh-Sherif, 3; sources of infor
mation, 3; platform, 3; corresponds
with Haram, 4; outer court, 6; its
size, 6; inclosing wall, 6; Antonia, 7;
portico connecting with Temple, 8;
corresponds with Turkish barracks, 9;
relation of Temple to city-wall, 9;
western gates, 10; southern gates, 11;
balustrade, 12; inner court, 13; cor-

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

161

responds with inner court of Haram,
14; the Altar, 14; corresponds with
the Sakhra, 15; cisterns and drains, 16;
remains of statue of Jupiter, 16; outer
court, and cloisters, 135; inner court,
gates, 136; ground-plan, 137; visited
by Christ, 140, 141; destroyed by Titus,
149; see also 77, 80
Temple of Solomon: importance of,
1; stood on Mt. Zion, 60^62; connec
tion with threshing-floor of Araunah,
76; its location, 77; the sanctuary, 78;
porch, 78; chambers, 79; inner court,
80; gates, 81; destroyed by Nebucha
drezzar, 116
Temple of Zerubbabel: on site of
Solomon's Temple, 1 ; biblical account,
80, 82, 116; account of Pseudo-Heca
taeus, 116; defiled by Antiochus
Epiphanes, 128; the stronghold of the
Maccabeans, 130; rebuilt by Herod,
135
Tent of the Ark, 73
Theater, 134
Thenius, 84
Third wall on north, 112
Threshing-floor of Araunah, 76
Thrupp, 55, 59
Titus, 107, 112, 115, 132, 147
Tobler, 28, 55
Tomb of Absalom, 17, 133
Tomb of Daved, 57, 74, 139, 142
Tomb op Helena of Adiabene, 148
Tomb of James, 17, 133
Tomb op Zechariah, 17, 133
Tombs in Kidron valley, 17
Tombs op the Kings, 114, 148
Tower of David, 7, 93, 135
Tower of the Furnaces, 122
Tower of Hananel, 97, 119
Tower of Hammeah, 117, 131
Tower of Hippicus, 9, 55, 93, 107, 135,
146
Tower op Phasaelus, 93, 135
Tower op Psephinus, 146
Tower Standing Out, 126
Treasury, 141
Triple Gate, ii
Trophimus, 13
Tunnel: see Siloam tunnel
Tunnel: one older than Siloam tunnel,
75

Turning op the Wall, 97, 98, 100, 126
Two walls, 105, 106, 108
Tyropoeon valley, 9, 27, 40, 45, 50,
55, S6> 73, 75, 93, 95, io6, i°7> I25,
126, 131, 133, 138, 141
Upper City, 8, 10, 27, 52, 53, 54, 55, 70,
76> 131, I32, 133, 139
Upper Court, 80
Upper Gate, 81, 96, 103, 117
Upper Gihon, 34
Upper Market-Place, 53
Upper Pool of Siloam, 41, 104, 105, 107,
108, 125
Upper room, 141, 142
Uzziah, 74, 92, 96, 97, 103
Valley Gate, 22, 23, 25, 92, 97, 98, 99,
107, 123
Valley op Fire, 17
Valley of Hinnom: see Hinnom
Valley of Jehoshaphat, 27
Valley of Kidron: see Kidron
Valley of the dead bodies and of
the ashes, 27, 101
Valley of the Lady Mary, 17
Valley of the Walnuts, 17
Valleys of Jerusalem: Wady el-J6z,
17; Wady Sitti Maryam, 17; Wady er-
Rababi, 19; El-Wad, 20; identity of
Kidron with Wady Sitti Maryam, 21-
23; identity of Hinnom with Wady
er-Rababi, 24-26; other minor valleys
in the O. T., 27; identity of Tyropoeon
with El-Wad, 28
Via Dolorosa, 144
Virgin's Fountain, 17, 25, 32, 36, 37,
38, 39, 40, 41, 44, 48, 50, 51, 104, 106,
141
de Vogue, 54, 59
WAdy el-J6z, 17, 20, 115
WAdy el-Werd, 27
WAdy en-Nar, 17, 20, 31
WAdy er-RabAbi, 19, 22, 24, 25, 27,
31, 33, 45, 92, 9§
WAdy Sitti Maryam, 4, 17, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 27, 29, 31, 32, 40, 45, 98
Wailing-Place: frontispiece, 4
Wall op Agrippa, 111-115, 146
Wall op Daved, 73
Wall of Eudoxia, 109

