attached, perhaps, to two neighbouring sites after- | wards incorporated into one. by implication, and Josephus, explicitly, recognise The sacred narrative, from the first a distinction between the Upper and the Lower city, the memorial of which is supposed to be retained in the dual form of the Hebrew name The learned are divided in opinion as to whether the Salem of Melchizedek is identical with Jerusalem. St. Jerome, who cites Josephus and a host of Christian authorities in favour of their identity, himself maintaining the opposite conclusion, says that extensive ruins of the palace of Melchizedek were shown in his day in the neighbourhood of Scythopolis, and makes the Salem of that patriarch identical with "Shalem, a city of Shechem" (Gen. xxxiii. 18); the same, no doubt, with the Salim near to Aenon (St. John, iii. 23), where a village of the name still exists in the mountains east of Nablus. Certain, however, it is that Jerusalem is intended by this name in Psalm lxxvi. 2, and the almost universal agreement of Jews and Christians

same

in its identity with the city of Melchizedek is still further confirmed by the religious character which seems to have attached to its governor at the time of the coming in of the children of Israel, when we find it under the rule of Adonizedek, the exact equivalent to Melchizedek ("righteous Lord"). Regarding, then, the latter half of the name as representing the ancient Salem, we have to inquire into the origin of the former half, concerning which there is considerable diversity of opinion. Josephus has been understood to derive it from the Greek word lepov, prefixed to Salem. In the obscure passage (Ant. vii. 3. § 2)

he is so understood by St. Jerome; but Isaac Vossius defends him from this imputation, which certainly would not raise his character as an etymologist. Lightfoot, after the Rabbies, and followed by Whiston, regards the former half of the name as an abbreviation of the latter part of the title Jehovah-jireh, which this place seems to have received on occasion of Abraham offering up his son on one of the mountains of "the land of Moriah." (Gen. xxii. 8, 14.) Reland, followed by Raumer, adopts the root yarash, and supposes the name to be compounded of

:

TT9

and D, which would give a very good sense," hereditas," or "possessio hereditaria pacis." Lastly, Dr. Wells, followed by Dr. Lee, regards the former part of the compound name as a modification of the name Jebus, ', one of the earlier names of the city, from which its Canaanitish inhabitants were designated Jebusites. Dr. Wells imagines that the was changed into, for the sake of euphony; Dr. Lee, for euphemy, as Jebusalem would mean "the trampling down of peace"-a name of ill oinen. Of these various interpretations, it may be said that Lightfoot's appears to have the highest authority; but that Reland's is otherwise the most satisfactory. Its other Scripture name, Sion, is merely an extension of the name of one particular quarter of the city to the whole. There is a further question among critics as to whether by the city Cadytis, mentioned in Herodotus, Jerusalem is intended. It is twice alluded to by the historian: once as a city of the Syrians of Palaestine, not much smaller than Sardis (iii. 5); again, as having been taken by Pharaoh-Necho, king of Egypt, after his victory in Magdolum (ii. 159). The main objections urged against the identity of Cadytis and Jerusalem in these passages, are, that in the former passage

VOL. II.

JERUSALEM.

17

Herodotus is apparently confining his survey to the the second is not alluded to in the sacred narrative. sea-border of Palaestine, and that the fact narrated in But, on the other hand, there is no mention in sacred inland, that could at all answer to the description of or profane history of any other city, maritime or Cadytis in respect to its size: and the capture of Jerusalem by Necho after the battle of Megiddo, dolum, the name of a city on the frontier of Egypt which is evidently corrupted by Herodotus into Magtowards Palaestine, with which he was more fain Holy Scripture; for the deposition and deportation miliar, though not expressly mentioned, is implied

ants.

Jehoiakim, could not have been effected, unless Necho had held possession of the capital. (2 Kings, xxiv. of Jehoahaz, and the substitution and subjugation of 29-35; comp. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 3.) It may, then, safely be concluded that Cadytis is Jerusalem; and it is remarkable that this earliest form of its classical which alone it is now known to its native inhabitname is nearly equivalent to the modern name by this title appears to have been attached to it as early El-Khuds signifies "the Holy (city)," and frequent recurrence after the Captivity. (Nehem. as the period of Isaiah (xlviii. 2, lii. 1), and is of xi. 1, 18; St. Matth. iv. 5, xxvii. 53.) many other ancient cities in Palaestine, never took name Colonia Aelia Capitolina, like those imposed on Its pagan any hold on the native population of the country, nor, indeed, on the classical historians or ecclesiastical writers. papers, and on coins, many of which are preserved to It probably existed only in state this day. (See the end of the article.)

