the crypts or subterranean galleries under the Mosque platform, and other parts of the Haram. Special subjects of individual interest will claim explanation in the course of the general inquiry. Such are the Phoenician letters which exist on the foundation courses of the great wall. Such are the varied modes in which the megalithic blocks are faced, in different courses. Such are the cubical projections, and corresponding hollows, on the faces of some of these colossal stones. Such are the super-imposed pavements, and successive strata of rubbish, that have been pierced, one below the other, by the mines. Such are the steps upon, and the cave with, in the Sakrah, and the relation of that venerated relic to the history of the site. To render possible the full solution of these questions, as a matter of engineering investigation, an adequate knowledge of the literature of the subject is indispensable. Glaring and demonstrable errors exist in the most venerated authorities. Not one can be trusted second-hand. It is only by knowing what those who had means of information actually say-not what some one else represents them as saying-that we can arrive even at the threshold of a serious investigation. We do not refer, in speaking of the literature illustrative of ancient Jerusalem, to the series of modern writers who, from Mr. Catherwood in 1833, to Count Melchior de Vogué in 1864, have occupied themselves with the topography of the Holy City. Beautiful drawings like those of M. de Vogué, possess a lasting value. But the actual information now at our command is so far in advance of that possessed by any former writers, as to render it unnecessary to revert to conflicts of partially enlightened opinion. With the surveys, plans, and mining sketches now existing, with the results of an exploration that is daily accumulating new facts, and with the published progress reports, in our hands, it is to the statements of writers who knew the locality, not to the guesses of those who did not, that we must look for guidance and explanation. Dr. Lightfoot's work on the Temple will always remain a monument of erudition. But Dr. Lightfoot was not a draughtsman. In his earliest edition he wisely made no attempt to project a plan; for which, indeed, he never had the materials. And the very extent of his reading, and accuracy of his learning, make him a dangerous guide in those places where, in the absence of a map, he has either departed from, or striven to go beyond, his authorities; or has quoted from Maimonides instead of from the Talmud. Two great divisions of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Prophets F +6 and the Hagiographa, contain much latent information as to the topography of Jerusalem. It may well deserve this term; for out of more than seventy passages giving distinct information relating to the gates alone, only nineteen will be discovered by the student who relies on a Concordance.' The Antiquities,' and 'Wars' of the Jews, by Josephus, are of course the most patent sources of knowledge on the subject. But the largest amount of instructive detail is hidden under the unlifted veil of the Talmud. Of this almost unexplored treasury of information, the tract most directly concerning the subject of these pages is the tenth of the fifth order, Kodashim, called the Middoth,' or Measurements. Important details are also given in the tract Succah, or Tabernacles, the sixth of the second order. Perhaps the most instructive of all is the tract Yoma, the fifth of the second order, which treats of the Day of Expiation. But from the entirely unexpected manner in which any subject is introduced in the Ghemara, it is impossible to claim an exhaustive knowledge of all the references contained in the Talmud, without a lifelong study of its twelve folio Hebrew volumes. 6 The footsteps of the visitor to Jerusalem, at the present day, will in the first instance most naturally follow the course taken by the Governor Nehemiah, rather more than 2,300 years ago. The book which bears his name (more especially in the third chapter) is to this day the best guide to the ancient topography of the city. The desolation is even more complete than that witnessed in his nightly round. The first impression produced, on leaving the Jaffa Gate, and following the valley to the south, is that of the utter stoniness of the spot. All that is not bare rock is loose stone. As the eye begins to take cognisance of the enormous mounds of rubbish, the sense of desolation is not diminished. The ancient strength of the place, the profound depths, and steep sides of the ravines, add to the force of the impression. On passing the lower pool of Gihon—an enormous dry reservoir, built of ancient, although not megalithic, masonry-the tombs of the Valley of Hinnom come in view. The imagination is seized by the wonderful colours of the rocks-greys with streaks of russet. The great wall of the Haram next appears; almost dwarfed by the enormous pile of rubbish which has been poured at its feet. It is distinguished by a rich tawny hue, peculiar to itself. Anon, over a foreground of grey shade, comes out the southern peak of Olivet, red in the glowing sunlight. Passing the unexplored tombs of Siloam, the eastern wall of the Haram is seen; and the attention is riveted by the large number of columns, of all sizes and materials, that are built in, at right angles to the face. They are of every description of rich marble-porphyry and syenite, white, and green, and red. On one, which projects a long distance from the wall, you are told that Mohammed will sit on the Day of Judgment. On reaching the north-east angle of the city wall, its scarped rock foundation commands attention. Megalithic masonry, and the great rock-cut ditch, mentioned by Strabo and by Josephus as protecting the north wall of the city, may be traced at intervals, until the marks of the ancient defences are lost beneath vast piles of rubbish west of the Damascus Gate. The area now occupied by the city of Jerusalem and its environs may be said to have been the site of seven successive cities. Eighteen great building epochs have been divided from one another by seventeen separate captures or hostile occupations. We cannot attempt now even to glance at these varied phases of the history of the place. The desolate and sordid aspect of the city testifies to the condition into which it has sunk under the Turkish rule. The most interesting of the existing edifices were raised by the Saracen caliphs. Remains of the work of Godfrey and the Angevin kings are to be recognised; but they are dwarfed by the colossal relics of the earlier