162

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Wall of Hezekiah: was the second
wall on the south, 106; rebuilt by
Nehemiah, 107; described by Josephus,
107; excavated by Bliss, 108; see
also 139
Wall op Manasseh: was second wall
on the north, 109; restored by Nehe
miah, 109; described by Josephus, no;
archaeological remains on the north,
in; problem whether these are the
second or the third wall, in; proof
that they are not the third wall, 112-
15, see also 139, 145
Wall op Nehemiah, 109, 117: its gates
and towers, 117-27
Wall of Ophel, 127
Wall of Solomon: inclosed west hill
of Jerusalem, 89-93; course on north,
93; course on south, 94; gates in this
wall, 96-101; unchanged down to time
of Hezekiah, 103
Wall of Temple, 6
Warren, 9, 10, 27, 37, 39, 48, 54
Water-Course, 75
Water Gate, 50, 64, 73, 74, 127
Weikert, 59
Well of the Spy, 36
West Gate, 82
West hill of Jerusalem, 45, 75

Whiston, 3
Williams, 54, 59
Wilson, 146
Wilson's Arch, 9
Wood market, 147
Wool market, 147
Xystus, 9, 93, 131, 138
Zahn, 143
Zahweleh, 37
Zechariah, tomb of, 17, 133
Zedekiah, 125
Zerubbabel, temple of: see Temple
Zeus, 128
Zion, 28, 51; traditional identification
with southwest hill, 59; other identi
fications, 59; early references identify
with City of David, 59; early prophets
identify with Temple Mount, 60; was
the hill on which the Palace stood, 61;
connected with Temple by exilic and
post-exilic writers, 61, 62; testimony
of Maccabees not erroneous, 63; wit
ness of Josephus, 63; parallelism with
Jerusalem, 63; see also 70, 77, 89, 91,
142
Zoheleth, 37

INDEX TO BIBLICAL PASSAGES
PAGE PAGE
Gen. cnap. 14  68 I Kings 2:37  21
14:18  66 3:1 ff  77,82,89
22: 2, 14  65 chaps. 5-8  77
Lev. 12:6  140 6:2  78,116
Josh. chap. 10  68 6:3  78
10:1  67 6:4  79
i5:7  36 6:16  78
15:8  24, 27, 70, 76 6:36  80, 81, 82
15:63  67 7:1  82
18:16  24,27,36,76 7:2-5  85
Judg. 1:1-7  68 7:2-8  85
i = 7  67 7:6  85
1:8  68 7:7  ,  85
1:21  68 7:8  82,85
9:6  70 7:10-12  84
chap. 19  70 7:12  80,81,82,86
19:12  68 8:1  49,59,84,89
USam. 5:6 f  25,48,68,70,75 8:4  73,84
5'-7  59 9:1,10,15  77,82
5:8  75 9 = 15  7I,88,89,i30
5:9  73, 76, 89, 130 9:19  85
5:"  73 9:24  49, 71, 84, 85, 130
6:10  49,73 i°:4  82
6: 12  63, 73 10: 5  82, 84
6:16  49 10:12  82
6: 17  73 10: 16 f  85, 86
7:2  73 10: 18-20  85
11:2  73 11:27  71,88
11:8,9,27  73 11:43  5°, 74
14:28  76 I4I27f  82
chap. 15  49 14:31  50, 74
15:16  73 15 = 8  5°,74
15:23  21,49 15 = 13  22
16:5  22 15:24  50,74
17:17  36 22:50  50, 74
19: 11  30, 73 II Kings 2:10  74
20:3  73 8:24  5°,74
23:8-39  73 9:28  50,74,91
24:16  76 11:5  85
24:18 f  75 11:6  82
I Kings 1:9  37 11:16  86,100,127
i:33  39, 49 11-I9  82, 84, 85
2:28  73 12:9-12  80
163

1 64 INDEX TO BIBLICAL PASSAGES
PAGE PAGE
II Kings 12: 18  83 II Chron. chaps. 21, 20  74
12:21  50, 74 22:9  74
!4:i3  9°, 96, 97 23:5  82, 85
J4:I4  83 23:15  86,100,127
14:20  50, 74, 91 23:20  81, 96
x5:7  5°,74 24:25  74
rS:35  81, 96, 117 25:23  90, 96, 97
IS:38  5°,74 25:28  74
16:8  83 26:9  92,95,97,98,99,100
16:20  50, 74 103, 123
18: 15  83 26: 23  74
18:17  40, 41, 105 27:3  64, 81, 96, 103, 117
19:21, 31  63 27:9  74
20:4  85 28:27  74, 92
20: 13  85 29: 16  22
20: 20  40, 104 32:4  22, 40, 106
21:18  109 32:5  71, 106, 130
21:26  109 32:30  39, 5°, i°6
22:14  109 32:33  74
23:4  22, 89 33:14  40, 51, 64, 109, 120
23:6  22 33:15  92
23 : IO  25 33 : 20  109
23: 12  22, 81 34:22  109
23 : 3°- :  109 35 : 24  109
24:10-19  116 Ezra 3:12  1
24:13  83 6:3  116
25:3-22  116 6:15  116
25:4  106,108,125 Neh. 2:8  130
25:9  82, 83 2:12-15  io6, 117
25:18  81 2:13  25,92,123,124
I Chron. 8:32  92 2:13-15  99
9:38  92 2:14  40,125
n:4f  70 2:15  22
11 : 5 f  48, 59 3:1  117, 119, 131
n:8  76 3:3  109,120
I5:29-- -49 3 = 6  121
3;8  121

