صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

Court of Israel, which was accessible from its West side, by an ascent of fifteen semicircular steps through the large brazen gates'. This Court was assigned to the Hebrew males. It extended in length along the whole breadth of the Court of the Women, but was only 11 cubits in width. To the West of this again,

the Court of the Priests, of like dimensions, rising two cubits and a half above the Court of Israel. Immediately within this stood the brazen altar, its base being 32 cubits square, removed 22 cubits from the Porch of the Temple, and situated before its eastern door. The Temple proper (vao's) extended 100 cubits westward, leaving a space of only 11 feet between the western wall of the inner enclosure and the Most Holy Place, thus giving to the third or inmost court a total length of 187 cubits, with a width of 135. The arrangements made for the orderly performance of the sacrifices, the distribution of the Temple into the Porch, the Sanctuary, and the Most Holy Place, with the dimensions of each, and their furniture and adornment, the account of the surrounding chambers and their several uses, belong rather to a book of Jewish antiquities than to such a work as the present, and cannot here be detailed. I have collected as much as will aid me in attempting to ascertain the exact position of the Temple with reference to the present Haram.

But before I proceed to this, another investigation will be necessary: for undoubtedly the task would be much facilitated by any trustworthy historical records

is fully given in the tract of the Mishna named Middoth (i. e. Measures), the 10th Tract in the 5th Book, in cap. II. sect. 5, chiefly, and cap. v. sect. 1.

7 Bell. Jud. v. v. 2. These were the Corinthian Gates, where the portent took place. J. W. vi. v. 3.

or traditions respecting the old Temple; especially could we find reason to believe that any of the still existing remains had been identified with the Temple at a period when its desolation was comparatively recent.

The following remarks will, I apprehend, enable us to form a fair estimate of the comparative value of Jewish and Christian testimony on this subject: for that of the Moslem writers is clearly worthless, as they could know nothing of the localities prior to Omar's conquest, except what they learnt from the others.

First then for the Jews. It has already been noticed that, within about 50 or 60 years after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus and the slaughter and dispersion of the entire nation, they were again in a position to attempt a restoration of their civil polity, and to endanger for a time the Roman tenure of the country, and that their insurrection was not crushed without the most strenuous efforts on the part of the government1. In order to account for this, we must suppose that they had returned to their old seats very shortly after the desolation of the city, and had been permitted by the Roman garrison to establish themselves among its ruins; as we have seen good reason to believe that the Christians also had done': and I can no more doubt that a continuous tradition of the site of the Temple was current during this interval, than I can question the same concerning the site of the Holy Sepulchre.

The attempt of the revolted Jews to rebuild the Temple at this time3, intimates that the tradition of its

For the insurrection under Hadrian, see Vol. 1. p. 207, &c.

2 Vol. 1. p. 202.

Κατὰ Ιουδαίων β. Tom. vi. pp. 333 and 237, Ed. Eton; where he speaks of three attempts to rebuild the Temple,

3 Mentioned by S. Chrysostom, viz. under Hadrian, Constantine, and

site was still retained; and it would be perpetuated after their reduction, and during the period of their jealous exclusion from the city and its neighbourhood', by the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, erected by the Emperor to desecrate the spots; as in the parallel case of the Holy Sepulchre, polluted by a Temple of Astarte": so that however long the law of Hadrian continued in force, there would be no danger of a breach in the tradition. The Idol Temple was probably demolished in the time of Constantine; but two equestrian statues of Hadrian still marked the spot, and were seen by the Bordeaux Pilgrim A.D. 333, when the site of the Temple and Altar and the extent of the area seem to have been clearly determined'. At this period, too, the Jews were accustomed to resort once a year to the site of the

Julian. Other authorities are quoted for the first by Bishop Münter, Translation in Bib. Sac. p. 431, note 3.