II. GENERAL SITE.

tain district which commences at the south of the Jerusalem was situated in the heart of the moungreat plain of Esdraelon and is continued throughout the whole of Sainaria and Judaea quite to the southern extremity of the Promised Land. It is and situated at an elevation of 2000 feet above the almost equidistant from the Mediterranean and from level of the Mediterranean. Its site is well defined the river Jordan, being about thirty miles from each, by its circumjacent valleys.

city is a shallow depression, occupied by an ancient Valleys. (1) In the north-west quarter of the pool. This is the head of the Valley of Hinnom, which from this point takes a southern course, confining the city on the western side, until it makes a sharp angle to the east, and forms the southern boundary of the city to its south-east quarter, where it is met by another considerable valley from the north, which must next be described.

yards from the "upper pool" at the head of the
(2) At the distance of somewhat less than 1500
Valley of Hinnom, are the "Tombs of the Kings,"
situated at the head of the Valley of Jehoshaphat,
which runs at first in an eastern course at some
distance north of the modern city, until, turning
sharply to the south, it skirts the eastern side of the
town, and meets the Valley of Hinnom at the south-
east angle, as already described, from whence they
Sea. Through this valley the brook Kedron is sup-
run off together in a southerly direction to the Dead
posed once to have run; and, although no water has
been known to flow through the valley within the
annals of history, it is unquestionably entitled to the
alias of the Valley of the Kedron.

Valley of Hinnom and the head
of the Valley of
The space between the basin at the head of the

C

Jehoshaphat is occupied by a high rocky ridge or swell of land, which attains its highest elevation a little without the north-west angle of the present town. The city, then, occupied the termination of this broad swell of land, being isolated, except on the north, by the two great valleys already described, towards which the ground declined rapidly from all parts of the city. This rocky promontory is, however, broken by one or two subordinate valleys, and the declivity is not uniform.

(3) There is, for example, another valley, very inferior in magnitude to those which encircle the city, but of great importance in a topographical view, as being the main geographical feature mentioned by Josephus in his description of the city. This valley of the Tyropoeon (cheese-makers) meets the Valley of Hinnom at the Pool of Siloam, very near its junction with the Valley of Jehoshaphat, and can be distinctly traced through the city, along the west side of the Temple enclosure, to the Damascus gate, where it opens into a small plain. The level of this valley, running as it does through the midst of a city that has undergone such constant vicissitudes and such repeated destruction, has of course been greatly raised by the desolations of so many generations, but is so marked a feature in modern as in former times, that it is singular it was not at once recognised in the attempt to re-distribute the ancient Jerusalem from the descriptions of Josephus. It would be out of place to enter into the arguments for this and other identifications in the topography of ancient Jerusalem; the conclusions only can be stated, and the various hypotheses must be sought in the works referred to at the end of the article.

This, then, was the disposition of the ancient city, on which a few remarks must be made before we proceed to the new city. The two-fold division, which, as has been said, is recognised by Josephus from the first, is implied also in the sacred narrative, not only in the account of its capture by the Israelites, and subsequently by David, but in all such passages as mention the city of David or Mount Sion as distinct from Salem and Jerusalem. (Comp. Josh. xv. 63; Judges, i. 8, 21; 2 Sam. v. 6—9; Psalms, lxxvi. 2, &c.) The account given by Josephus of the taking of the city is this: that the Israelites, having besieged it, after a time took the Lower City, but the Upper City was hard to be taken by reason of the strength of its walls, and the nature of its position" (Ant. v. 2. § 2); and, subsequently, that "David laid siege to Jerusalem, and took the Lower City by assault, while the citadel still held out" (vii. 3. § 1). Having at length got possession of the Upper City also, "he encircled the two within one wall, so as to form one body" (§ 2). This could only be effected by taking in the interjacent valley, which is apparently the part called Millo.

