OF THE 
 
..iwjljss:;^;;;^^!^.-.,,,,^^ 
 
 
 
 an 
 
 
 *i|^^i! 
 
 '^^^^a. 
 
 
 JERUSALEM AND THE 
 
 TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 I FROM THE NORTH EAST 
 
jq 
 
 ijit^- 
 
SACEED SITES OF THE 
 GOSPELS 
 
 WITH ILLUSTRATIONS, MAPS AND PLANS 
 
 BY 
 
 W. SANDAY, D.D., LL.D., Litt.D 
 
 LADY MARGARET PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND CANON OF 
 
 CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD 
 
 HON. FELLOW OF EXETER COLLEGE 
 
 WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF 
 
 PAUL WATERHOUSE, MA., F.R.I.B.A. 
 
 OXFORD 
 
 AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
 
 1903 
 

 HENRY FROWDE, M.A. 
 
 PUBLISHER TO THE UNIA^ERSITY OF OXFORD 
 
 LONDON, EDINBURGH 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 
UNIVERSITATI CANTABRIGIENSI 
 
 HUNC LIBELLUM QUANTULUMCUMQUE 
 
 GRATO ANIMO 
 
 D. D. 
 
 AUCTOR 
 
vi PREFACE 
 
 handmaids of Science — may sometimes have to 
 contribute to questions that in their way are of 
 some importance. I was confirmed in this feeUng 
 by what was almost the last piece of literature to 
 pass through my hands, the article of Dr. Zahn's 
 mentioned in a note on p. 93. This article un- 
 fortunately came to my notice later than it should 
 have done and not until the sheets of the book were 
 already in type. I should much like to discuss it 
 on a really adequate scale and without any avoidance 
 of technicalities ; and I hope to embrace an oppor- 
 tunity of doing this. But the questions involved so 
 go to the root of the whole textual criticism of the 
 New Testament, that it seems well to wait until we 
 have Prof, von Soden's great work on the Text — 
 now, I am glad to think, nearing completion — 
 actually before us. In the meanwhile it is perhaps 
 right for me to say that on the particular point at 
 issue, much as I regret to find myself in opposition 
 to some whom I respect most highly as authorities, 
 I am not as yet shaken in my own opinion. 
 
 This is not the only instance in which the position 
 of a controverted question has altered somewhat 
 while the book has been preparing. I can only hope 
 that the Index may make it possible for the reader 
 to keep pace with such changes and to correct an 
 earlier impression by a later, where that is neces- 
 sary. Of all the decisions that I had come to, the 
 site of Capernaum is that as to which my own 
 doubts are strongest. 
 
PREFACE vii 
 
 The first three chapters were dehvered in substance 
 as lectures after my return in the summer term of 
 last year. I have allowed them to keep the lecture 
 form, though I have since added a short chapter 
 that was not delivered in the same way. The 
 whole work has been strictly a irapepyov, that has 
 been written at odd moments in the midst of other 
 work ; and I should not be surprised if it bore some 
 marks of this origin. As it progressed the ambition 
 grew in me to try to present to the eye of the reader 
 some of those features in the Palestine of the present 
 that I had myself found most suggestive, and at 
 the same time to enable him to follow me in the 
 steps by which I was myself seeking to reconstruct 
 the Palestine of the past. 
 
 For the first of these purposes it was sufiicient to 
 reproduce a few selected photographs, for the second 
 it was necessary to have recourse to professional aid. 
 And in this connexion I must express my warmest 
 thanks to my friend Mr. Paul Waterhouse, M.A., 
 F.E.I.B.A., to whom I am indebted for the perspec- 
 tive view of ancient Jerusalem which forms the 
 frontispiece, and for the plan and sections of the 
 Herodian Temple, as well as for the notes explaining 
 the details of his work. It will be seen with what 
 keen interest and skill Mr. Waterhouse has entered 
 into this inquiry. It has been a special pleasure to 
 me that we have worked together in such complete 
 agreement. The maps and the plan of Jerusalem 
 have been made for me by Messrs. Darbishire and 
 
viii PEEFACE 
 
 Stantbrd of Oxford, whom I must also thank for 
 their intelligent and willing co-operation. And I 
 should not like to leave unacknowledged the taste 
 and good judgement so freely placed at my disposal 
 at the Clarendon Press, 
 
 One who ventures to write on Palestine without 
 being an Orientalist is obliged to take much at 
 secondhand- In the transliteration of Arabic names 
 I have in the main followed Baedeker, with one or 
 two conce^ons to more familiar forms. My friend 
 and colleague Dr. Driver very kindly corrected the 
 greater part of the proofe for me in this respect. 
 
 It wiLL I believe, sufficiently appear from the 
 notes where my obligations have been greatest. 
 Special acknowledgements are due to the Committee 
 of the Palestine Exploration Fund, who readily gave 
 permission for the use of their maps and phot^^graphs. 
 The -more outlying objects (e.g. Plates XVJI — XIX. 
 XXI X X 1 1 1 B, XXXV) are taken from their series. 
 With a few exceptions the remaining photographs 
 are by the American Colony at Jerusalem (Tester) 
 or by B-iiiEls of Beirut. 
 
 C^xjoET'. Easier. 1903, 
 
COXTEXTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 L The Exteekal Aspect of Paixsttsx ly the Tixe 
 
 OF Christ i 
 
 Notes os Plates I-XXII . . . . .18 
 
 n. Sites orxsiDE Jeeusalek 20 
 
 Notes ok Plates XXIII-XXXVI . . . -49 
 
 III. Sites rs JEBUSAT.rM ...... 51 
 
 Notes ok Plates XXXVll-L .... 89 
 
 IV. Some Recekt Litef^ttp^ 90 
 
 Notes ok Plates LI-LV 105 
 
 The Tehple of Hebod [Paul Waterhoxise] . . . 106 
 
 The Plak of Jebusalem 118 
 
 Ikdex 121 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS, MAPS AND 
 PLANS 
 
 FeONTISPIECE [P. WaTERHOUSe] PAG 
 
 Plates 
 
 I. 
 
 II. 
 
 III. 
 
 IV. 
 
 V. 
 
 VI. 
 
 VII. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 IX. 
 
 XI. 
 
 XII. 
 XIII. 
 
 XVI A. 
 XVI B. 
 XVII. 
 
 XVIII. 
 
 XIX. 
 
 XX. 
 XXI. 
 XXII. 
 
 I-XXII between i8, 19 
 
 Approach to Jerusalem (from SW.). 
 Saracenic Jerusalem : Damascus Gate. 
 Saracenic Jerusalem : Street Scene. 
 Saracenic Jerusalem : Dome of the Eock (general 
 
 view). 
 Saracenic Jerusalem : Dome of the Eock (exterior). 
 Saracenic Jerusalem : Dome of the Eock (interior). 
 The Holy Places : Chapel of the Holy SepiUchre. 
 The Holy Places : Golgotha. 
 The Holy Places : Cave of the Nativity. 
 Church of the Nativity. (Early Christian Work. 
 
 Constantine's Basilica at Bethlehem.) 
 Crusading Castles : Belfort {Kal'at esli-ShaUf). 
 Crusading Castles : Castle of Baniyas. 
 Crusading Castles : Castellum Peregrinorum 
 
 (Atmt). 
 Herodian and Eoman Jerusalem : so-called Tombs 
 
 of Absalom, St. James, and Zechariah. 
 Herodian and Eoman Jerusalem : Tomb of Helena 
 
 of Adiabene, 41-54 a.d. (so-called Tombs of 
 
 the Kings). 
 Herodian Palestine : Site of Samaria {Sehaste). 
 Samaria : Street of Columns. 
 Eoman Palestine: Tell Hum (supposed ruins of 
 
 Synagogue). 
 Eoman Palestine : A>/r ^iVim (supposed ruins of 
 
 Synagogue). 
 Eoman Palestine : Mcwn (supposed ruins of 
 
 Synagogue). 
 Eoman Palestine : Mole of Caesarea. 
 Eoman Palestine : Euins of Gerasa (Decapolis). 
 Ford of Jordan (near Jericho). 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS, MAPS AND PLANS xi 
 
 Map of Environs of Jerusalem . 
 
 Map of Environs of NAblus 
 
 Map of Sea op Galilee .... 
 
 Plates XXIII-XXXVI . . . . 
 
 Nazareth : The Virgin's Fountain. 
 
 to face 
 
 pages 
 20 
 
 to face 
 
 32 
 
 to face 
 
 48 
 
 between 50, 51 
 
 XXIII A. 
 
 XXIII B. 
 
 XXIV. 
 
 XXV. 
 
 XXVI. 
 
 XXVII. 
 
 XXVIII. 
 
 XXXI. 
 
 XXXII. 
 XXXIII. 
 XXXIV. 
 
 XXXV. 
 XXXVI. 
 
 Nazareth : Cliif of Precipitation (probable). 
 
 Cana ? {Kefr Eerma). 
 
 Nain. 
 
 Bethany. 
 
 Bethlehem. 
 
 Supposed (but less probable) Site of Emmaus 
 {cl-Kubebeh). 
 
 Jacob's Well, with Crusaders' Church (now- 
 enclosed). 
 
 Joseph's Tomb : Village of Sychar : Mount 
 Ebal. 
 
 Magdala (looking NE.) and Plain of Gennesaret. 
 
 Magdala (looking SW.). 
 
 'Ain et-Tabiglia. 
 
 Aqueduct at Klian Minyeh. 
 
 Tell Hum : Field of Euins. 
 
 Tiberias (looking N.). 
 
 Plates XXXVII-L . . . . . letween 88,89 
 
 XXXVII. Jerusalem: Site of Herod's Palace (SW. angle). 
 XXXVIII. Herod's Palace : Tower Hippicus (lower courses 
 probably Herodian). 
 XXXIX. So-called Pool of Bethesda. 
 XL. Pool of Siloam. 
 
 xLi. Kidron Valley : S. Wall of Temple : Virgin's 
 Fountain (in the bend). 
 XLii. Substructures of the Temple (' Solomon's 
 
 Stables '). 
 XLiii. The Golden Gate. 
 XLiv. View fi-om Gordon's Calvary. 
 XLv. Gordon's Calvary. 
 XLVi. The Garden Tomb. 
 XLVii. St. Helena's Chapel. 
 
xii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS, MAPS AND PLANS 
 
 PLATES PAGES 
 
 XLViii. So-called Zion Suburb. 
 XLix. So-called Tomb of David : The Cenaculum. 
 L. Interior of the Cenaculum. 
 
 Plates LI-LV between 104, 105 
 
 LI. Typical Scenes : A Village on the Maritime 
 
 Plain (Lydda). 
 Lii. Typical Scenes: A Village near Jerusalem 
 
 (Ain Kdrim). 
 Liii. Typical Scenes : Cliff overlooking plain, near 
 
 Nazareth. 
 Liv. Typical Scenes : The Wilderness of Judaea. 
 Lv. Finis Judaeae : the Eock of Masada, v^here the 
 Jews made their last stand against Titus. 
 
 Plan of Herod's Temple [P. Waterhouse] . . after 116 
 Sections of Ditto in pocket 
 
 Plan op Jerusalem after 119 
 
 Map of Palestine At end 
 
 ABBEEVIATIONS 
 
 D. B. Dictionary of the Bible. 
 
 NhZ. Neue Jcirchliche Zeitschrift. 
 
 PEFQ. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement. 
 
 R. 'E. , PRE ^ Hauck-Herzog, Protestantische Real-EncyMopadie. 
 
 ZDPV. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paldstina-Vereins. 
 
 Z. ntl. Wiss. Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft. 
 
THE EXTERNAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 IN THE TIME OF CHRIST 
 
 The traveller who goes to the Holy Land in the hope 
 of recovering some impression of the external conditions 
 of the life of Christ has a difficult task before him. In 
 Palestine there is no Pompeii to take him back at one 
 step into the very heart of the past, and not only of the 
 past vaguely, but of the particular past of which he is in 
 search ; to preserve it for him, as it were, hermetically 
 sealed all through the centuries, and to set it before his 
 eyes certainly authentic and unadulterated, free from 
 all admixture of anything save that which he is seeking. 
 An experience like that of Palestine serves to bring 
 home to us the immense and unique value of Pompeii 
 in helping us to revive for ourselves the picture of 
 ancient life. "What would we not give for such an 
 example on the soil of Palestine, really and indisput- 
 ably belonging to the time before the destruction of 
 Jerusalem by Titus in 70 A. d. ? 
 
 As it is, we have to work our way painfully back to 
 the past from the present by a long process of analysis, 
 elimination and reconstruction. We have to take the 
 present as it were to pieces, and put aside those elements 
 in it that are not relevant, and then to put together as 
 well as we can the few crumbling and disfigured frag- 
 ments that are left. We speak of the ' unchanging East' ; 
 
2 THE EXTEENAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 and it is true that there are certain common attributes 
 of Eastern peoples that have a way of persisting through 
 change. But, in the case of Palestine, the larger part 
 of what we seek does not come under this description. 
 We have only to think of the succession of more or 
 less alien elements intruded into the unhappy country 
 since the date that we are considering. First the 
 Eoman in greater dominance; then the Byzantine; 
 then the Saracen ; then the Crusader ; then the Saracen 
 again, stronger and more pervading than before ; then 
 the Turk ; not to speak of the modern invasion, German 
 colonies, colonies of modern Jews, Roman Catholic 
 religious orders in great numbers and force, Russian 
 churches and huge establishments for pilgrims, British 
 and American schools and missions. 
 
 All these last bear their modernness upon their face, 
 and are easily put aside. But the others have entered 
 into the grain more deeply. Most of all, most by far, 
 the Saracen. If we ask what it is that gives Jerusalem 
 its stamp most conspicuously to the eye at the present 
 day, we should answer, undoubtedly the Saracen. 
 
 Of all the successive layers deposited one above the 
 other on the sacred soil, the Saracenic is uppermost^. 
 