* See the references in Vol. I. p. 213, notes 4 and 5. The terms of the law were very stringent: thus Aristo of Pella (ap. Euseb. H. E. Iv. vi.) Tò πᾶν ἔθνος ἐξ ἐκείνου καὶ τῆς περὶ τὰ Ἱεροσόλυμα γῆς πάμπαν ἐπιβαίνειν εἴργεται· νόμου δόγματι καὶ διατάξεσιν Ἀδριανοῦ, ὡς ἂν μὴ δ ̓ ἐξ αὐτόπτου θεωροῖεν τὸ πατρῶον ἔδαφος, έγκελευσαμένου. The parallel passage in the Apology of Tertullian is well known, and proves that the edict was still rigorously enforced, 'Dispersi, palabundi, et cœli et soli sui extorres vagantur per orbem, sine homine, sine Deo Rege, quibus nec advenarum jure terram patriam saltem vestigio salutare conceditur." Cap. XXI. p. 20. Ed. Rigaltii, 1634.

[ocr errors]

5 Dion Cass. LXIX. 12. ÉS TOV TOU Θεοῦ τόπου, ναὸν τῷ Διὶ ἔτερον ἀντεyeipavтos. The well-known coin of Elia Capitolina, representing Jupiter in a tetrastyle temple, is conclusive on this point. It is quoted by Vaillant and Eckhel, under the reigns of Hadrian and his successors. See Doct. Num. Vet. Pars 1. Tom. II. p. 443: a copy will be found at the foot of this chapter.

See Vol. 1. pp. 240, 41; and for the coin, p. 128 of this volume.

7" In æde ipsa ubi templum fuit, quod Salomon ædificavit, in marmore ante aram, sanguinem Zachariæ ibi dicas hodie fusum. Etiam parent vestigia clavorum militum, qui eum occiderunt, in totam aream, ut putes in cera fixum esse. Sunt ibi et statuæ duæ Hadriani." Itin. Hierosol. ed. Wesseling, pp. 590, 91.

Temple, and to anoint a pierced stone with oil': and although it would appear that they abused this newlyrecovered liberty to visit Jerusalem, and made another unsuccessful attempt to build the Temple2, which led to the re-enactment of the law of Hadrian3, yet the statue of the God or Emperor still stood to mark the spot'; and many of the Jews, in the time of Julian the Apostate, would remember the annual visit of their countrymen to the pierced stone, which would enable them clearly to identify the site: so that I can have no doubt that the foundations which they began to open up, when at the instigation of Julian they commenced their third infatuated attempt, were really the foundations of the Temple", and that this design to falsify our Lord's prophecy

1 "Est et non longe de statuis lapis pertusus, ad quem veniunt Judæi singulis annis, et unguent eum, et lamentant se cum gemitu, et vestimenta sua scindunt, et sic recedunt." Ibid.

2 The second attempt mentioned by S. Chrysostom 1. c. and barbarously punished by the Emperor. αὐτοὺς δείκνυμι οὐχ ἅπαξ οὐδε δὶς, ἀλλὰ καὶ τρὶς ἐπιχειρήσαντας καὶ ῥαγέντας. Then, after detailing the attempt under Hadrian, he proceeds, ὁρᾷς τὴν πρώτην επιχείρησιν τῶν ἀναισχύντων Ιουδαίων; βλέπε δὲ καὶ τὴν μετ ̓ ἐκείνην· ἐπὶ Κωνσταντίνου πάλιν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐπεχείρησαν· ὁ δέ τὰ ὦτα αὐτῶν ἀποτεμων καὶ τὸ τῆς παρακοῆς σύμβολον ἐνθεὶς αὐτῶν τῷ σώματι πανταχοῦ περιήγε, καθάπερ τινὰς δραπέτας καὶ μαστιγίας, διὰ τῆς τοῦ σώματος πηρώσεως ἅπασι καταδήλους ποιῶν, κ.λ. p. 333. This event he speaks of as within the memory of man, τοῖς ἔτι πρεσβυτέροις ἡμῶν γνώριμον· and then proceeds to speak of the attempt under

Julian, as καὶ τοῖς σφόδρα νέοις δῆλον καὶ καταφανές. p. 334.