26:16  82

II Chron. 1:4 f  73 3:9  p2
3:I  65 3:11  I22
5 = 2  49,59,89 3:12  92
8:11  49 3:13  99,123,124
9:3!  74 3:i3-!S  107
I2:i°f  82 3:15  40,50,92,125,126
12:16  74 3:16  73,74
J4:i  74 3:I9  ..126
I5:l6  22 3:24  '.  126
l6:i4  74 3:25  '. . 85
21:1  74 3:26  126,127

-£¦ Go
O -**

OOon

4*

GoGo

Go to

H H

to

Go

Oo

M

to to to to
>o Co au

to ooon to ^J Oto tooo

to to -<r

oooooooooooo
to tooo to w to oo oo oo r '- --

2

to to to to to to

oooooooooooooooooooootoOotoJi.OototO-^OtO-^lOtoOotO^tOHtoOotO

CO NjJ M w w O

00 00 OO OJ Oo oo
H M OO OO tO K)

O to to to

«* Oj si 44 vj nj ^ 00 -J -<r -<r -<i -*j 44. j

0000

^ ¦f' A ^ C*J OOOOOOOOOOOOO 10 to to to

-OT H OO M M

O Mto >o

to *T3)

O Ui Oo to t/i

0000000000000004^
Go Go Oo Oo h H0o0o0o4^0o0ocji0o h

00 j>
w to
O Oo

to CO O 4*
00 —J h 00

o & «

b °

to o o o
O Oo to H

to 4*- to 00

00 00 ^J
O OO

f) A -^ U to to
tr 
p On Oo w OO Oo

p¦ 4^
Oo vO

tO tO M K>

OOOOO O vo 04^4^4^ OOOh On O 00 O O O\o
0H0O0H00H00HH000MO00O000H4i00H

On

Oiyi(flUltrtUl^^4iOJCrtGO(>JO,(>j[«0)(>,OjOJCtJUCM tO W 10 tO tO t-t H H
^.4^^WMHwwloHtHOOJHOvO,OOOCO^JO\ONCaK)tOHHMOONONtotoOOO^^OOO,<r^JO\ON^.

tO H H

H CM to 4^

O 0\ O ON ON On H 00 to *0 On O*
LMOOHCOOJHOvlHUllO HH

CO 0\ M tO

COM M COOOCOto Coto H Ov ON O Co Co 00 M to to Oi 0> a H OOO

U M M CM

O tn u <t vo mojOj^ h f «j ui O, ^ Oj o en h oo 4u

OnOn

£ ST

>

V? "^^ P? P? " " " * MOj H-e*4^4^4*4^G0Gi H $ OM1^0.0^ » » »

H It1

->— 4-- 4-. H H I— I
OGooo Q> H O >0 OOOOOOCOO-i

m h H O OJ

O

ooooooovo
4^ Go Go H h Go Oo to

4^ O Go O

n© 00 -<t OO

m to m h On Go

h Oto OOOOOOOOOOOOOto
OOo O Oo Go 4* OGoOoOoOo h h Go Go -*o:

00 Ln
vO O O 00 00 •<!
to Oo h h Ln 4^

O 00 00 vo
O to to O

oo -<r

1 M Oo

INDEX TO BIBLICALPAGE
I Mace. 4 : 37, 38  62 Luke
4:38, 48  116
5 = 54  62 John
7:32, 33  51- 6a
10:10 f  93
i3:49  13°
i3:5°  13°
14:27  62
14:36  Si. 54
14:48  62
16:20  93
Matt. 21:1  139
24:3  J39
24:15  l6
27:27  143
27:32  115, 144
Mark 13:3  139
14:15  141
14:26  139
14 = 5! f  J4i
15 :l6  143
15:20  115, 144 Acts
16:14  J42
Luke 2 : 22-39  140
2 : 41-50  140
13 = 4  40, 139
i9:29, 37  J39
21:37- ••  z39
22:12  141
22:39  x39
23:6-12  144 Heb.