 In the first place, the whole of the vast Temple area, 
 though very much pre-Saracenic in its substructures and, 
 so to speak, in its lower courses and materials, has yet 
 been so transformed and adapted to Saracenic ends that 
 the Saracen really dominates over all besides. And 
 the Temple area, as we now see it, culminates in the 
 Mosque of Omar or Dome of the Rock, which is beyond 
 all comparison the most striking and beautiful thing 
 * ' La ville est restee sarrasine' (Pierre Loti, Jenisalem, p. 52). 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHRIST 3 
 
 in Jerusalem. Here, too, the columns and capitals and 
 marbles may be actually taken from pagan temples or 
 Constantinian or Byzantine cburches ; and it may be 
 true enough that the original architects and workmen 
 were Christians who developed their art from Byzantine 
 models ; but none the less here, as in so many instances 
 elsewhere, the presiding genius is Saracenic, and the 
 wonderful effect that we now see was given to it by the 
 Saracens : the outer casing of encaustic tiles, the deep 
 rich mosaic, not in lines of figures as at Ravenna, but 
 in conventional patterns of flowers set in vases and 
 covering the walls with their luxuriant growth, the 
 endless play and glow of stained glass, the artistic 
 bands of Cufic writing, the arabesques of cornice and 
 dome. 
 
 The Temple area is Saracen ; the city walls also are 
 Saracen. However far back the foundations may go in 
 some sections, and although it may be true that the 
 latest and most characteristic features are due to Soliman 
 the Magnificent in 1537, i. e. in the Turkish period, it 
 is the Saracenic spirit that really prevails. And as we 
 wind our way through the bazaars and tortuous streets, 
 and mingle in the many-coloured crowd, we feel that 
 we are as much in a city that is essentially Saracenic as 
 if we were in Damascus or in the old quarter of Cairo. 
 
 And I imagine that the same holds good of the 
 smaller towns and villages. The dome and minaret are 
 almost always the most picturesque and prominent 
 objects. Only in comparatively few cases, as at Bethle- 
 hem, Nazareth and Cana of Galilee, does the Christian 
 spirit really take the lead, and that spirit is at best 
 in the form of mediaeval Byzantinism. 
 
4 THE EXTEENAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 It is probable enough that in the time of our Lord 
 there was also a very distinct Arabian element, clans 
 of nomads settling on both sides of the Jordan ; but 
 there can be little doubt that since that day the process 
 of ' Arabization ' has gone much further. The great 
 impulse, of course, was given by the conquest and rule 
 of the successors of Mahomet ; but in the last two 
 centuries other causes have contributed to the same 
 result ^ 
 
 On the fact of this * Arabization ' we have the expert 
 testimony of Mr. Hogarth : — 
 
 ' A certain degree of similarity in human character 
 and an even greater similarity of language prevails 
 over an immense area, where races of most various 
 origin have all been assimilated more or less by the 
 one which occupies the healthy crown of the land, the 
 Arabian of Nejd ^.' 
 
 Unfortunately this Arabian influence is not good for 
 the country. The Bedawin has virtues and attractions 
 on his native steppes which he is apt to lose in settled 
 life; and he is a bad cultivator. 
 
 ' For some centuries Palestine has been in the evil case 
 of having to receive from time to time broken remnants 
 of Hamad tribes worsted in desert warfare, who must 
 perforce take up the uncongenial status of fellahm. Such 
 have no skill in agriculture and no heart. They im- 
 poverish the land and lightly abandon it to denudation 
 and sand-drift ; and it is largely due to them that 
 Palestine, especially in the south of Judaea, is the waste 
 that it is ^.' 
 
 ' Hogarth, The Nearer East, p. 256. ' Ibid. p. 255. 
 
 * Ibid. p. 264. 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHRIST 5 
 
 In spite of these adverse conditions, and in spite of 
 tlie misgovernment whicli lies like a dead weight upon 
 the land, one seems to see some signs of recuperation. 
 But these are due to immigration of a different kind. 
 Under any other government the prosperity of Palestine 
 would advance by leaps and bounds. 
 
 Among the immigrants are the Jews, who of late 
 have returned to Palestine in great numbers. And it 
 might be thought that their restoration to their ancient 
 home would help us in imagination to repeople the 
 land as it was. But the Jews of the present — at least 
 the Jewish settlers in Palestine — must be different beings 
 from those of the past. The Jews, as they live for us 
 in the pages of Josephus, were fierce, turbulent and 
 fanatical, but of an unquenchable spirit and daring. 
 But to the Jews, as we see them now, none of these 
 epithets would be applicable. On this head I may 
 quote Mr. Eider Haggard, whose impressions entirely 
 coincided with our own : — 
 
 ' As I had been informed that this city [Tiberias] was 
 for the most part occupied by Jews, I was curious to 
 see them, thinking that upon their native soil we should 
 find representatives of the race more or less as it was 
 when it defied the Roman eagles. I was destined to 
 disappointment. Here were no harsh-eyed, stern-faced 
 men, such as I had pictured. Here even was no Hebrew 
 as we know him, strenuous, eager, healthy, and cosmo- 
 politan. Far different are those Jews, for the most 
 part of Russian or Polish origin, who dwell in Tiberias. 
 At a little distance, in their dressing-gown-like robe, it 
 is not easy to say whether individuals are men or women. 
 Indeed, even when studied face to face their aspect is 
 singularly sexless. Their complexions are curiously pallid 
 
6 THE EXTERNAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 and unwholesome, while the hair of the men, often of 
 a burning red, is arranged in two thin curls, which 
 hang down oilily on either side of the forehead in 
 front of the ears, like spare ringlets from the cTievelures 
 of our great-aunts. I asked David [the dragoman], who 
 had dwelt among- them for years, what this curious- 
 looking folk did for a living. He replied : " Oh ! they 
 just sit about." So far as I could learn, this seems to 
 describe the facts, but I understand that the means to 
 sit about on are, for the most part, subscribed by 
 charitable Hebrews in Europe and elsewhere. Many 
 of the men are, however, engaged in a study of the 
 Talmud, an occupation for which Tiberias is traditionally 
 famous ^.' 
 
 The same description would hold good for the Jews' 
 quarter of Jerusalem, which is the most crowded, filthy, 
 and poverty-stricken of all the quarters of the city. 
 But I believe there is some difference between the 
 Ashkenazim (or Jews from the north, i. e. mainly from 
 Poland, Russia, &c,), who are the more numerous, and 
 the Sephardim (or Jews from the south, more particularly 
 Spain), to the advantage of the latter. I also understood 
 that the Jewish colonies, which at first were a heavy 
 drain on their wealthy supporters in the West, now 
 that they are handed over to the Alliance Israelite and 
 the Jewish Colonization Society, are more systematically 
 managed, and are improving. Mr. Robinson Lees, who 
 lived for some years among them, says that ' some of 
 
 * A Winter Pilgrimage i7i Palestine, Italy, and Cyprus (London, 1901), 
 p. 217. There is even stronger language in Fulleylove and Kelman, 
 The Holy Land (London, 1902), p. 98. Mr. Kelman however recog- 
 nizes that ' the spirit of the people is not broken by oppression as 
 is the spirit of the Fellahin. The Jew takes what comes and says 
 little ; but he believes in himself, his past and his future, with a faith 
 indomitable as it is daring.' 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHRIST 7 
 
 the Jews are very industrious, and work from early mom 
 till late at night for very low wages ^.' Dr. Wheeler, 
 of the Medical Mission, who has also worked much 
 among them, speaks with enthusiasm of many of their 
 qualities. They probably live up to their religion, as 
 they understand it, more strictly than most Christians. 
 In this, and in their intense tenacity, they are true 
 descendants of their forefathers. But these had probably 
 more of the appearance of the Arab, and at least a finer 
 physique and freer and bolder bearing. There are many 
 sketches of ' typical Jews of Jerusalem ' in Mons. Tissot's 
 remarkable book ^ ; but they will give a better idea of 
 the Pharisees and Sadducees than of the Zealots, who 
 more nearly represent the mass of the nation. 
 
 'Men, and not walls, make a city.' But in the 
 endeavour to recall the image of the past we must 
 make a study of the buildings as well as of the men. 
 And here again we find ourselves baffled. It is true 
 that there is no lack of ruins. Indeed, it might well 
 be said that Palestine is a land of ruins. No unfortunate 
 land has been so much fought over, harried, plundered 
 and devastated — Roman trying to stamp out the irre- 
 pressible Jew, who in his turn instigates the ruthless 
 Persian, Moslem seeking to wipe out traces of the 
 Christian, or Christian seeking to wipe out traces of 
 the Moslem; and wild Eastern hordes (like the Khares- 
 mians^ in 1244) destroying for sheer destruction's sake. 
 
 ' Jerusalem and its People, p. 29. 
 
 ^ The Life of our Lord Jesus Christ (richly illustrated) : London 
 and Paris, 1897. 
 
 ^ These were a Turcoman tribe from the Sea of Aral and the Oxus, 
 whose widespread dominion had been broken up by Genghis Khan in 
 
8 THE EXTERNAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 And then in time of peace the ravages of fire have been 
 added to the ravages of the swotd. 
 
 It is often disappointing to find how little there is, 
 even on the most sacred of sites, that is really ancient 
 or in any sense primitive. The greater part of the 
 Church of the Holy Sepulchre dates only from the last 
 century. After I know not how many previous destruc- 
 tions and restorations, a disastrous fire destroyed most 
 of it in 1808 ; and the dome that we now see was only 
 finished in a nondescript style in 1868. The Chapel of 
 the Holy Sepulchre itself dates from the same period. 
 A few bits^ of old work may be seen here and there, 
 e. g. portions of a cornice in the fa9ade, and the pillars 
 and capitals in St. Helena's Chapel ; but these are almost 
 lost on the mass of modernization. The Cenaculum, 
 or Upper Room, is part of a Franciscan church, later 
 than the crusades and not built till the fourteenth 
 century. Justinian's church, now the mosque el-Alisa 2, 
 has been so cut about and has so lost its true proportions 
 as to be hardly recognizable. The greatest amount of 
 authentic material is to be seen in the Church of the 
 Nativity at Bethlehem, the nave of which seems to be 
 really the work of Constantine. 
 
 We need not indeed doubt that there are considerable 
 
 1220. Ten thousand of them were called in as mercenaries by the 
 Fatimide Sultan Eyyub, and perpetrated fearful massacre and destruc- 
 tion in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. It is to the Tartars and Mongols 
 from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries that are due the worst 
 devastations in the East. Many regions have not recovered to this day. 
 
 > On these see especially Strzygowski, Orient oder Bom (1901), 
 p. 129 S. 
 
 2 ' i. e. the far-of (mosque), to which Mohammed pretended to 
 have been transported by night (Kor. 17. i), so called in opposition 
 to the mosque of Mecca' (Dr. Driver). 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHEIST 9 
 
 remains from the first century of our era still existing. 
 But they are doubly buried. Many of them are far 
 below the surface. For instance, the ground of what 
 was once the Tyropoeon (the valley between the eastern 
 and western hill) is from fifty to eighty feet below the 
 present level. And much that does not lie as deep as 
 this is either built into or covered by houses. In spite 
 of all that has been done by the engineers of the 
 Palestine Exploration Fund, or by the independent 
 researches of Dr. Schick and others, far more still 
 remains to do. It is not easy to conduct architectural 
 research beneath the foundations of a closely packed 
 city. 
 
 The objects of Christian veneration that are nearer 
 to the surface have been buried in another way. They 
 are, and have been in the past, so thickly overlaid with 
 ornament, placed there by devout worshippers, that it 
 is well if any portion of the original is still visible. 
 
 I have said that the Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre, as 
 we see it, is quite modern. The French writer Pierre 
 Loti calls it a ' kiosk ^ ' ; and that best describes its 
 external appearance. "We should give it the epithet 
 'fantastic/ and almost 'tawdry' — which are obviously 
 not the epithets that we should wish to give to the scene 
 of our Lord's sepulchre and resurrection. Internally 
 it is divided into two portions: the outer is called the 
 Chapel of the Angels ; the inner chapel, which is roughly 
 about six feet square, is so completely encased with 
 marble and gilding that no one would guess that it 
 represented a rock-tomb. And yet the living rock may 
 
 ^ Vt sup. p. 56 : ' Le grand kiosque de marbre, d'un luxe a demi bar- 
 bare et surcharge de lampes d 'argent.' 
 
10 THE EXTEENAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 be seen in a cupboard used for keeping tapers, which 
 opens out of the marble panelling. It seems that both 
 Constantine (326-336) and Modestus (616-626), who 
 restored the chapel after its destruction by the Persians 
 under Chosroes II, sought to give the whole construction 
 a monumental form ^ ; so that even from the first the 
 original character of the tomb was deliberately disguised. 
 
 The same rule holds of all the sacred sites, and we 
 might say in proportion to their sanctity. The more 
 sacred the site, the stronger was the impulse to adorn 
 it. If we ourselves could choose, we should prefer rather 
 to leave what was once made sacred scrupulously as it 
 was, reserving our gold or precious stone for the setting, 
 and carefiil not to let them come too near that which 
 was more precious than they. But we cannot be sur- 
 prised if the instinct of devotion has more often gone 
 the other way. The first thought is to give of our best, 
 and to draw near with it in our hands ; it is the second 
 thought to take the shoes from off the feet and to stand 
 afar off. 
 
 In one way or another the remains of the first century 
 are, for us, for the most part practically buried. But 
 even where they come to sight, it is by no means easy 
 to distinguish and identify them. For another conse- 
 fjuence of the manifold destructions and restorations 
 that the sites of the Holy Land have undergone is that 
 even the wreckage has been thrown into almost inextric- 
 able confusion. It is rarely that our explorers are able 
 to do as they did (e. g.) at Lachish, or as Schliemann did 
 at Troy — slice off as it were one layer of deposit after 
 another. That can only be done when the grass has 
 ' Cf. Mommert, Golgotha, pp. 72, 198-204. 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHRIST ii 
 
 grown over the mound, and its contents have been left 
 undisturbed. The later ruins of Palestine have not fared 
 thus, but they have been turned inside out and upside 
 down, so that the order of their succession is scarcely- 
 recoverable. At least it is not to be recovered on the 
 spur of the moment by the casual amateur who spends 
 his two or three weeks in Palestine. He will find his 
 eye insufficiently trained, and he will soon come to the 
 end of his criteria. He will do far better to resign 
 himself to the judgement of experts like the late 
 Dr. Schick or Dr. Bliss. 
 
 I have stated some of the difficulties that stand in the 
 way of an exact knowledge of the external aspect of 
 Palestine in the time of Christ. But an exact know- 
 ledge is one thing, a broad general conception of what 
 we are to picture to ourselves is another. Such a 
 conception is perhaps more within our reach. 
 
 Our object is to get back to the past through the 
 present. And we ask by what process of subtraction 
 and addition this can be done. 
 
 The answer would seem to be : first, that we must, so 
 far as we can, subtract the Saracen, or at least eliminate 
 so much of the Saracen as is not common to the whole 
 Semitic family. On the other hand, that which is so 
 common is perhaps the best basis that we have to build 
 upon. 
 