3 This is nowhere stated totidem verbis, but I find evidence of it in this, that while at the time of the Bordeaux Pilgrim's visit (A.D. 333), they were allowed to enter the city at least once a year, Eusebius, writing later, Comment. in Psalm. LVIII. p. 267, Νόμοις γοῦν τῶν κρατούντων ἐξ ἐκείνου πᾶν Ιου· δαίων ἔθνος ἀπηγόρευται τοῖς τόποις ἐπιβαίνειν, ἀπαιραιτήτου τιμωρίας, ἐπαιωρουμένης τοῖς τοῦ νόμου παραρ βάτοις· διὸ εἰς ἔτι καὶ σήμερον ἀμφὶ μὲν τοὺς ὅρους κύκλῳ παρίοντες πόῤῥως θεν ἴστανται, μηδ' ἐξ αὐτόπτου τὸ πάλαι νενομισμένον αὐτοῖς ἱερὸν ἔδαφος θεάσασθαι καταξιούμενοι. Conf. Gre gory Nazianzum, Orat. xir. p. 202.

See the passages quoted from S. Jerome, p. 338, note 3.

5 See the narrative and references in Vol. 1. pp. 254, 5. And S. Chrysostom l. c. p 334.

only led to its more complete accomplishment, by the entire destruction of the ruins in the fiery eruption. It seems certain that the edict of Hadrian was again enforced subsequently to the time of Julian", probably until the Saracenic conquest; and it is in this interval that the Jewish traditions would suffer most materially. Yet I cannot but think that the main sites, such as Sion and the Temple Mount, would still be had in remembrance by a small remnant of mourners who might bribe the Roman soldiers, if not to connive at their residence in the city, at least to allow them to pay periodical visits to the ruins, as their forefathers had dones.

As may be gathered from S. Chrysostom's language, after relating the defeat of Julian's attempt, in his second Homily against the Jews. Kai νῦν ἐὰν ἔλθης εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα, γυμνὰ ὄψει τα θεμέλια. p. 334; and in the 3rd, p. 342, ἐρείπιον ἐγένετο ὁ ναός.

7 When S. Hilary wrote his Commentary on the Psalms the prohibition was in full force. The date usually assigned to this work is cir. A.D. 365, only two years after the death of Julian the Apostate, A.D. 363: his words are (Tractat, in Psalmum LVIII. sect. 7. Op. col. 130). "Quinetiam nunc in. gressu civitatis ejusdem, edicto Romani regis inhibentur ;" and a little below, col. 133," Amissa civitate Temploque deserto, et secundum Romani regis edicta circumeuntes tantum, non etiam ineuntes civitatem," &c. In S. Chrysostom's time the edict was still enforced. Thus he argues that if God had willed the continuance of the Jewish sacrifices he would not have allowed them to be scattered through the world,

and have made that city alone inaccessible to them, in which only sacrifice could be offered. Κατὰ Ἰουδαίων, α. p. 315-317. So, p. 318, OUTW Kai d θεὸς τῶν θυσιῶν ἀπήγαγε, τὴν πόλιν καθελών, καὶ ποιήσας αὐτὴν ἄβατον πᾶσιν ; and a little after, ή μὲν οἶκουμένη πᾶσα ἀνεῖται τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ἔνθα οὐκ ἔξεστι θύειν· μόνη δὲ ἡ Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἄβατος γέγονεν, ἔνθα μόνον θύειν ἐξην.

So touchingly described by S. Jerome in Comment. in Soph. 1. 15, 16, where, referring to the parable of the unthankful husbandmen (in Matt. XXI. 35, 43,) he writes, "...usque ad præsentem diem, perfidi coloni, post interfectionem servorum, et ad extremum, Filii Dei, excepto planctu prohibentur ingredi Jerusalem: et ut ruinam suæ eis flere liceat civitatis, pretio redimunt; ut qui quondam emerant sanguinem Christi, emant lacrymas suas. Et ne fletus quidem eis gratuitus sit, videas in die quo capta est a Romanis et diruta Jerusalem, venire populum

« السابقةمتابعة »