(4) But when in process of time the city overflowed its old boundaries, the hill Bezetha, or New City, was added to the ancient hills, as is thus described by Josephus:-" The city, being overabundant in population, began gradually to creep beyond its old walls, and the people joining to the city the region which lay to the north of the temple and close to the hill (of Acra), advanced considerably, so that even a fourth eminence was surrounded with habitations, viz. that which is called Bezetha, situated opposite to the Antonia, and divided from it by a deep ditch; for the ground had been cut through on purpose, that the foundations of the Antonia might not, by joining the eminence, be easy of ap

Hills. Ancient Jerusalem, according to Josephus, occupied "two eminences, which fronted each other, and were divided by an intervening ravine, at the brink of which the closely-built houses terminated." This ravine is the Tyropoeon, already re-proach, and of inferior height." ferred to, and this division of the city, which the historian observes from the earliest period, is of the utmost importance in the topography of Jerusalem. The two hills and the intermediate valley are more minutely described as follows:

(1) The Upper City.-" Of these eminences, that which had upon it the Upper City was by much the loftier, and in its length the straiter. This eminence, then, for its strength, used to be called the stronghold by king David,.... but by us it was called the Upper Agora.

(2) The Lower City.-"The other eminence, which was called Acra, and which supported the Lower City, was in shape gibbous (aupiKUPTOS).

(3) The Temple Mount.—" Opposite to this latter was a third eminence, which was naturally lower than Acra, and was once separated from it by another broad ravine: but afterwards, in the times when the Asmonaeans reigned, they filled up the ravine, wishing to join the city to the Temple; and having levelled the summit of Acra, they made it lower, so that in this quarter also the Temple might be seen rising above other objects.

"But the ravine called the Tyropoeon (cheesemakers), which we mentioned as dividing the eminences of the Upper City and the Lower, reaches to Siloam; for so we call the spring, both sweet and abundant. But on their outer sides the two eminences of the city were hemmed in within deep ravines, and, by reason of the precipices on either side, there was no approach to them from any quarter." (B. Jud. v. 4, 5.)

The Antonia, it is necessary here to add, in anticipation of a more detailed description, was a castle situated at the north-western angle of the outer enclosure of the Temple, occupying a precipitous rock 50 cubits high.

It is an interesting fact, and a convenient one to facilitate a description of the city, that the several parts of the ancient city are precisely coincident with the distinct quarters of modern Jerusalem: for that, 1st, the Armenian and Jewish quarters, with the remainder of Mount Sion, now excluded from the walls, composed the Upper City; 2dly, the Mahommedan quarter corresponds exactly with the Lower City; 3dly, that the Haram-es-Sherif, or Noble Sanctuary, of the Moslems, occupies the Temple Mount; and 4thly, that the Haret (quarter) Bab-elHitta is the declivity of the hill Bezetha, which attains its greatest elevation to the north of the modern city wall, but was entirely included within the wall of Agrippa, together with a considerable space to the north and west of the Lower City, including all the Christian quarter.

The several parts of the ancient city were enclosed by distinct walls, of which Josephus gives a minute description, which must be noticed in detail, as furnishing the fullest account we have of the city as it existed during the Roman period; a description which, as far as it relates to the Old city, will serve for the elucidation of the ante-Babylonish capital,- -as it is clear, from the account of the rebuilding of the walls by Nehemiah (iii., vi.), that the new fortifications followed the course of the ancient enceinte.

III. WALLS.

1. Upper City and Old Wall.- -"Of the three walls, the old one was difficult to be taken, both on account of the ravines, and of the eminence above them on which it was situated. But, in addition to the advantage of the position, it was also strongly built, as David and Solomon, and the kings after them, were very zealous about the work. Beginning towards the north, from the tower called Hippicus, and passing through the place called Xystus, then joining the council chamber, it was united to the western cloister of the Temple. In the other direction, towards the west, commencing from the same place, and extending through a place called Bethso to the gate of the Essenes, and then turning towards the south above the fountain Siloam, thence again bending toward the east to the Pool of Solomon, and running through a place which they called Ophla, it was joined to the eastern cloister of the Temple." To understand this description, it is only necessary to remark, that the walls are described, not by the direction in which they run, but by the quarter which they face; i. e. the wall" turning towards the south' is the south wall, and so with the others; so that the Hippic Tower evidently lay at the NW. angle of the Upper City; and, as the position of this tower is of the first importance in the description of the city walls, it is a fortunate circumstance that we are able to fix its exact site.

The towers were constructed of white marble, in blocks of 20 cubits long, 10 wide, and 5 deep, so exactly joined together that each tower appeared to be one mass of rock."