 Then we must also clear away from our minds all 
 traces of the Crusaders. I suspect that few will have 
 realized before going to Palestine how numerous and 
 important these traces are. The Crusaders planted down 
 their castles on every point of vantage, much as we may 
 
12 THE EXTERNAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 see them on the marclies of Wales or Scotland. On the 
 way up from Jaffa to Jerusalem we passed the great 
 fortress of Mont Gisart = Gezer [Tell Jezer), which is 
 now being excavated for the Palestine Exploration Fund. 
 A little further south, commanding the mouth of the 
 next main approach, was another great fortress, Blanche- 
 garde {Tell es-Sdjiyeh). On the way down to Jericho 
 we had full in view a Crusaders' fort on a height com- 
 manding the pass. As one goes north from Jerusalem 
 to Nablus and Nazareth, one passes a Kasr Berdawil 
 (Baldwin's Castle), and there is another of the same name 
 east of the Sea of Galilee. A little further there were 
 considerable ruins at Sin-jil(= Saint Giles). We left to 
 the right the strong castle of Belvoir near Bethshan, 
 and so on. The Crusaders had a succession of strong- 
 holds along the coast. And they built as many churches 
 as castles, and not only in the cities but in comparatively 
 remote villages. 
 
 The kingdom of Jerusalem lasted less than ninety 
 years (1099-1187) and the last Crusader was expelled in 
 1291. But in that short space of time it is astonishing 
 how they have written their names in stone all over 
 Palestine. 
 
 Next, we must raise the Jew, as we see him, to a 
 higher power. For this purpose we must utilize our 
 experience of the Jew at his best and under more 
 favourable conditions. Physically, and in force at least 
 of character, as well as in capacity for spiritual things, 
 we shall not do wrong to rate the Jews of our Lord's 
 day high in the scale. It is just a case- where corriiptio 
 optimi pessima: and we must be prepared for both 
 extremes. 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHEIST 13 
 
 We must allow for a difference between Galilee and 
 Jerusalem. In Jerusalem we must think of the kernel 
 of the population as consisting of pure Jews with the 
 national characteristics strongly marked. In the time 
 of the early Maccabees, the Jews of Galilee were a mere 
 Diaspora settled among the heathen ; so much so that 
 Simon had thought that he consulted best for their 
 safety by removing them with their wives and children 
 bodily to Judaea (i Mace. v. 23), as Judas also did with 
 the Jews of Gilead (ibid. 45). The more thorough 
 judaizing of this region seems to have been begun under 
 Hyrcanus, and to have been carried on under Aristo- 
 bulus I (105-104 B.C.). It proved very successful and 
 thorough. All through the great rising of a. d. 66 the 
 population of Galilee for the most part moved together, 
 and on the same lines as Judaea and the capital. Such 
 exceptions as Sepphoris and Tiberias hardly meant more 
 than a local preponderance of the party friendly to 
 Eome. In the rest of Galilee the less pure Jews and 
 the more pure made common cause. 
 
 The strict Jew held aloof from intercourse with the 
 foreigner. But in this respect there would be all shades, 
 and the thriving commercial life of Galilee weakened 
 the opposition, and gave a wider and more generous 
 outlook. The ruling powers, as might have been ex- 
 pected, and especially the Herods, were in much closer 
 sympathy with the current Graeco-Roman civilization ; 
 and they indulged this sympathy as far as they dared, 
 i. e. more freely in proportion to the distance from 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 It is on the side of this Graeco-Roman civilization 
 that we have to make the greatest addition to what 
 
14 THE EXTEENAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 we can now see in Palestine, and in regard to which, 
 we have to make the greatest efifort to restore to the 
 picture an element that is now wanting. To the eye 
 at least this quasi-classical culture derived from G-reece 
 and Rome counted for much more than it really did in 
 the deeper springs of the national life. Palestine had 
 not developed any art or architecture of its own. 
 Whoever desired to build at all on a large scale had 
 no choice but to follow Graeco-Roman models. And 
 the Herods were at once the great builders and the 
 most pronounced in their leanings towards Hellenism. 
 Hence all the great buildings of the time before or soon 
 after the birth of Christ were in their style and essence 
 Graeco-Roman. The Herodian Temple itself was this; 
 much more the Xystus, a large public colonnade con- 
 nected with the gymnasium, and the great fortified 
 palace which Herod had built for himself on the opposite 
 hill. No matter to what part of Palestine one went, 
 to east or to west, to centre or north — to Jericho or to 
 the port of Caesarea, to Samaria or to Tiberias, or to 
 Caesarea Philippi — wherever there was anything new 
 and splendid, it took this quasi-classical form. 
 
 If we look for specimens of the style in vogue at the 
 time among extant monuments, we shall find them best 
 among the tombs — that conspicuous group in the Valley 
 of Jehoshaphat, the so-called Tombs of Absalom, of 
 St. James and Zacharias, and the so-called Tombs of the 
 Kings and of the Judges ^ 
 
 ' To these may be added the remains, somewhat later, of what are 
 commonly thought to be synagogues in Galilee. I see that in a work 
 that has just appeared (Christmas, 1902), Dr. Biirkner, an eminent 
 German architectural writer, throws doubt on these synagogues 
 {Gesch. d. kircJil. Kunst, p. 7), but I think that they may be 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHRIST 15 
 
 If we wish to know what the details of style were like 
 in Herod's Temple itself the series of tombs may suggest 
 them. It may be taken as proved or at least highly 
 probable that the remarkable structure known as the 
 Tombs of the Kings is really the tomb of Helena of 
 Adiabene, with her son Izates and his prolific family, 
 eminent converts to Judaism between the time of Christ 
 and the destruction of Jerusalem. And this fixed date 
 gives us a key to that of the rest. In other words, it 
 supplies us with evidence enough to go upon as to the 
 style of the Herodian building ; and this is just what 
 we should have antecedently expected. It is the one 
 criticism that I could not help making upon Dr. Schick's 
 famous model of Herod's Temple, that the style is not 
 sufficiently classical, but is too much a rather colourless 
 invention of his own. Perhaps this is partly due to the 
 exigencies of the model, and to the necessity of having 
 recourse to invention in the case of the Temple of 
 Solomon. I would venture to think that even Perrot 
 and Chipiez, in their reproduction of the Solomonic 
 and post-exilian Temple, have not trusted enough to 
 analogies, and have given rather too free rein to their 
 own fancy. 
 
 Two factors between them must, I imagine, account 
 for nearly all the external and material expression of 
 the arts of life in the Palestine of the first century : 
 on the one hand, the common Semitic characteristics of 
 domestic furniture and dress, with slight local modifica- 
 tion ; and, on the other hand, for anything more ambi- 
 tious than this, forms borrowed ultimately from Greece 
 
 defended. At least I believe that they are probably synagogues, 
 though not so early as the time of our Lord. 
 
i6 THE EXTERNAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 and Italy ; so that after all, though we have no Palestinian 
 Pompeii, we may use Pompeii to some extent in re- 
 constructing our picture of Palestine. A Semitic people 
 with an external wash of Graeco-Roman or Hellenistic 
 culture is what we must think of. 
 
 Remove the Saracen ; multiply in number and heighten 
 in colouring the Jew; and substitute for all the varied 
 modem invasions the one invasion of this Graeco-Roman 
 culture ; and we shall be not far from that of which 
 we are in search. 
 
 As to the general aspect of the country, we must think 
 of it as far more populous and flourishing than it is at 
 the present day^. The population is roughly estimated 
 at about four times its present amount {2I millions as 
 against 650,000). The cities were larger and fall of new 
 and imposing buildings. The ports of Caesarea and 
 Ptolemais were good for their day, and rapidly expanding, 
 and crowded with traffic. In the country districts, the 
 villages in like manner were on a larger scale. In his 
 exaggerated way Josephus says that none of the villages 
 of Galilee had less than 15,000 inhabitants. They are 
 spoken of almost indifferently as 'villages' (Kw/xat) and 
 towns or ttoX^ls. The hillsides were lined with terraces 
 more numerous and in better repair. The fertile plains 
 along the coast or interspersed among the hills of Samaria 
 and Galilee were more completely cultivated. The 
 irrigation, which is still in some parts very good, was 
 more widely extended. Though the west of Jordan 
 
 ^ Tacitus, after his manner, hits oiF the leading characteristics of the 
 country in few strokes : ' Corpora hominum salubria et ferentia laborum. 
 Rari imbres, uber solum : fruges nostrum ad morem praeterque eas 
 balsamum et palmae ' {Uist. v. 6. 2). 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHRIST 17 
 
 was never thickly timbered, there were probably many 
 more trees growing in the open, and especially many 
 more fruit-trees than there are at present. The dis-/^^^°"T 
 content that existed then, as it exists now, was due to umivf -tu- 
 moral causes and not to material pressure. The aspect, 
 of the land must indeed have been bright and smiling ; 
 and if there were volcanic fires beneath the surface, they 
 were not the product of despair, but rather of irrepressible 
 hope and energy. The more fervid spirits lived in 
 a future which imagination painted for them crudely 
 but vividly ; and this future seemed so near that it 
 constantly beckoned to them to enter in and possess 
 it, while they on their part had no lack of courage to 
 grasp what was offered them. At this time the youth 
 of the nation were like hounds straining at the leash, 
 which the cooler and wiser heads were doing all in 
 their power to control ; for the time they were suc- 
 ceeding, but it was felt that the tension could not last 
 much longer. 
 
 The Jews of the present day are sustained by a more 
 subdued and distant enthusiasm. Of the other in- 
 habitants the middle-class Syrians have enterprise and 
 aspirations, but these are rather individual than national. 
 The Mahometan peasantry seem for the most part re- 
 signed, and will accept what fate has in store for them ; 
 but what this is to be will be determined elsewhere 
 than in Palestine. Happily England has no ambitions 
 of her own to serve : her interest is in the welfare of the 
 people for their own sake. But it is very doubtful 
 whether she can play more than the part of a sympathetic 
 spectator. 
 
i8 THE EXTEENAL ASPECT OF PALESTINE 
 
 NOTES ON PLATES I— XXII 
 
 The plates are intended to illustrate the main points in the 
 text Most of them will explain themselves ; but a few may 
 need some further words of comment. 
 
 Plate I. The minaret in the centre of the picture is in the 
 south-west corner of the modern barracks which are on the site 
 of the great Palace of Herod (comp. PI. XXXVII). A little to 
 the left of this are the two towers of the Jaffa Gate, of which 
 that to the right may be identified with the ancient Hippicus 
 (PI. XXXVIII). All the buildings to the left of this are modern. 
 The group that stands out rather conspicuously on the horizon 
 is the Latin Patriarchate. All this should of course be ignored 
 by any one who wishes to reconstruct for himself the ancient 
 Jerusalem. Of this the tower Hippicus formed the north-west 
 angle. It should be remembered, by way of compensation, 
 that the ancient city stretched some way further to the south. 
 The wall continued along the ridge beyond the point that we 
 have marked as the south-west angle. 
 
 Plate II. The Damascus Gate in its present form really 
 dates from Soliman the Magnificent (1537 a.d.), but thoroughly 
 retains the Saracenic character. 
 
 Plate IV. This view of the Dome of the Rock is taken from 
 the south. The spectator has his back to the Mosque el-Aksa. 
 During the possession of Jerusalem by the Crusaders (1099-1 187) 
 a cross took the place of the crescent at the top of the Dome. 
 
 Plate V. The decoration of the exterior of the Dome (the 
 encaustic tiles and stained glass) dates generally from the six- 
 teenth century. 
 
 Plate VI. It is unfortunate that no satisfactory photo- 
 graphic reproduction can be given of the interior of the Dome, 
 which is the most characteristic feature. The view represented 
 is of the ambulatory which surrounds the sacred rock. The 
 pillars and capitals probably came from Christian churches. 
 The marble casing that we now see is, I believe, of the six- 
 teenth century. 
 
 I 
 
Plate III. 
 
 SARACENIC JERUSALEM : STREET SCENE, 
 
Plate VII. 
 
 THE HOLY PLACES : CHAPEL OF THE HOLY SEPULCHRE. 
 
i UNlVEt 
 
 OF 
 
OF TH "" 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF 
 
OF THE 
 
^"f 
 
OF THE 
 
 /ERSJTY 
 
■'SU'-I^' 
 
 
 • % 
 
 
 %'^m. 
 
■ OF 
 
 UNIVE'SiTY 
 
 OF 
 
IN THE TIME OF CHEIST 19 
 
 Plate VIII. Between the Greek Chapel of the Exaltation 
 of the Cross and the Latin Chapel of the Crucifixion is the 
 traditional Cleft in the Eock. The floor of these chapels is 
 about 15 ft. above the main floor of the church. 
 
 Plate IX. The silver star under the altar bears the in- 
 scription ' Hie de Virgine Maria lesus Christus natus est.' 
 
 Plate X. There is fair reason to believe that the pillars 
 and capitals shown in this plate are really Constantino's work. 
 If not, they are of the time of Justinian. 
 
 Plates XVI A and B. The site of Samaria was really still 
 more imposing than would appear from the photograph. It 
 was an isolated hill, of which the highest point lies behind and 
 considerably above the minaret of the mosque, which has been 
 formed out of a Crusaders' church. The ' Street of Columns ' 
 ran round the hill and was built by Herod the Great. Un- 
 fortunately, in the short time at our disposal we did not suc- 
 ceed in finding a capital; but they were probably like those 
 at Gerasa (PL XXI). 
 
 Plate XXI. There is a very full article on Gerasa, 
 abundantly illustrated with plans and photographs, by Herr 
 Schumacher in ZDPV. xxv (1902), pp. 109-177. 
 
II 
 
 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Palestine is a land of ruins : and it might also be 
 described as a land of legends. The legends, as well 
 Mahometan as Christian, are just what the tourist is told 
 most assiduously. They are expected to interest him, 
 and the supposed demand creates the supply. In the 
 process of manufacture the smallest items of the sacred 
 history acquire a local habitation. "We are shown the 
 site of the house of the Holy Family at Nazareth, which 
 was carried away in the night first to Dalmatia and then 
 to its present resting-place at Loreto ; and we are not 
 only shown this, but also the very spot where the Angel 
 Gabriel stood at the Annunciation. At Jericho we are 
 taken to the house of Zacchaeus. At Bethany we have 
 pointed out, not only the house of Mary and Martha, 
 but also a separate house as that of Simon the Leper; 
 and we are told where the sisters went to meet our Lord 
 on His approach. It is well known how in the Church 
 of the Holy Sepulchre every detail in the history of the 
 Passion has a definite place assigned to it. 
 