PASSAGES 167 PAGE
24:33  142
24:50  146
2:13-22  140
chap. 5  140
5"-2  4i
7:1-10, 21  141
8:1  139
8:20  141
9:I~7  J4i
9 = 7  4o, 139
10: 22-42  141
18:1  23, 139, 143
18:12  143
18:24  143
18:28 ff  143
19 = 9  x43
19:13  143
19: 17-20  144
19: 17, 20, 41  115
19:41  144
20: 19  142
1:12  139, J46
1:13  J42
1:14  142
1:26  142
2: 1-4  142
2:28 ff  13
2:29  75, 139
12:12  142
21:40  9
13:12  115, 144

INDEX TO PASSAGES PAGE
Ant. i, 10: 2  66 Ant.
i, 13:2  63
™, 3:1, 2  52
vii, 3:2  66, 70
vii, 4:2  63
™, 13:4  63
vii, 14:5  39, J39
viii, 2:1  93
viii, 3:2  84
viii, 6:1  93
viii, 7:7  93
ix, 7:3  88, 101
ix, 10:3  103
ix, 11:2  103
xii, 3:3  52, 128
xii, S;4  128
xii, 6:2  •  52, 128
xii, 7:6  52, 54, 128
xii, 9 = 3  52, 54, 128
xii, 9:4  52, 128 Cont.
xii, 9 : 5-7  130 War .
xii, 10:4  52, 128
xiii, 1:3  52, 128
xiii, 2:1  129
xiii, 2:3  52, 130
xhi, 4:9  S2, !3°
xiii, 5:2  52, 130
xiii, 5:ii  52, 130
xiii, 6:6  52, 130
xiii, 6:7  52, 130
xih, 8:4  74, 139
xiii, 11:2  117, 131
xiii, 13:5  n6
xhi, i5:5  133
xih, 16:1  133
xiii, 16:5  8, 132
xiv, 1:2  130, 131, 132
xiv, 2:1, 2  130
xiv, 4:1, 2  10, 130, 131, 132
xiv, 4:2-4  131
xiv, 13:3, 4  131
xiv, 15:14  131
xiv, 16:2  56,131,132 168

IN JOSEPHUS

xv, 8:1-4  134
xv, 9:3  135
xv, 11  3, 136
xv, 11:1-5  3
xv, 1 1 : 2  2
xv, 11:3, 6  15
xv, 11:4  8, 131
xv, 11:5  10, 13, 14
xv, 11:7  8
xvi, 7:1  74, 139
xvii, 9:3  143
xvii, 10:2  115, 135, 138
xviii, 4:3  8,131
xx, 1 : 1  8
xx, 4:3  114, 148
xx, 5:3  8
xx, 8 : 6  139
xx, 8:11  131, 144, 148
xx, 9:7  3
Ap. i, 22  116
1:4  52
2:2  52, 130
2:5  74, 139
3:3"5  131
5H  8
6:1  131, 132
7:2  IO> !3i, 133
13:2, 3  131
I7:8  r3!
, 18:2  132
21 : 1  3, 8, 135
,2:2  143
,3:1  "5, 138
,3"-2  135, 138
,3:6  131
,7:1  131
, 14:8 f  143
,i5:5,6  8
, 16: 2  40
, l6-3  131, 138, 144
, 16:5  8, 138
, J7:3  14
;. i7:5  56

INDEX TO PASSAGES IN JOSEPHUS 169
PAGE PAGE
War. ii, 17:6  143, 147 War. v, 7  133
ii, 19:4  115, 147 v, 7:3  8, 112, 132, 147
iv, 9:11  148 v, 8  54
iv, 9:12  56 v, 8: 1  147
v, 2:3  23, 115, 139 v, 9:2  8, 132
v, 2:4, 5  139 v, 9:4  40, 107, 139
v, 3:2  44 v, 11:4  44
v, 3:5  135> *39 v, 12: 2  23, 40, 133, 139
v, 4:1  27, 40, 52, 53, 56, 70,

2, 53, 50, 7°, vi, 1:7,8.
76, 130, 139 . '

v, 4:2  7, 9, 40, 54, 55, 64, 93,
...107, no, 115, 135, 138, vi, 2:5
139, 146, 148
v,4 = 3  93, "4, I3S

vi, 2:4  13

vi, 3:2  23, 139
vi, 4:4  8
v>4:4  93,i3S ^ 6:2  10,55,138
' " " I3° vi, 6:3  56,64, 138, 139, 148
vi, 7'-2  4o, 56, 139
vi, 8:1  10, 135
5:8  7, 8 vi, 8:4  54, 135
v, 6: 1... 23, 40, 53, 64, 107, 139, 148 vi, 8:5  40, 139
v, 6:2  132 vi, 9:3  114

v,S:i  2, 3
v, 5 = 2  8, 13
v, 5:6  14

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 02215 3572

m  :

!i!HI
I II