Now, the modern citadel of Jerusalem occupies the NW. angle of Mount Sion, and its northern wall rises from a deep fosse, having towers at either angle, the bases of which are protected on the outside by massive masonry sloping upward from the fosse. The NW. tower, divided only by the trench from the Jaffa gate, is a square of 45 feet. The NE., commonly known as the Tower of David, is 70 feet 3 inches long, by 56 feet 4 inches broad. The sloping bulwark is 40 feet high from the bottom of the trench; but this is much choked up with rubbish. To the tower part there is no known or visible entrance, either from above or below, and no one knows of any room or space in it. The lower part of this platform is, indeed, the solid rock merely cut into shape, and faced with massive masonry, which rock rises to the height of 42 feet. This rock is doubtless the crest of the hill described by Josephus as 30 cubits or 45 feet high. Now, if the dimensions of Hippicus and Phasaelus, as already given, are compared with those of the modern towers on the north side of the citadel, we find that the dimensions of that at the NW. angle-three of whose sides are determined by the scarped rock on which it is based— so nearly agree with those of Hippicus, and the width of the NE. tower-also determined by the cut rock-so nearly with the square of Phasaelus, that there can be no difficulty in deciding upon their identity of position. Mariamne has entirely dis

(1) The Hippic Tower is mentioned in connection with two neighbouring towers on the same north wall, all built by Herod the Great, and connected with his splendid palace that occupied the north-appeared. west angle of the Upper City. "These towers," says the historian, "surpassed all in the world in extent, beauty, and strength, and were dedicated to the memory of his brother, his friend, and his best loved wife.

"The Hippicus, named from his friend, was a square of 25 cubits, and thirty high, entirely solid. Above the part which was solid, and constructed with massive stones, was a reservoir for the rain-water, 20 cubits in depth; and above this a house of two stories, 25 cubits high, divided into different apartments; above which were battlements of 2 cubits, on a parapet of 3 cubits, making the whole height 80 cubits.

(2) "The Tower Phasaelus, which was named from his brother, was 40 cubits square, and solid to the height of 40 cubits; but above it was erected a cloister 10 cubits bigh, fortified with breastworks and ramparts; in the middle of the cloister was carried up another tower, divided into costly chambers and a bath-room, so that the tower was in nothing inferior to a palace. Its summit was adorned with parapets and battlements, more than the preceding. It was in all 90 cubits high, and resembled the tower of Pharus near Alexandria, but was of much larger circumference.

(3) "The Tower Mariamne was solid to the height of 30 cubits, and 20 cubits square, having above a richer and more exquisitely ornamented dwelling. Its entire height was 55 cubits.

"To these towers, situated on the north, was joined within

(4) "The Royal Palace, surpassing all powers of description. It was entirely surrounded by a wall 30 cubits high, with decorated towers at equal intervals, and contained enormous banquetting halls, besides numerous chambers richly adorned. There were also many porticoes encircling one another, with different columns to each, surrounding green courts, planted with a variety of trees, having long avenues through them; and deep channels and reservoirs everywhere around, filled with bronze statues, through which the water flowed; and many towers of tame pidgeons about the fountains."

This magnificent palace, unless the description is exaggerated beyond all licence, must have occupied a larger space than the present fortress, and most probably its gardens extended along the western edge of Mount Sion as far as the present garden of the Armenian Convent; and the decorated towers of this part of the wall, which was spared by the Romans when they levelled the remainder of the city, seem to have transmitted their name to modern times, as the west front of the city wall at this part is called Abroth Ghazzeh, i.e. The Towers of Gaza.

(5) As the Xystus is mentioned next to the Hippicus by Josephus, in his description of the north wall of the Upper City, it may be well to proceed at once to that; deferring the consideration of the Gate Gennath, which obviously occurred between the two, until we come to the Second Wall. The Xystus is properly a covered portico attached to the Greek Gymnasium, which commonly had uncovered walks connected with it. (Dict. Ant. p. 580.) the Jerusalem Xystus was a place where public meetings were occasionally convened (Bell. Jud. ii. 6. § 3), it must be understood to be a wide public

As

We have now to trace the wall of the Upper City in the opposite direction from the same point, viz. the Hippic Tower at the NW. angle. The points noticed are comparatively few. "It first ran south-large fortified building, to the south of the Temple, ward (i. e. with a western aspect), through a place called Bethso, to the Gate of the Essenes; then, turning E., it ran (with a southern aspect) above the fountain of Siloam; thence it bent northward, and ran (with an eastern aspect) to the Pool of Solomon, and extending as far as a place called Ophla, was joined to the eastern cloister of the Temple."