 The process is easy. Any prominent object that catches 
 the eye and that might conceivably suit the narrative is 
 at once transferred from the region o{ posse to that of esse. 
 Tne first time it is, 'Perhaps or probably this was the 
 scene,' &c. The next time ' perhaps ' or ' probably ' has 
 dropped out, and an opinion soon hardens into a 
 tradition. 
 
)F JERUSALEM 
 
II 
 
 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Palestine is a land of ruins: and it might also be 
 described as a land of legends. Tiie legends, as well 
 Mahometan as Christian, are just what the tourist is told 
 most assiduously. They are expected to interest him, 
 and the supposed demand creates the supply. In the 
 process of manufacture the smallest items of the sacred 
 history acquire a local habitation. We are shown the 
 site of the house of the Holy Family at Nazareth, which 
 was carried away in the night first to Dalmatia and then 
 to its present resting-place at Loreto; and we are not 
 only shown this, but also the very spot where the Angel 
 Gabriel stood at the Annunciation. At Jericho we are 
 taken to the house of Zacchaeus. At Bethany we have 
 pointed out, not only the house of Mary and Martha, 
 but also a separate house as that of Simon the Leper ; 
 and we are told where the sisters went to meet our Lord 
 on His approach. It is well known how in the Church 
 of the Holy Sepulchre every detail in the history of the 
 Passion has a definite place assigned to it. 
 
 The process is easy. Any prominent object that catches 
 the eye and that might conceivably suit the narrative is 
 at once transferred from the region of posse to that of esse. 
 Tne first time it is, 'Perhaps or probably this was the 
 scene,' &c. The next time ' perhaps ' or ' probably ' has 
 dropped out, and an opinion soon hardens into a 
 tradition. 
 
ENVIRONS OF JERUSALEM 
 
 _, 
 
 
 ; -4 < ■"- ;"--'-'%, 
 
 ,^^p 
 
 ^^ t ;pi^''', %:^ 
 
 J^^^^ri^. MIZ^H 
 
 ' ; /f ^ r"'"'.'-'-;^--"'^"""" 
 
 y'^''^^^''' '^^^A^^^'- 
 
 [ : il •Tiii'k-Fuiy' ...,:-"'""\ 
 
 1 ': ' ' '. n ' 
 
 t\\ CC'BEAH OF SaUI^ ■ 
 
 ; '' S,--'"''^: \ H. 
 
 \ \ ,_ '^^^ ;' •ANATHOTH ...,,^ 
 
 -■'''^■.^Ji^' ''• ^ 
 
 Sjftom •'' V'"^^ •--, ,'-'"''' ji^^°°°^ 
 
 
 ^^^ A. '.,, -'^^^ ^^ 
 
 y JAFFA ^'i^^ Q,' 
 
 ; jff^^^^ 
 
 ^^-=^^^Q^^&^^°''.-. ^ 
 
 -'-> --C 
 
 T^^^^^^, 
 
 ,-' ' "'' yAinjfajrim. 
 
 \ jr /j)r°¥ ■#^~^^"'^'^'^ 
 
 0^^'°^^'**'=°°°^'^ 
 
 '•) *°*^wV'^'^^ ' -*• '''' 
 
 jT^"^'^^ 't--'~^ ... 
 
 .J '^^ \? -.^^V'-'^ 1-'-''' 
 
 '"' '^~'' 
 
 xl S ' " V- "'■ \v 
 
 \ Bethen "-^, %_ \ 
 
 ; , M^ ""'''^ '\^N .^-. 
 
 «;- ~- 
 
 / ' /J^ Vi ; ) ^ \\ ■ "■^^^■:,i^^fe 
 
 ) \ ■ \pf^ 
 
 w^li vts^s^ 
 
 ^==7==^V^^y^^'' .- ■'" 
 
 ,i#>^jBrrm£HEM~~~-J5i5^^ i- 
 
 /C ' • ' * fi^ 
 
 f'jH/^^'^^^^'^^Y^ '.«-'. .f^ 1 
 
 -'""■---, /^XJ- " " ;^ 
 
 <-.'-'. yw V- ■^Q^C^ 
 
 C Vn'-%. --"''"' "i"' '- "• •'«V,=^ 
 
 \ ( ^^ /^omM,h^U "S^ ^^'f. _.---■' • ' ' 'W.I 1 
 
 
 VV ^^ -B- Reference. ^ 
 
 ' i '* <^ 
 
 - '''^V ■^^^'«'"~> BMical Names tfms mzpf^H • 
 
 '■\ Y- ^ 
 
 / ' ^ . •' :, 
 
 '•Ti^_, ^^==^5,V,^.:.:.^orfer/i, .. -, BitJala,o 
 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 21 
 
 The tendency is so deep-rooted in human nature that 
 we find it as actively at work in the fourth century as 
 it is now. The pilgrim commonly known as Silvia of 
 Aquitaine, who visited the Holy Land and the East 
 about the year 385, not only had the scenes of the Old 
 Testament history pointed out to her as confidently as 
 those of the New, but she visits Edessa and there too 
 is shown and accepts quite as implicitly all the mythical 
 scenes of the Letter to Abgarus. Even before Silvia, 
 the Bordeaux pilgrim of the year 333 was told details 
 equally minute and equally apocryphal. 
 
 I do not know that we need be too severe on the 
 thousands of simple-minded pilgrims who now and in 
 the past have taken all the stories told them for gospel. 
 Their devotion is touching; and we cannot perhaps 
 wholly enter into the state of mind by which it is 
 accompanied. After all, they do but use these external 
 helps as symbols to bring home to their minds something 
 spiritual and intangible. Our symbols may be a little 
 more adequate, but they too are really only approximate, 
 and the use to which we put them is the same. 
 
 It would be a mistake if, as some are inclined to do, 
 we were at once to jump to the conclusion that because 
 there is a great deal of legend abroad, therefore nothing 
 was trustworthy and nothing could be verified accurately 
 enough to deserve attention. The historian is not like 
 the philosopher. He does not demand certainties or 
 great comprehensive truths. For him, as for Bishop 
 Butler, ' probability is the very guide of life ' ; and he 
 is content with a low degree of probability where he 
 cannot have a high one. 
 
 A fair proportion of the Gospel sites can be identified 
 
22 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 quite satisfactorily ; and in regard to others, the 
 alternatives lie within measurable compass. I doubt if 
 there are more than two where evidence altogether fails 
 us : and of those two it is possible that one may dissolve 
 away upon examination. 
 
 This is Dalmanutha in St. Mark viii. lo: 'And 
 straightway He entered into the boat with His disciples, 
 and came into the parts of Dalmanutha.' Now there is 
 a sort of combe hollowed out in the hillside about mid- 
 way, or a little more than midway, between Tiberias and 
 Magdala on the west of the Sea of Galilee ; and at the 
 foot of this combe there are springs which are called 
 in Baedeker 'Ain el-Bdrideh (in the Exploration Fund 
 map "Ain el-Fuliyeh). Dr. Tristram suggested that this 
 was the site of Dalmanutha \ and the dragomans go so 
 far as to speak of the valley as Wady Dalmanutha. But 
 except that the situation roughly corresponds to what 
 is wanted, there is no other evidence. 
 
 The parallel passage in St. Matt. xv. 39 has (in the 
 true text) ' Magadan,' which appears to be a variant of 
 Magdala^. Critically Dalmanutha is preferable, as it 
 stands in the older authority (St. Mark). But why 
 it should have been altered to Magadan is rather a 
 problem. Rendel Harris and Nestle proposed, in- 
 dependently of each other, to take Dalmanutha as a 
 misreading of the Aramaic equivalent of ct? to. {xiprj. 
 This, perhaps, is not probable ^ ; and though more may 
 be said for regarding Dalmanutha as a corruption of 
 
 * The Land of Israel, p. 425. 
 
 2 Cf. the MSS. of the LXX of Josh. xv. 37, as quoted in Dr. Swete's 
 note on Mark viii. 10. 
 ' See Dalman, Wotie Jesu, p. 53. 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 23 
 
 Magdalutha, that also cannot be verified. We must, 
 however, leave open the possibility of some deep-seated 
 corruption. 
 
 The other site, for which there are no direct data, is 
 Bethany beyond Jordan, the true reading of St. John i. 28. 
 
 The authorities for the reading * Bethany ' are over- 
 whelming. They include not only the oldest MSS. (D 
 is not extant at this point) but also the great majority 
 of the versions, among them the Latin. The only first- 
 rate witness on the other side is the Old Syriac (both 
 Curetonian and Sinaitic), which is, however, on account of 
 this reading and one or two others, open to the suspicion 
 of having come under the influence of Origen. For while 
 Origen tells us expressly that ' Bethany beyond Jordan ' 
 was read in ' nearly all the copies ' of his day, he himself 
 was not able to find a place of that name on the Jordan, 
 and advised the substitution of Bethabara— whether 
 with or without MS. authority does not quite appear. 
 
 Bethabara has, I think, been satisfactorily identified by 
 Col. Conder with a ford "Ahdra on the Jordan, slightly 
 to the NE. of Beisdn (Scythopolis). And Origen would 
 seem to have had some ground in tradition for regarding 
 it as a place where John had baptized. It is possible — 
 we cannot say more — that Bethany may have been not far 
 away (see further on Aenon and Salim below, also p. 94). 
 
 The means by which we are enabled to identify sites 
 are two: partly through the persistence of ancient 
 names, and partly by direct tradition. 
 
 I shall proceed to give illustrations of each of these 
 methods. And in doing so it will be convenient to 
 take first the sites mentioned in the Gospels outside 
 
24 SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 
 
 Jerusalem, and then those in Jerusalem. It happens 
 accidentally that identification by survival of names is 
 more largely illustrated in the former, and identification 
 by tradition in the latter. 
 
 In many cases the process is quite simple. The 
 modern en-Nd.fira is certainly Nazareth; the modern 
 Bet Lahm as certainly Bethlehem ; Cana is either Kefr 
 Kenna or Kdnet el-Jeltl ^ ; the village of Nain is still Nain 
 and Magdala Mejt^eZ 2 . Chorazin is still iTe/'d^e/t ; Bethany 
 is not much disguised under the name el-Azariyeh. 
 
 Just a word should be said about some of these names. 
 
 There is no real doubt about Chorazin, though the 
 identification was questioned by Dr. Edward Eobinson, 
 the American traveller, to whom the topography of 
 Palestine owes so much that he might still be called its 
 leading master. He does not seem to have seen the 
 whole of the ruins ; and he did not go up to or examine 
 them. They lie at about an hour's distance from Tell 
 J}um and nearly due north, partly in the hollow formed 
 by a stream and partly above it. The place appears to 
 have been of some importance. 
 
 The village of Nain is a conspicuous object on the 
 northern slope of Nebi Dahi (Little Hermon), the great 
 eastern buttress of the plain of Esdraelon, and a striking 
 feature in the landscape. A white Franciscan church 
 gleams in the distance. 
 
 'To the east of Nain, by the roadside, about ten 
 
 ^ I believe that the most probable site of all is neither of these, 
 but 'Ain Kdnd, rather nearer to Nazareth than Kefr Kenna. Dr. Guthe 
 appears to lean to this ; but the arguments in the case are philological, 
 and do not come within my province. 
 
 ^ Dr. Cheyne questions this (art. ' Galilee ' in JEmcj/c/. Bibl. ii. 1635). 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 25 
 
 minutes' walk from the village, lies the ancient burying- 
 ground, still used by the Moslems ; and probably on this 
 very path our Lord met that sorrowing procession. A 
 few oblong piles of stones, and one or two small built 
 graves with whitened plaster, are all that mark the 
 unfenced spot^.' 
 
 There are two Bethlehems, the second in Galilee about 
 seven miles west of Nazareth ; and it has recently been 
 suggested (in the new volume of the Encyclopaedia 
 Biblica) that this Galilean Bethlehem may be the true 
 scene of the Nativity. There would be real advantages 
 if Bethlehem could be thought of as near to Nazareth. 
 But to obtain this result we have to go entirely behind 
 our Gospels. Both St. Matthew and St. Luke are express 
 in placing the birth of Christ at Bethlehem of Judaea. 
 And as their narratives are wholly independent of each 
 other and differ in most other respects, it is clear that 
 we have on this point a convergence of two distinct 
 traditions. 
 
 A good instance of the preservation of an ancient 
 name is supplied by the scene of the miracle of what is 
 commonly called the Gadarene demoniac. 
 
 As one looks across the lake from Tiberias, the eastern 
 side appears to be formed by a single mountain wall 
 averaging some 1,500 feet in height, with a few clefts 
 in it, where ravines come down to the sea. Of these 
 ravines the most considerable is the "Wady Semak, a 
 little north of midway up the side. At the mouth of 
 this ravine I had pointed out to me a tiny patch darker 
 in colour than its surroundings. These are the ruins of 
 Khersa or Kersa. I have practically no doubt that these 
 
 * Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 127!. 
 
26 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 ruins mark the place which gave its name to the miracle ; 
 and that in spite of Baedeker, who speaks with some 
 reserve of ' an attempt ... to identify Kersa with Gergesa 
 (Matt. viii. 28), although Mark v. i and other passages 
 read Gadara." Baedeker is an excellent book; but in 
 this instance the editor (the late Prof. A. Socin of 
 Leipzig) has omitted to call in either the Higher Criticism 
 or the Lower, which happen to be here of much im- 
 portance. 
 
 The Higher Criticism tells us that we must take as 
 our starting-point the Gospel of St. Mark. The Lower 
 Criticism determines for us the text both of that and of 
 its two companion Gospels. 
 
 The true text of Mark v. i is quite certainly not 
 ' Gadarenes ' but ' Gerasenes.' Critics of both the leading 
 schools must agree in this: because the reading ' Gerasenes ' 
 has in its favour not only the oldest and best Greek 
 MSS. but also the "Western text as represented by the 
 Latin versions. 
 
 In Matt. viii. 28 the best-attested Greek reading is 
 * Gadarenes,' and the Western reading ' Gerasenes,' which 
 however is open to the suspicion of being assimilated to 
 St. Mark. In Luke viii. 26, 37 the best reading also 
 seems to be ' Gerasenes,' though a group of MSS. of some 
 importance has ' Gergesenes.' This probably betrays the 
 influence of Origen. We cannot doubt that the oldest 
 reading is ' Gerasenes,' on which ' Gtidarenes ' is a later 
 gloss. ' Gerasenes ' and ' Gergesenes ' alike are attempts 
 to represent the adjective of the local name which 
 survives under the form Kersa. 
 