builders. The Persian came only to destroy. The Roman thrice ruined or transformed Jerusalem. Justinian, and before him Constantine, filled it with convents, and shrines, and churches. Julian and Hadrian reared temples to Venus and to Jupiter; and the latter endeavoured to suppress its very name, in favour of that of Elia Capitolina. Under the Idumean kings, and the preceding Asamonean dynasty, occurred fierce struggles with the Roman and with the Parthian-with the kings of Syria and of Egypt. During the period of 1,113 years, which elapsed between the capture of the city of Jebus by David, and the great catastrophe effected by Titus, magnificent monarchs exhausted the arts of their day in adorning the sacred mount. In the whole history of Jerusalem, from the days of Melchizedec to our own, the most memorable epochs of destruction were the capture effected, in the 488th year of the Hebrew monarchy, by the Chaldeans, and the yet more complete overthrow, 646 years later, by the Romans. The marks of these master calamities, and of the workmanship of the three chief founders and restorers of the city-Solomon, Nehemiah, and Herod-are preserved beneath mounds of accumulated débris, with something of the fidelity of the geological record of the globe. The topographical questions which arise may be divided, in the first instance, into three groups; referring to the history, or to the traditions, of the Jew, the Christian, or the Moslem. The last, where they are not also Jewish, are the most shadowy of the local associations. The second, which refer to the verification of the holy places venerated by the different Christian communions, are those which have hitherto excited the greatest interest in Europe. But to form any idea of the probable authenticity of the monkish sites, we must understand the topography of Jerusalem under the Idumean kings. Nor can we halt in the investigation until we have traced the marks of the devastations wrought by the Romans and by the Chaldeans; and have thus attained some idea of the successive states of the city under its three native or naturalised dynasties. The city of Jerusalem attained its utmost extent under the third, or Idumean, dynasty of the kings of Judea. In splendour and architectural beauty, if not in colossal grandeur, the buildings of Herod the Great rivalled those of Solomon, his most famous predecessor. The polished ashlar work of the Roman and Grecian temples was introduced by Herod, as is shown by the remains of his works at Cesarea. The drafted megalithic style of Solomon was restored by Agrippa, the last king. The area within the walls of the present city is calculated by Mr. Besant, from Ordnance data, to cover 209 acres of ground, of which thirty-five are occupied by the Noble Sanctuary. To this must be added, in order to arrive at the area walled in by Nehemiah, after the return from the first captivity, a space approximately taken at fifty-seven acres, lying between the present southern wall, and the ancient fortifications of Ophel and of Sion. The city, thus containing some 266 acres, is described by its rebuilder as great and large,' while its inhabitants, enumerated at 49,942, were disproportionately few. By the time of Claudius Cæsar, Jerusalem had grown more populous. It gradually crept,' Josephus informs us, beyond its old limits, and those parts of it that stood north'ward of the Temple, and joined that hill to the city, made it considerably larger; and occasioned that hill, which is in number the fourth, to be inhabited also.' Around this new city, Bezetha, or Canopolis, Agrippa laid the foundations of a megalithic wall, which, on the outburst of the final storm, was raised by the people to the height of more than 30 feet. Its circuit has not yet been accurately traced; but there are distinct indications of its approximate course. Such are the directions of the roads, the remains of megalithic masonry, and the position of the enormous sacrificial ash heaps which are mentioned in the tract Yoma of the Talmud as lying to the north of the city wall. The area of Bezetha may be taken approximately at an amount which would make the Jerusalem of the Idumean kings cover something under 370 acres. The perimeter given by Josephus is 33 stadia.* The Roman wall of circumvallation, which began from the camp of the Assyrians, was 39 stadia. The length of a line drawn round the Ophel wall discovered by Captain Warren, the southern scarp of the fortification of Sion, discovered by Lieutenant Conder, and the points above indicated coincide very closely with the statement of the historian.§ The historic notices that exist of the walls of Jerusalem are few and brief. Yet they are sufficient, when examined by the light afforded by the results of actual survey, to enable us to speak with considerable certainty as to the eras, and even as to the authors, of their successive extensions. Four hundred and fifty years after the invasion of Palestine by Joshua, David laid siege to the royal city of Jebus. He stormed the lower 'city, but the citadel still held out,' || confiding in the all-but inaccessible rock which had so long secured its independence. After the capture of this fortress, David joined the citadel to 'the lower city, and encompassed the whole with walls.'¶ These Solomon repaired and made higher, with great towers upon 'them.'** This magnificent king, moreover,ft by divine reve'lation, encompassed' the Temple hill with a wall, at the 'south side of which he laid rocks together, and bound them to 'one another with lead, and joined together as part of the hill itself to the very top of it.' Thus Jerusalem, in the time of Solomon, was encompassed by the wall of Sion, the wall to the north of the lower city, and the fortress wall of Moriah. In the two centuries and a quarter succeeding the death of Solomon, the city, in spite of two successful sieges, had become Bell. V. iv. 2. † Bell. V. xii. 2. P. E. F. Quarterly Statement, Oct. 1872, p. 168. With reference to the density of the population, and the large numbers congregated at the great annual festivals, we may draw au instructive comparison from the statistics of the city of London. The city proper covers 631 acres. In 1866 its resident day population was 244,865. This was increased by a daily influx of 509,111 clients and customers, raising the day population to 753,976. In the case of any extraordinary attraction, such as the visit of the Queen to St. Paul's, the density of the crowd is enormously increased. And London has no building capable, like the Temple, of containing 200,000 persons. Ant. VII. iii. 2. tt Ant. XV. xi. 3. Ant. VII. iii. 1. |