 The textual and the topographical problem are thus, 
 I cannot but think, satisfactorily cleared up. A genera- 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 27 
 
 tion ago both were very doubtful. If we look (e. g.) at 
 Alford's note, he is unable to solve either. In St. Mark 
 he reads ' Gergesenes,' which is certainly wrong ; he 
 follows Matthew (when he should follow Mark), and 
 treats the original reading as ' Gadarenes ' ; and he does 
 not know whether or not there was any place corre- 
 sponding to Gerasa or Gergesa on the lake at all. The 
 doubt on that head is now set at rest. 
 
 The travellers' descriptions are agreed that only the 
 neighbourhood of Kersa satisiies the conditions of the 
 miracle. Not only are there tombs near at hand, but here 
 alone is there a cliff that falls sheer almost into the lake. 
 Elsewhere there is a strip of some breadth between the 
 cliffs and the sea ^. 
 
 It is worth while to remember this convergence of 
 data, textual, topographical and historical, taken separately 
 and weighed with the strictest objectivity, when we come 
 to consider the character of the narrative and of the 
 miracle which it contains. 
 
 There remains just one question. How is it, we may 
 ask, that the Decapolitan city Gerasa is now represented 
 by Jerash, while Gerasa or Gergesa on the Sea of Galilee 
 is represented by Kersa or Kursi ? 
 
 The first point is to be sure as to the form of the 
 name. On this our authorities are explicit. Dr. Thomson, 
 who first rediscovered the place, writes thus : — 
 
 ' The name of this prostrate town is Kerza (sic) or Gersa 
 as my Bedawin guide shouted it in my ear the first 
 time I visited it, on that windy day we have been 
 describing.' 
 
 ^ Thomson, The Land and the Book (ed. 1901), p. 377; Schumacher, 
 Jauldn, p. 180 ; Buhl, Geog. d. alien PaMstina, p. 243. [See however 
 p. 93 below.] 
 
28 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 And again : — 
 
 'The name, however, pronounced by Bedawin Arabs, 
 is so similar to Gergesa, that to all my inquiries for 
 this place, they invariably said it was at Chersa {sic) ; and 
 they insisted that they were identical, and I agree with 
 them in this opinion.' 
 
 And Herr Schumacher : — 
 
 ' According to the statements of the Bedawin, it [i. e. 
 a round tower built above the ruin] bears the name 
 Kersa, or Kursu (sic), because it is not unlike a stool, 
 whilst the already-mentioned walls on the lake are 
 called es-Sur. Nevertheless, what is usually under- 
 stood by Kersa is the ruin generally.' 
 
 There is an important note by the veteran geographer 
 Dr. K. Furrer, of Zurich : — 
 
 ' That Kersa (the first discoverer of the place, Thomson, 
 writes Gersa, Schumacher Kursi) may, so far as the 
 sounds are concerned, be identified with Gerasa, no one 
 will doubt who, for instance, knows that the Gabara of 
 Josephus corresponds to the modern Kahra. That there 
 was a place Gerasa (Origen thought that it should be 
 written Gergesa) on the eastern shore of the lake was 
 known not only to Origen, who on his repeated journeys 
 to Bostra may have been personally acquainted with this 
 district, but also to Burchardus (1283), who remarks: 
 Gerasa civitas in littore maris sita Galilee, suh monte Seyr 
 (by which he means the highlands of Jolan) contra 
 Tiberiadem fere, sed modicum declinans ad aquilonem. 
 Learned men have very often been, as it were, blind to 
 the fact that the name Gerasa belongs to several different 
 places. "When this name occurred they alwaj-s supposed 
 themselves bound to think of the far-famed Gerasa in 
 Peraea, and had no notion how strongly it speaks for the 
 fidelity of the topographical tradition of the Evangelists 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 29 
 
 when they mention an otherwise obscure place of the 
 same name. Many copyists wrote Gadara for Gerasa, 
 because they knew nothing of the place so called on 
 the eastern shore of the lake, while Gadara through its 
 poets and thinkers was familiar to persons of Greek 
 education. But those who were locally better informed 
 knew of our Gerasa quite late, as Marino Sanudo in 
 the fourteenth century. A faint knowledge of the fact 
 is echoed in Willibaldus, Theodericus, Joh. Wirzibur- 
 gensis, when they put Chorazin in place of Gerasa. . . . 
 There seems therefore to be no necessity to look for the 
 Gerasa of the Gospels elsewhere than at Kersa at the 
 mouth of the Wddi es-Samak ^.' 
 
 I am not able to speak as a philologist, but I would 
 venture to make a suggestion for the consideration of 
 philologists. Schumacher tells us expressly that 'the 
 remains date from two periods : a more ancient one, from 
 which only scattered building stones and foundations 
 are still extant, and a more recent one, probably Eoman.' 
 May it not be that whereas Gerasa of Decapolis was 
 a city of Greek foundation, so that the Greek name 
 would be primary and directly represented by Jerash, 
 Kersa or Kursi may stand for a more ancient name of 
 which Gerasa or Gergesa are attempted Greek equiva- 
 lents ? 
 
 Another identification that I think we should say, but 
 for a single hitch, works out neatly and satisfactorily 
 is in regard to the Emmaus of St. Luke xxiv. 13. Here, 
 as I will explain in a moment, the persistence of the 
 name is indirect rather than direct, but is not on that 
 account less convincing. 
 
 To Eusebius and Jerome, and throughout the earlier 
 
 1 ZDPV. xxi (1898), p. 184 f. 
 
30 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Middle Ages, this Emmaus was the well-known city of 
 that name, at the foot of the Judaean hills, the Emmaus 
 Nicopolis mentioned often in the Books of Maccabees, 
 which in the third century was the home of Julius 
 Africanus. 
 
 This, however, is much too far frpm Jerusalem. And 
 although a group of authorities headed by Cod. Sinaiticus 
 reads ' i6o furlongs ' for sixty, that must no doubt be 
 dismissed as a correction. 
 
 On the whole, the more fashionable identification is 
 with the village of el-Kubebeh, where the Franciscans 
 have built a monastery on the site of a Crusaders' 
 church. But the tradition which identifies this with 
 Emmaus does not begin until the fourteenth, or at the 
 earliest the twelfth century, and I need not say is quite 
 worthless. [But see p. 92.] 
 
 A far more promising claimant is a village that bears 
 the name of Kaloniyeh, on the road from Jerusalem to 
 Jaffa. We are expressly told by Josephus that after 
 the Jewish war Titus planted a colony of 800 veterans 
 at a village called Emmaus near Jerusalem {B. J. vii. 
 6. 6). And just as Megiddo is now called Lejjun from 
 the fact that a Roman legion had a station there, so also 
 does Emmaus survive under an Arabic transliteration of 
 the Latin Colonia. Besides the mention in Josephus, 
 the place appears to be also alluded to in the Talmud. 
 
 One of the first to propose this identification was 
 C. E. Caspari in his Chro7iologisch-geographische Einlelt- 
 ung (Hamburg, 1869). He thought himself the first, 
 but found he had been anticipated (p. 208). As he 
 presents the case, it is still more complete than I have 
 stated. Caspari made Josephus, like St. Luke, give the 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 31 
 
 distance of Emmaus from Jerusalem as ' sixty furlongs.' 
 "We now know, however, that the best MSS. of Josephus 
 have ' thirty furlongs ' instead of sixty ^ ; and this is really 
 much nearer to the true distance (which is about thirty- 
 four). There is the hitch ; but I find it difficult to allow 
 this to break up a chain of proof that is otherwise 
 so complete. St. Luke tells the story at secondhand, 
 perhaps from hearsay ; and his figures must not be 
 taken too strictly. The change of name to Colonia would 
 account for the lost tradition. 
 
 Kaloniyeh is a pretty and flourishing village within 
 an easy walk of Jerusalem, and with some traces of 
 ancient foundations. 
 
 Topographers and commentators are now pretty well 
 agreed that St. John's Sychar (iv. 5) is the modem ^Ain 
 ^Askar, situated at the foot of Mount Ebal, about a mile 
 from Nablus and rather less from Jacob's Well. The 
 principal difficulty is the question why the woman should 
 have gone all the way to Jacob's "Well when, as the 
 modem name implies, there is a good spring in the 
 village of 'Askar itself. 
 
 This question has something in common with another 
 which arises as to Jacob's "Well itself. How is it that 
 the well comes to be where it is, seeing that it is itself 
 mainly artificial, while Nablus and the immediate neigh- 
 bourhood abounds in natural springs ? In a communica- 
 tion to the Palestme Exploration Fund Quarterly (PEFQ.) 
 for 1897, p. 197, Dr. H. J. Bailey quotes from a Mr. Mills, 
 who had resided for three months at Nablus, to the effect 
 that ' the well is not an 'ain, a well of living water, but 
 a her, a cistern to hold rain-water.' Dr. Bailey adds : — 
 ^ See Niese's apparatus criticua ad loc. 
 
32 SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 
 
 ' The observations of various writers confirm this view, 
 which well accords with the fact that for many years 
 comparatively little water found its way into the well, 
 as the surrounding surface has been neglected and in a 
 ruinous state. An examination of the spot shows that 
 the true mouth of the well is some distance below the 
 surrounding surface, and was made in such a position as 
 to ensure a large quantity of rain-water finding its way 
 into the well. The Greek custodians have lately cleared 
 the surroundings and mouth of the well, and the 
 immediate result, in spite of the many feet of accumu- 
 lated rubbish in the well itself, is a far better and more 
 constant supply of water. There can, therefore, be little 
 doubt that rain-water plays a large part in the supply 
 of this well, and that the keen and accurate perceptions 
 of the natives have long detected an essential difference 
 in the quality of the water as compared with the 
 surrounding springs.' 
 
 The reason assigned for the sinking of the well is to 
 avoid collision with the natives of the district who had 
 rights, which they would jealously maintain, in the springs 
 of the neighbourhood. 
 
 In any case we must take Jacob's Well as we find it. 
 It would be rash to suppose any transfer of the name 
 of a spot already so well known and so greatly venerated 
 at the beginning of the Christian era. 
 
 In regard to the woman of Sychar, it is true that 
 her presence precisely at that spot and at that time of 
 the day (noon) needs some explanation. The usual time 
 for drawing water was early morning or evening. It is 
 possible that the special sacredness and real excellence 
 of the water (on a hot day it is beautifully soft and 
 refreshing) had something to do with it. But perhaps 
 the best suggestion is one put forward {PEFQ. ut sup. 
 
32 SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 
 
 ' The observations of various -writers confirm this view, 
 which well accords with the fact that for many years 
 comparatively little water found its way into the well, 
 as the surrounding surface has been neglected and in a 
 ruinous state. An examination of the spot shows that 
 the true mouth of the well is some distance below the 
 surrounding surface, and was made in such a position as 
 to ensure a large quantity of rain-water finding its way 
 into the well. The Greek custodians have lately cleared 
 the surroundings and mouth of the well, and the 
 immediate result, in spite of the many feet of accumu- 
 lated rubbish in the well itself, is a far better and more 
 constant supply of water. There can, therefore, be little 
 doubt that rain-water plays a large part in the supply 
 of this well, and that the keen and accurate perceptions 
 of the natives have long detected an essential difference 
 in the quality of the water as compared with the 
 surrounding springs.' 
 
 The reason assigned for the sinking of the well is to 
 avoid collision with the natives of the district who had 
 rights, which they would jealously maintain, in the springs 
 of the neighbourhood. 
 
 In any case we must take Jacob's Well as we find it. 
 It would be rash to suppose any transfer of the name 
 of a spot already so well known and so greatly venerated 
 at the beginning of the Christian era. 
 
 In regard to the woman of Sychar, it is true that 
 her presence precisely at that spot and at that time of 
 the day (noon) needs some explanation. The usual time 
 for drawing water was early morning or evening. It is 
 possible that the special sacredness and real excellence 
 of the water (on a hot day it is beautifully soft and 
 refreshing) had something to do with it. But perhaps 
 the best suggestion is one put forward {PEFQ. ut sup. 
 
ENVIRONS OF NABLUS. 
 
 e Tl 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 33 
 
 p. 149) by Dr. H. C. Trumbull of Philadelphia, U.S.A., 
 known for his researches on Kadesh Bamea, that the 
 woman was not engaged in fetching water for her 
 household but for workmen employed on the adjacent 
 cornlands. There is no profit in pursuing a question of 
 this kind further. We cannot be sure of exhausting 
 the local needs and casual motives of nearly nineteen 
 hundred years ago. 
 
 Before descending to Jacob's Well I had looked down 
 from the northern summit of Mount Gerizim on the 
 village of Sdlim as it lies peacefully on the slope of 
 the shallow basin which collects the first waters of the 
 Wddy el-Fdr'a. Some way lower down the valley there 
 are some ruins on the top of a hill that bear the name 
 of 'Ainun. Many writers identify these two places with 
 the 'Aenon near to Salim' of St. John iii. 23. The 
 most confident of these writers is the editor of the new 
 Macmillan's Guide. He says : — 
 
 * On the north side of Wady Farah [el-Far'a] stands an 
 old ruined site called 'Ainun, and undoubtedly marking 
 the site of Aenon, mentioned by St. John with Salim. . . . 
 Here then we have one of the few absolute certainties of 
 sacred spots in Palestine : and it was undoubtedly at these 
 head waters of the Wady Farah that the Baptist was 
 exercising his functions when he was taken prisoner by 
 Herod Antipas.' 
 
 Macmillan's Guide is pleasantly and readably written ; 
 at times rather diffuse, when it need not be, but as a 
 rule practical and well suited for those who do not desire 
 to be overburdened with information. But I cannot 
 think that the editor is happy in his identifications, and 
 
34 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 still less in the confidence with which he speaks of some 
 of them. 'Ainiin is about seven miles as the crow flies 
 from JSdlim, with two considerable ridges intervening; 
 it would be much more by the track that does duty for 
 a road ; so that it would be strange if it were described 
 as ' near to Salim ' ; and strange also that ruins on the 
 top of a hill should mark a spot where ' there was much 
 water.' ' Here is precisely the name Aenon ; but un- 
 fortunately there is no Salim near, nor a drop of water,' 
 is Dr. Robinson's summary verdict ^. 
 
 Both Eusebius and Jerome expressly place Aenon and 
 Salim in the Jordan valley eight Roman miles south 
 of Scythopolis (Beisdn), and the two sites were certainly 
 shown here in the fourth century. The pilgrim Silvia's 
 description of her visit to them is interesting. She was 
 shown the city of Melchizedek, formerly called Salem 
 but then ' corruptly Sedima.' This was on a low hill 
 on the top of which stood a church ; and near to it were 
 the foundations of what she was told was Melchizedek's 
 palace. Remembering that St. John was said to have 
 baptized in Aenon near to Salim she asked the presbyter 
 in charge how far it was. 
 
 'Then said the holy presbyter: There it is two 
 hundred paces off; if you please I wiU take you there 
 on foot. The stream that you see in the village, 
 so copious and so pure, comes from that fountain. 
 Then I began to thank him and to beg him to conduct 
 us to the place, which he did. So we began at once 
 to go on foot all the way down a delightful valley until 
 we came to a very pleasant orchard, where he showed 
 
 ' Biblical Researches, iii. 305; cf. Sir C. Wilson, art. 'Aenon' in 
 Smith's Diet. Bihl 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 35 
 
 us in the midst a spring of water very good and pure 
 which sent forth a full stream in one jet. In front of 
 it the spring had a sort of basin, in which it appeared 
 that St. John had baptized. Then said the holy pres- 
 byter to us, This orchard is now called in Greek nothing 
 but "the garden of St. John," which is what you call in 
 Latin hortus sancti lohannis. For many holy monks 
 our brethren, coming from different places, are eager to 
 bathe here^' 
 
 Silvia goes on to tell how she said her prayers and 
 read a lesson and sang an appropriate psalm, as she was 
 accustomed at the sacred sites, and then after more talk 
 and hospitality went thankfully on her way. 
 
 The most satisfactory concise account of the present 
 condition of the site is that by Sir Charles Wilson (and 
 the late Sir George Grove) in the article in the second 
 edition of Smith's Dictionary referred to above. 
 
 'In the Jordan valley, about seven and a half miles 
 from Beisdn (Scythopolis), there is a remarkable group 
 of seven springs, all lying within a radius of a quarter 
 of a mile, which answers to the description "many 
 waters." Close to the springs are the considerable ruins 
 of Umm el-Amddn, and about three-quarters of a mile 
 to the north is Tell Ridhghah, an artificial mound, on 
 the top of which is the tomb of SheiJch Sdlim. This 
 is almost certainly the spot indicated by Eusebius and 
 Jerome, and there is nothing remarkable in the dis- 
 appearance of the ruins when it is considered that such 
 important towns as Jericho and Antipatris have entirely 
 disappeared.' 
 
 If we are right in supposing that Bethany beyond 
 Jordan was not very far from Bethabara, we shall then 
 have a little group of sites in a northern section of the 
 
 1 Itin. Hieros. (1898), p. 57 f. 
 D 2 
 
36 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 course of the Jordan wliicli were the scene of the* 
 Baptist's activity, as well as those in the neighbourhood 
 of Jericho. There is no reason to give up the latter, 
 which are not only marked by the great body of 
 tradition down to the present day, but are also suggested 
 by the nature of the case. "When St. John first appears 
 in the Synoptic narrative we are told that 'there went 
 out unto him all the country of Judaea and all they of 
 Jerusalem.' For the inhabitants of the southern province 
 the most accessible point would be the ford or fords near 
 Jericho \ A more northerly site would draw upon the 
 inhabitants of Galilee and Decapolis. It is probable 
 enough that the Baptist moved from place to place. 
 
 I pass on to a subject that was much in my thoughts 
 in going to Palestine, the question as to the true site 
 of Capernaum. This question so affects the very heart of 
 our Lord's ministry that I was specially anxious to reach 
 a clear decision upon it ; and although I came back with 
 some of the data more firmly apprehended and confirmed 
 in my general view of the probabilities of the case, 
 I could not feel that all the difficulties were removed 
 or that the question was wholly solved. 
 
 I am not here to make out a case for one site or 
 another. I am here first to form for myself and then 
 to try to convey to you as truthful an impression as 
 I can. And I believe that I shall discharge this latter 
 duty best if I may be allowed to carry your thoughts 
 
 ^ The place to whicli pilgrims at present resort is a little to the 
 south of that indicated by mediaeval tradition, which is just above 
 the Greek monastery of St. John. This monastery occupies the site 
 of one which is said to have been erected by the Empress Helena and 
 was in existence in the time of Justinian. 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 37 
 
 along the same track that was taken by my own. In other 
 words, I will £rst sketch the history of the problem, 
 as it was present to my mind before I left home. Then 
 I will try to state the topographical conditions as they 
 appeared upon the spot. And lastly, I will do my best 
 to state the arguments for and against the two opposing 
 views. 
 
 (i) Any one who has followed the history of Palestine 
 exploration will have noticed that there has been a 
 certain swaying of the pendulum on this question of 
 Capernaum. We might mark off roughly three periods. 
 In the first, arguments were put forward now on one 
 side and now on the other for the two main competing 
 sites, Tell Hum and Khdn Minyeh. Excellent authorities 
 favoured each. Then for about two decades there seemed 
 to be a distinct preponderance in favour of Tell Hum. 
 And now during the last decade and more especially 
 towards its close the balance seems to have swung round 
 towards Khan Minyeh. I may show this to the eye by 
 setting some of the leading authorities side by side. 
 
 For Tell Hilm. For KMn Minyeh. 
 
 Ritter (1850-1852). Robinson (from 1838). 
 
 Furrer (from 1865). Stanley (from 1856). 
 
 Neubauer (1869). ^^PP (fro™ 1862). 
 
 Thomson (from 1869). Keira (1867). 
 
 Sir C, Wilson (from 1871). Conder (from 1879). 
 Schenkel's Bihel-Lexikon (Furrer), Merrill (from 1881). 
 
 1871. G. A. Smith (from 1894). 
 
 Socin (from 1872). Hastings, D. B. (Ewing), 1898. 
 
 Schiirer (from 1874). Von Soden (1898). 
 
 Guerin (1880). Enci/clopaediaBiblica{G. A.Smith), 
 Riehm, Handw'orterbuch (Wolff), 1899. 
 
 1884. Rider Haggard (1901). 
 Guthe (from 1890). 
 Buhl (1896J. 
 
38 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 If we were to look only at the personal authority of 
 the writers, the balance might seem to be in favour of 
 Tell Hum (though there are some good names in the 
 other list) ; but we are struck not so much by the weight 
 of particular evidence, as by the distribution of the whole 
 in reference to time. 
 
 The Bible Dictionaries may be taken as representative. 
 And it will be seen that whereas in the seventies and 
 eighties both the dictionaries that appeared were for 
 Tell Hum, the two most recently issued are for Khan 
 Minyeh. Not only so, but all the most recent writers 
 (except Buhl and Schiirer in the latest edition of his 
 great work, who both represent the older tradition) are 
 on the same side. Two of the writers mentioned, 
 von Soden and Rider Haggard, are confessedly the 
 mouthpieces of Father Biever of the German Catholic 
 Palestine Society, who is in charge of the hospice at 
 et-Tdbigha. I was led to think that the influence of 
 Father Biever might have been felt further than it was 
 seen, and that he perhaps might be the ultimate cause 
 of the seeming revolution in opinion. It may therefore 
 be supposed that I looked forward with the greatest 
 interest to the possibility of meeting him, rather hoping 
 that all my own doubts and questions might be set 
 at rest. 
 
 I had the good fortune to find Father Biever at home 
 and to enjoy a brief conversation with him. He is 
 a native of Luxemburg, on the confines of French and 
 German science, and a striking personality. Both to 
 Prof, von Soden and to Mr. Rider Haggard he seems 
 to have expressed his views quite decidedly and without 
 qualification. But I was not long in discovering that he 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 39 
 
 really had some mental reserve, and that he was con- 
 scious that the arguments were not quite all on one side. 
 
 {2) With this much of preface as to the history of 
 opinion, I may now go on to describe the topographical 
 conditions of the problem. 
 
 Towards the north end of the lake the cliff wall 
 recedes or breaks up and gives place to a series of gentle 
 slopes gradually leading up to the conspicuous height 
 (more than 3,000 feet above the level of the lake) on 
 which is planted the town of Safed, the typical and 
 traditional ' city set on a hill ^' 
 
 This configuration may be said to begin at Magdala, 
 which lies at the foot of the bold crags KaVat Ihn Ma'dn. 
 From this point the coast is trending NE. in beautiful 
 shallow curves, only perhaps at et-Tdbigha amounting 
 to a bay. For three miles from Magdala stretches the 
 rich plain of Gennesar or Gennesaret (el-Ghutceir ^), which 
 is two miles in breadth and perhaps the most fertile spot 
 in the whole land, as fertile naturally as the Delta of 
 the Nile. At the NE. end the hills, which had so far 
 kept at a modest distance, push forward but still gently 
 towards the lake and form a sort of low promontory. 
 Just in the hollow that is thus formed and set back 
 perhaps some 300 yards from the lake, and on a slight 
 rise in the ground, are the ruins of a great Saracenic 
 khan or caravanserai, known to have been in existence 
 in the time of Saladin. This is Khd7i Minyeh. There are 
 
 ^ It is 2,749 feet above the Mediterranean level, and the Sea of 
 Galilee is some 680 below it. The age of Safed is disputed and rather 
 uncertain. The Jewish colony did not settle here till the sixteenth 
 century. But Dr. Neubauer was inclined to identify it with the Sej)h 
 of Josephus and Cephath of the Talmud {Geogr. du Talmud, p. 227). 
 
 2 'i. e. the little Ghor, or " hollow '" (Dr. Driver). 
 
40 SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 
 
 some other ruins below it, and according to Schumaclier 
 some also above it. These are not, as I gather, very 
 extensive. But that cannot be wondered at, as the 
 materials have doubtless been used up in the building 
 of the khan. 
 
 Bounding the little promontory we come in about ten 
 minutes to the German hospice, and then perhaps in ten 
 or fifteen minutes more, at the other end of the curve 
 which I have described as almost a bay, to the abundant 
 springs 'Ain et-Tdbigha, the ancient Heptapegon. The 
 Arabic word, as you will perceive, preserves the sound 
 of the Greek. Macmillan's Guide, which speaks of ' five 
 springs ' instead of seven, is naturally puzzled to see the 
 resemblance. But the so-called groups of seven springs 
 — of which we have a classical example in Beersheba — 
 are not meant to be taken literally, any more than the 
 so-called ' Seven Churches ' in Ireland ; they only mean 
 that the springs are more than usually strong and 
 copious. 
 
 I should have said that our path from KMn Minyeh 
 round the promontory lay in part through a curious 
 cutting in the solid rock some three feet deep and wide, 
 and twenty to thirty feet above the lake, which was no 
 doubt really an aqueduct to convey the waters of 
 et-Tdbigha to the sloping ground at the back of Khdn 
 Minyeh. I asked myself at first why this could be 
 wanted, as there is a fine spring (Ain et-Tin) just below 
 the khan between it and the lake. But clearly this 
 could not send its waters to the rear, as Heptapegon by 
 its greater elevation could. 
 
 From Heptapegon onwards the features of the ground 
 are less marked, and in a short two miles we come to 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 41 
 
 Tell Hum. Here there is another field of ruins, now in 
 the possession of the Franciscans, who have erected a 
 wall round a great part of it and are excavating. Not all 
 that used to be visible can now be seen, but there are 
 several finely carved limestone blocks in the garden 
 that have been identified as belonging to the ancient 
 sjmagogue. Schiirer thinks that this may date from the 
 palmy days of Judaism round the Sea of Galilee, i. e. 
 from the second to the fourth century a. d. I am afraid 
 this is more probable than that they really date from the 
 time of our Lord. 
 
 In front of the Franciscan enclosure are two small 
 jetties ; but these are quite modern, and there are no 
 indications of an ancient harbour. Tell Hum looks 
 straight out over the lake and has not the variety of 
 interest of Khdn Minyeh. 
 
 About two and a half miles further is the mouth of 
 the Jordan, and it may be as much more to et-Tell, the 
 supposed site of Bethsaida Julias, on the left bank of 
 the river. It is worthy of note that the delta which 
 the river forms here is said to have increased considerably 
 from alluvial deposit; so that we should think of the 
 ancient coast-line as some way further back than it is 
 at present. This will make some features in the Gospel 
 narrative, more especially as to the events preceding the 
 Feeding of the Five Thousand, rather more intelligible. 
 
 The question as to the site of Bethsaida is intimately 
 bound up with that of Capernaum. It used to be 
 thought that in order to satisfy the Biblical data there 
 must have been two Bethsaidas : one, Bethsaida Julias 
 of which we have just been speaking, enlarged and 
 adorned by Herod Philip in honour of Julia, daughter 
 
42 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 of Augustus ; and the other a sort of harbour for Caper- 
 naum. If Capernaum were at Khdn Minyeh, it would 
 be natural to place this harbour on the little bay of 
 et-Tdhigha. 
 
 It is however coming to be more and more questioned 
 whether it is really necessary to assume this second 
 Bethsaida. I should be myself prepared to think that 
 the inference rests on a stricter interpretation of Mark vi. 
 45 than the words will warranto The grounds alleged 
 do not seem adequate to justify the invention of a 
 place not otherwise attested. Besides, we know that 
 the ancient name of et-Tdbigha was Heptapegon ; and 
 none of the authorities so much as hint at anything 
 else. 
 
 It is quite possible that there may have been an old 
 part and a new part of Bethsaida Julias, and that the 
 references in the Gospels are rather to the old than to 
 the new (cf. p. 48 below), as our Lord rarely entered 
 these fashionable Greek cities. 
 
 (3) ^^ ^^® ^"^"^ brought definitely face to face with 
 the main issue, the choice between Khdn Minyeh and 
 Tell Hum for the site of Capernaum. 
 
 (i) The attraction of Tell Hum lies largely in the 
 name. The more correct spelling is Caphamaum : now 
 Caphar (the modem Kefr) = 'village,' just as Tell = 'hill'; 
 and Hum may be taken to be a contraction for ' Nahum.' 
 So that it would be obvious to suppose that 'Nahum's 
 village ' simply passed into ' Nahum's hill, or mound.' 
 
 ' We have to remember that the Gospel was probably written at 
 Rome, and that its author was a native of Jerusalem, not of Galilee. 
 We cannot be surprised if his language on topographical points some- 
 times lacks precision. 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 43 
 
 There are said to be some philological difficulties . 
 in this : e. g. it is maintained by Sepp that the proper 
 contraction would be Num and not HUm. 
 
 It is also maintained that Tell Hum is really a cor- 
 ruption of Tanhum or Tenhum. The forms Kefar 
 Tanhum, Tanhumin and Tehumin are found in the 
 Talmud \ 
 
 It seems to me that we are shut up to the conclusion 
 that Tell Hum is a corruption, because there is no Tell 
 anywhere near. There is only the gentlest possible 
 upwards slope of the ground, and no 'hill' or 'mound.' 
 I put the question directly to my dragoman, who was 
 an intelligent specimen of his class, whether the site 
 could possibly be described as a Tell ; and he answered 
 decidedly No. 
 
 This however still leaves the difficulty that the name 
 Kefar Tanhum must have been comparatively recent. 
 The place, one would think, must have had an older 
 name, as to which we are no wiser. It also appears 
 from mediaeval documents referred to by G. A. Smith 
 that the Jews made pilgrimages to the tomb of Nahum ; 
 and we cannot doubt that this was at Capernaum. 
 But where Capernaum itself was, there is nothing to 
 show. 
 
 (ii) The indications in the Gospels favour Khdn Minyeh 
 as I think clearly, but not quite so stringently as 
 Dr. Eobinson supposed. They seem to connect Caper- 
 naum with the Plain of Gennesaret in a way that is 
 better satisfied if Capernaum was actually upon it than 
 if it were two and a half miles away. 
 
 (iii) This is still more decidedly the case with 
 ' Neubauer, Geographic du Talmud, p. 221. 
 
44 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Josephus, whose language is express. After speaking 
 of the extraordinary fertility of the plain he adds : — 
 
 ' Besides the good temperature of the air, it is also 
 watered from a most fertilizing [reading yovifXQ)TdTri, v. 1. 
 TTOTiixoiTCLTri] fouutaiu. The people of the country call it 
 Caphamaum. Some have thought it to be a vein of the 
 Nile, because it produces the Coracin fish^ as well as 
 that lake does which is near to Alexandria, The length 
 of the plain extends along the shore of the lake that 
 bears the same name for thirty furlongs, and is in 
 breadth twenty, and this is the nature of that place -.' 
 
 It is not quite clear what fountain Josephus means — 
 probably et-Tdhigha rather than ^Ain et-Tin. But at Tell 
 Hum there is no fountain of any sort, and it has no 
 connexion with the Plain of Gennesaret. If there is 
 any crucial argument in the case it is this. The other 
 indications drawn from Josephus are indecisive. 
 
 (iv) On the other hand, the evidence of the pilgrims 
 does not come out very clearly, but on the whole favours 
 Tell Hum. 
 
 Unfortunately Eusebius and Jerome are too vague to 
 help us; and if Silvia visited Capernaum, that part of 
 her narrative is not preserved. Antoninus also tells us 
 nothing that helps us. The first precise statement meets 
 us in Theodosius (530 a.d.). Theodosius gives distances 
 that should be exact, and in part are so. The critical 
 text of his treatise published by the Vienna Academy 
 in 1898 reads as follows :— 
 
 ' From Tiberias to Magdala, where the lady Maiy was 
 
 ^ Dr. Tristram argues from the presence of this fish for the ' Round 
 Fountain ' (Ain el-Mudatcwara). The difficulty is that there are no 
 ruins. 
 
 2 B. J. iii. 10. 8. 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM. 45 
 
 born, is two [Eoman] miles. [This is rather too little.] 
 From Magdala to Seven Fountains [Heptapegon], where 
 the Lord Christ baptized the Apostles, is two miles, 
 where He also fed the people with five loaves and two 
 fishes. [There is no variant reading ; but 11 may be 
 a corruption of in or v; the number is certainly too 
 small.] From Seven Fountains to Capharnaum is two 
 miles. [This is really exact, if applied to Tell Hum.^ 
 From Capharnaum to Bethsaida, where were born the 
 Apostles Peter, Andrew, Philip, and the sons of Zebedee, 
 is VI miles. [This may be very fairly correct.] From 
 Bethsaida to Panias is l ^' 
 
 Not only has Theodosius got the distance from Hepta- 
 pegon to Capernaum right, but he clearly puts the latter 
 place after Heptapegon and not before. 
 
 The other witness is Arculfus (c. 685 a. d.), as reported 
 by Adamnan. What he says is this : — 
 
 ' Those who going down from Jerusalen desire to visit 
 Capharnaum, as Arculfus told me, go straight through 
 Tiberias ; and then pass along Lake Cinereth, also called 
 the Sea of Tiberias and the Sea of Galilee, and then 
 through the place of the Blessing of the Loaves [the 
 Feeding of the Five Thousand, which one tradition 
 placed on the hillside at the back of Khdn Minyeh] ; 
 from whence at no great distance {non longo circuitu) 
 they reach Capharnaum by the sea in the borders of 
 Zabulun and Naphtali. This city, as I was told by Arcul- 
 fus who saw it from a neighbouring mountain, is without 
 a wall and is confined within a narrow space between 
 the mountain and the lake stretching from east to west 
 for a considerable distance along the shore with the 
 mountain to the north and the lake to the south V 
 
 The description would really suit Khdn Minyeh better 
 than Tell Hum, because there the city would be really 
 ^ Itin. Hieros. p. 137 f. * Ibid. p. 273 f. 
 
46 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 'confined' by the hills; and most writers take the 
 passage in that sense. It is also true that there is 
 another traditional site for the Feeding of the Five 
 Thousand (at Hajar en-Nusdra, on the high plateau 
 N. or NW. of Tiberias), which would be reached before 
 arriving at Khdn Minyeh — neither of the two sites can 
 really hold good, because both are in a populous region 
 and that indicated in the Gospels is clearly E. of the 
 lake ; but on the whole I believe that Arculfus had in 
 his mind the same site as Theodosius, and that he too 
 intended to locate Capernaum at Tell Hum. 
 
 (v) There is also a natural presumption in favour of 
 Tell Hum from the fact that at the present day the 
 ruins there are more important, and in particular they 
 include the striking remains of the synagogue. Not very 
 much, however, can really be built upon this. We know 
 that Tiberias contained many fine buildings of marble ; 
 and yet I believe I am right in saying that not a trace 
 of marble exists there to-day. Sir Charles Wilson refers 
 significantly to a report that some of the carved blocks 
 at Tell Hum had been burnt there for lime, and conveyed 
 in that state to Tiberias ^ 
 
 I will conclude with two arguments for which I am 
 indebted to Father Biever in part directly, and in part 
 through the report of Professor von Soden. [They are 
 however really of older origin and are urged particularly 
 by Sepp.] 
 
 (vi) The khan of Khdn Minyeh is a stage on the great 
 
 caravan route from Damascus to Jerusalem, and thence 
 
 to Gaza and Egypt. These routes keep to their old lines ; 
 
 so that we may safely assume that the same spot was 
 
 ^ Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 387. 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 47 
 
 on a main thoroughfare and a place of lively traffic in 
 the time of our Lord. There would thus be an obvious 
 reason for the tollhouse from which St. Matthew was 
 called, while there would be no such clear reason on 
 the site of Tell Hum. 
 
 (vii) There is also much more of a beach on either 
 side of the promontory near Khdn Minyeh than there 
 could be said to be at Tell Hitm. It appears that when 
 the water is low remains of harbour works can be seen. 
 We are told that this part of the lake is much more 
 frequented both by fish and by fishermen than any 
 other. The fish are attracted by the stream of warmer 
 water that comes in from 'Ain et-TdhigJia. Both these 
 arguments go to reinforce in a substantial way our 
 previous inference that the Biblical data agree better 
 with the hypothesis that Khan Minyeh is Capernaum. 
 And this fact, taken with the clear and strong evidence 
 of Josephus, cuts at the root of the later tangle caused by 
 the apparent shifting of Christian and Jewish tradition. 
 
 There remains the question, which was evidently rather 
 haunting the mind of Father Biever: If the ruins of 
 Tell Hum are not those of Capernaum, to what place 
 do they belong? They cannot be identified with any 
 of the other more important sites that are known to 
 have existed along the lake. Not to me, but to Professor 
 von Soden, Father Biever threw out the suggestion that 
 they are a Jewish branch settlement from Tiberias, 
 founded after the time of our Lord and associated with 
 the Rabbi Tanhum. 
 
 We must not be moved by reasons of sentiment ; and 
 I do not allege what I am going to say as a reason. 
 But one would like to think that the true site was Khdn 
 
48 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Minyeh. As I stood on the ruins of tlie khan, the 
 landscape that stretched before my eyes was, I thought, 
 the most beautiful that met them in the whole of 
 Palestine. The contrast of the rich dark green of the 
 plain with the bold precipices of Wddy el-Hamdm rising 
 straight in front, and fringed on the one side by the 
 curving shore and on the other by the gently swelling 
 uplands, was a thing not to be forgotten. It spoke of 
 something more than the variety of nature. It hinted 
 also at the infinite variety in the lives and characters 
 of men. I had not realized that Capernaum was full 
 in view of a famous haunt of robbers, a haunt perhaps 
 also of desperate patriots. Among the peaceful fisher- 
 folk and tillers of the soil, and among the gay coloured 
 caravans of traders coming and going, there must have 
 been felt the stress of sterner and fiercer passions ; and 
 such surroundings were a fit home for Him who came 
 to seek and to save that which was lost. 
 
 The topographical features naturally lend themselves 
 to the suggestion that the axis, so to speak, of our Lord's 
 public ministry lay along this great road from Damascus 
 to the south from about the point where it crosses the 
 ridge above Chorazin to the neighbourhood of Nain. 
 This seems to have been the region of His most prolonged 
 and persistent working ; but there were excursions from 
 time to time to the west and north and east, besides the 
 journeys to the great feasts at Jerusalem. 
 
 Note. In the map of the Sea of Galilee I have em- 
 bodied an attractive suggestion of Dr. Guthe's as to 
 the site of Old Bethsaida {Kurzes Bihelworterbuch, s. v. 
 'Bethsaida'). There is a Roman road from the site 
 indicated to et-Tell. 
 
r,ALlLEE 
 
 The Oxford Geotfraphical MstituU 
 
48 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Minyeh. As I stood on the ruins of the khan, the 
 landscape that stretched before my eyes was, I thought, 
 the most beautiful that met them in the whole of 
 Palestine. The contrast of the rich dark green of the 
 plain with the bold precipices of Wddy el-Hamdm rising 
 straight in front, and fringed on the one side by the 
 curving shore and on the other by the gently swelling 
 uplands, was a thing not to be forgotten. It spoke of 
 something more than the variety of nature. It hinted 
 also at the infinite variety in the lives and characters 
 of men. I had not realized that Capernaum was full 
 in view of a famous haunt of robbers, a haunt perhaps 
 also of desperate patriots. Among the peaceful fisher- 
 folk and tillers of the soil, and among the gay coloured 
 caravans of traders coming and going, there must have 
 been felt the stress of sterner and fiercer passions ; and 
 such surroundings were a fit home for Him who came 
 to seek and to save that which was lost. 
 
 The topographical features naturally lend themselves 
 to the suggestion that the axis, so to speak, of our Lord's 
 public ministry lay along this great road from Damascus 
 to the south from about the point where it crosses the 
 ridge above Chorazin to the neighbourhood of Nain. 
 This seems to have been the region of His most prolonged 
 and persistent working ; but there were excursions from 
 time to time to the west and north and east, besides the 
 journeys to the great feasts at Jerusalem. 
 
 Note. In the map of the Sea of Galilee I have em- 
 bodied an attractive suggestion of Dr. Guthe's as to 
 the site of Old Bethsaida {Kiirzes BiheUcorterhuch, s. v. 
 ' Bethsaida '). There is a Roman road from the site 
 indicated to et-Tell. 
 
SEA OF GALILEE. 
 
 
 
 ._ .,_. V^.. -A ., iT^s^^i^ 
 
 ^BrtlMjid^'juli^ii/ •' ' 
 
 
 JtJfiMi mzm^. tf>^ •TIBERIAS ~"""' " ~ ^ .5 ^ >%. \ ( ) 
 
 
 
 Joaephu^.- .."....•Sennabri* , f^ ji 1 j/S ^ '> 1 ^^ 
 
 jf (( / ( "v-^-r- 
 
 
 Modern. .■,..<, IrtUi ^_,__-— -^^-^ 1 JU V ij/^ 
 ~v "Vl ^ f^ BETHS 
 
 ^i^i^N ,-'■ 
 
 
 ■-,>,, , ^^ \ 
 
 
 iN 
 
 
 
 
 .^.---' #^^ W 
 
 1 
 
 
 ;• ---,„,_^ *^.^C™... -5 ^ « 
 
 jh^ 
 
 
 ; .' / ^!^^**V^{v*^''^''^ 
 
 oer*sam(^"^V-^ 
 
 
 / """' / ^'*^»Si.6i,rm 5?s 
 
 ifo-»o,,..-«u»i)nj( 
 
 
 / '""'I y:f=^lrhixl '"'" \ 
 
 III 
 
 
 ' ^ -'-i^^ -^ ^ .>W..^a.^ ^ ^ 
 
 i-i 
 
 
 
 
 e J'-^4 
 
 
 ^i^s^L^iT ■ / 4^ '^v }^-lyf ii|li^-«- 
 
 /// '' 
 
 
 
 # « "■pp°»5 
 
 
 ^^^''^^. %t2^^4y''^9A 
 
 #4^ fc 
 
 
 %. ^,f^t::^^v^V';^\ 
 
 /f 1 
 
 
 ,"-\%./ ' "' ^X ' t 
 
 \ 
 
 / /• 
 
 
 \ »».««-,vaPi ; / ^;;,i|^ V ^"Jfc* 
 
 L ^^^^ 1 
 
 c^ / 
 
 
 \ 1) -i.\ I *"7"^°'!^^/ %A '?«^ 
 
 >fe'X' M> 
 
 ,/ 
 
 
 
 ^^^^s^^^ 
 
 a'"' / 
 
 
 ' /P " ^^r^ ^^fltel ^-"^ idtm^ ^ &".^.«t^%j^ 
 
 ' >/ 
 
 
 )D.baritto ff y ,,-" ''**fc'- ,'"% "At^j^-'-Th ^ 
 
 ^^^:*===^ 
 
 
 /• •: I ; }' X'\^'-:^\^^^ 
 
 .^ f 
 
 
 '^mij^m/ 
 
 
 
 / \\ ^^"o ^ — ""' •^ — ^j ^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,N^N t'\ V r^ ^\-^ ^^-4iy 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
SITES OUTSIDE JEEUSALEM 49 
 
 NOTES ON PLATES XXIII— XXXVI. 
 
 Plate XXIII B. There are no less than four so-called Cliffs 
 of Precipitation (referring to the incident of St. Luke iv. 29) : 
 one in the hands of the Latins ; one in the hands of the Greeks ; 
 one some way out of Nazareth (the cliff shown in PI. LIII), and 
 the one in this plate, which is not only more probable than the 
 rest, but in itself really probable, as it lies just at the back of 
 ancient Nazareth. 
 
 Plate XXVI. The traditional Tomb of Lazarus is in the 
 lane going up the hill to the right ; and it is at least so far 
 like the real tomb that one descends into it by a shaft cut in 
 the rock. 
 
 The conical hill in the distance is the site of a fortress built 
 by Herod the Great and called Herodium. The name 'Frank 
 Mountain ' is given to it in consequence of a legend connecting 
 it with the Crusaders, but of no real authority. The platform 
 at the top is artificially formed. 
 
 Plate XXVIII. I was unfortunately not able to obtain a 
 photograph of what I believe to be the true Emmaus {Kalo- 
 niyeh). The plate represents the site now most in favour, with 
 ruins of the apses of a Crusaders' church. 
 
 Plate XXIX. Since the photograph was taken, the site of 
 Jacob's Well, with the ruins of the church erected over it, has 
 been neatly enclosed. I cannot be sure of the exact position of 
 Sdlim, but it lay on the gentle slope to the right of the picture. 
 'Ainun is some way beyond the high ridge on the horizon. 
 
 Plate XXXI. Klidn Minyeh, which I believe to be the 
 slightly more probable site of Capernaum, lies just to the left 
 of a reddish-white cliff which can be barely distinguished in 
 the photograph. The ancient road came down upon it just 
 over the hill. The spurs in the left of the picture run up 
 to Safed, more than 3,000 ft. above the level of the lake. 
 
50 SITES OUTSIDE JERUSALEM 
 
 Plate XXXII. The photograph hardly does justice to the 
 picturesque abruptness of the cliffs, some i,ioo ft. high, in 
 the face of which to the right of the picture are the robbers' 
 caves mentioned in Josephus, Ant. xiv. 15. 4, 5 ; B. J. i. 16. 2-4. 
 
 Plate XXXIII. The Cliffs of the Eobbers just come in on 
 the left of the picture. Next to them are the Horns of Hattln, 
 the traditional scene of the Sermon on the Mount, where the 
 Crusaders fought their last disastrous battle with Saladin 
 which sealed the fate of Jerusalem. The aqueduct in the next 
 plate is just above the prominent bush on the ridge sloping 
 down to the lake. 
 
 Plate XXXVI. The photograph is on too small a scale to 
 give an adequate idea of the picturesqueness of Tiberias, with 
 its mediaeval castle and walls, with its mosque minaret and 
 palms. Traces of the ancient city (built by Herod Antipas 
 16-22 A.D.) extend more into the foreground. 
 
 y 
 
Plate XXIII b 
 
 NAZARETH: CLIFF OF PRECIPITATION (PROBABLE). 
 
 Plate XX P 
 
 NAZARETH : THE VIRGIN S FOUNTAIN. 
 
%<c^y% 
 
OF THF 
 
 ! UNIVERSITY 
 

 ^. ^ife.' -liS^. 
 
 
 1^ Igl 
 
 Iil|.: 
 
 
 vJbJ 
 
 ^flP'y 
 
 S' 
 
 ft w 
 
 M0 
 
 m 
 
 
 Cj. 
 
 SMB^jtf'^^A' 
 
 WmM 
 
 ■| 
 
 t^^iW'WiL'r 
 
 
 B 
 
 m 
 
 ^^181 
 
 
 ■ 1 
 
 j1 
 
 P^^HH 
 
 ■b 
 
 ii 
 
 l^lf-^^H^Rii^^B 
 
 HI 
 
 * ^■^ 
 
 
 ■ppp- 
 
 
 
 p^ ■ 
 
 
 it^SilB 
 
 1 
 
 ^KiLj 
 
 
 W 
 
 'Wl 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 ' "" ^* ' W- 
 
 
A ny 
 
 OF ^ " " ^ 
 
 of 
 
OF Ti^'' 
 OF 
 
u. 
 
f UNiVE 
 
^s;-» 
 
K-* 
 
c 
 
-"^P THf 
 
 ^£RS/Ty 
 
 OF 
 
^TB R a ft y,-, 
 
 OF TH- 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF 
 
Ill 
 
 . SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 We have been dealing so far mainly with sites which, 
 we are enabled to recognize through the survival of 
 ancient names ; we shall now have to speak of sites 
 round which there has gathered a more luxuriant growth 
 of tradition and legend. 
 
 The most important point in regard to this is that 
 we should not treat it wholesale, as though it were all 
 of the same kind, and because we condemn some 
 therefore condemn all. In this, as in so many other 
 things, we must distinguish. The first question to be 
 asked in regard to any tradition is, When does it first 
 appear? when do we begin to have evidence for it? 
 And the second question, which is by no means identical 
 with the first, is, What is its origin ? How does it seem 
 to have arisen? 
 
 There are many strata or layers, or ' seed beds ' we 
 might perhaps call them, of tradition, and each of these 
 has its own special character and value or want of value. 
 Crusading tradition is one thing ; Mahometan, another ; 
 Jewish, a third ; and Christian tradition of the Byzantine 
 period is distinct from Christian tradition of the age of 
 Constantino. It is this last age, the age of Constantino, 
 that requires the closest attention, because much of 
 that too counts for very little historically; but there 
 
 E 2 
 
52 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 are grains of wheat mingled with the chaff, and we 
 must be on our guard against losing these along with 
 the rubbish. 
 
 The critical period of all is the period, say, between 
 70 and 323 A. D. What we have to do is to look hard 
 at the tradition in the form in which it first meets us 
 and to see whether that form suggests links of connexion, 
 or whether from any other extraneous source we can 
 find anything to enable us to span the gap, and so 
 connect the story as it reaches us with the original 
 facts to which it professes to testify. This is the real 
 centre of interest and the real ground for investigation. 
 Some deeply important examples of what I have been 
 saying wiU soon come before us; but I must begin 
 with others of lesser moment. 
 
 Of lesser moment do I say? and yet the first that 
 I have on my list will bring us very near to a question 
 of larger scope than itself. 
 
 In the February number of the Zeitschrift fur die 
 Neutest. Wissenschaft, a new periodical in the third year 
 of its existence, there is an elaborate paper by Dr. J. 
 Kreyenbiihl on the ' Place of our Lord's Condemnation.' 
 Dr. Kreyenblihi is known to me chiefly for an extra- 
 ordinary mare's-nest of a book on the Fourth Gospel. 
 But he has no lack either of ability or of learning ; 
 and in the present instance he is happier in many of 
 his arguments and in his conclusion. 
 
 I think he may be said to have proved that the events 
 connected with our Lord's condemnation by Pilate did 
 not take place, as has been often supposed, in or near 
 the Tower of Antonia, the massive citadel and barracks 
 that overhung the Temple, but rather in and in front 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 53 
 
 of Herod's Palace, the outer fortifications of which still 
 survive by the Jaffa Gate, and are the first conspicuous 
 object that most travellers see on their approach to 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 I am not going to involve you in the intricacies of 
 the discussion. I will content myself with placing before 
 you a passage that struck me (as it has evidently struck 
 others) in reading Josephus, and I will ask you to 
 observe how close is the parallel which it presents to 
 the narrative of the Gospels. 
 
 Josephus is describing the events which led to the 
 outbreak of the Jewish war. He has told how Gessius 
 Floras, the procurator, has come to Jerusalem in a 
 suspicious and angry mood ; and he goes on : 
 
 ' Now at this time Florus took up his quarters at the 
 Palace ; and on the next day he had his tribunal set 
 before it, and sat upon it, when the high priest, and 
 persons of influence, and those of the greatest eminence 
 in the city, all came before that tribunal; upon which 
 Florus commanded them to deliver up to him those who 
 had reviled him, and told them that they should them- 
 selves taste of the vengeance that was their due if they 
 did not produce the criminals ; but they maintained that 
 the mass of the people were peaceably disposed, and 
 they begged forgiveness for those who had spoken amiss. 
 . . . Florus was more provoked at this, and called aloud 
 to the soldiers to plunder that which was called the 
 Upper Market Place, and to slay such as they met with ; 
 . . . they also caught many of the quiet people, and 
 brought them before Florus, whom he first chastised 
 with stripes, and then crucified. . . . "What made this 
 calamity the heavier, was this new method of Roman 
 barbarity, for Floras ventured there to do what no one 
 had done before, that is, to have men of the equestrian 
 
54 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 order scourged before his tribunal, and nailed to the cross ; 
 who although they were by birth Jews, yet were they of 
 Roman dignity notwithstanding \' 
 
 The great similarity in all the accessories leads us to 
 infer an identity of scene ^. The story, as it is told by 
 Josephus, is condensed, and it might appear as though 
 the crucifixions took place immediately before the tri- 
 bunal ; but that was probably not the case. There was 
 a city gate (Gennath) near at hand, and we may assume 
 that the executions took place outside this. If that were 
 so, the course taken in our Lord's case would be much 
 the same. The procession would wind through the same 
 gate, and the traditional site of Calvary would be 
 between three and four hundred yards from the place of 
 condemnation. This would, I suppose, roughly correspond 
 to the open space that there now is before the Turkish 
 Barracks, part of the site being occupied by the church 
 
 ^ B. J. ii. 14. 8, 9. 
 
 ^ I see that Dr. Swete, on Mark xv. 16, argues in favour of the other 
 view, that the trial was held in the Castle of Antonia, on the ground 
 that ' the proximity of this great fortress to the Temple and its means 
 of communication with the precinct accord with the picture presented 
 by the Gospels, while on the other hand ... a procession of the 
 Sanhedrists across the city would have been at once indecorous and 
 dangerous.' But really the Sanhedrists would have had easier access 
 to Herod's palace than to Antonia. The stairs mentioned in Acts 
 xxi. 35 were specially for the use of the garrison, and are not likely to 
 have been open to the public. Besides, the council-chamber of the 
 Sanhedrin was outside the precincts, near the bridge over the Tyro- 
 poeon, and on the direct road to the palace, through a comparatively 
 open and aristocratic quarter ; the house of Ananias the high priest 
 (of a different family from the Annas of the Gospels) was about mid- 
 way between this council-chamber and the palace (B, J. ii. 17. 6). 
 The traditional house of Caiaphas would be quite near the palace ; 
 and in any case we may be sure that the house was in this quarter. 
 On the view assumed above the localities hang nicely together. See 
 also what is said about the Cenaculum (p. 77 inf.). 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 55 
 
 (Christ Church) and depository of the London Jews' 
 Society. We shall lose the Via Dolorosa, the course of 
 which has been frequently changed and which has no 
 real authority ; but we shall be able to substitute a 
 simple and definite conception for it. 
 
 A later number (July, 1902) of the same periodical 
 which contained the article by Kreyenbiihl has a further 
 article by Mommsen which also throws some light on 
 the proceedings before Pilate. We must, of course, 
 distinguish between ' the court, which is the Praetorium ' 
 (Mark xv. 16) and the 'judgement-seat' (/3^ju,a, John xix. 13, 
 Matt, xxvii. 19). The first is Herod's palace, from which 
 the crowd was excluded; the second was the official 
 tribunal, set up in front of the palace, where Pilate gave 
 his verdict in public. 
 
 In regard to the Pool of Bethesda I am sorry to say 
 that I only brought back a negative- conclusion. There 
 was rather a stir some fourteen years ago caused by the 
 opening up of a pool near the Church of St. Anne and 
 to the north of the Temple ^ This is just the region in 
 which the Pool of Bethesda was to be sought, and it 
 seems to have been located here by tradition as far back 
 as the twelfth century. It is needless to say that such 
 a tradition counts for little or nothing in itself; but the 
 accounts received seemed to make the identification 
 worth looking into. I was obliged to think that it 
 entirely broke down. The pool is a deep reservoir cut 
 in the rock ; and although it is true that there are five 
 heavy piers or ribs also cut in the solid rock, I cannot 
 
 ^ A full account of the discovery was given in PEFQ. for July, 
 
56 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 conceive that these would ever have been called ' porches ' 
 or cloisters (oroat). They may be seen in the photograph 
 (PI. XXXIX), and the reader may judge for himself. 
 
 The site that really has some substantial support in 
 tradition is that of the so-called ' Twin Pools,' under the 
 convent of the Sisters of Zion. These are definitely and 
 circumstantially referred to by the Bordeaux pilgrim 
 in the year 333 a. d., who calls them not Bethesda but 
 Bethsaida. I shall have a word to say about this 
 presently. His words are : — 
 
 ' Interius uero ciuitati sunt piscinae gemellares, quin- 
 que porticos habentes, quae appellantur Betsaida. Ibi 
 aegri multorum annorum sanabantur. Aquam autem 
 habent hae piscinae in modum coccini turbatam ^.' 
 
 Jerome writes to much the same effect, though with 
 some amplification, in 383 a. d. ; and Eucherius speaks 
 of Bethsaida piscina gemino . . . insignis lacu. The early 
 tradition is therefore clear and unanimous. 
 
 I regret that I did not examine these pools ; but I am 
 afraid there is little chance that they can be the real 
 Bethesda. They appear to be really iw the huge ditch, 
 165 feet wide and 65 feet deep, which protected the north 
 side of Antonia ; so that they must have been constructed 
 after the ditch had been partially filled up, i. e. after the 
 destruction by Titus. Very much the same thing applies 
 to the Birhet Isrdin, another traditional site. 
 
 Colonel Conder suggests what is now known as the 
 Virgin's Well, which certainly corresponds to the ancient 
 (rihon (i Kings i. 33; 2 Chron. xxxii. 30, xxxiii. 14). 
 This has the advantage that it is really an intermittent 
 
 ' Itin. Hieros. p. 21, 
 
SITES IN JEEUSALEM 5A^'"*of 
 
 spring, the waters of which are really ' troubled ' in the 
 way described. The 'troubling' is due to mechanical 
 causes which are fully explained by Dr. Guthe K The 
 other pools probably were not intermittent. 
 
 The Virgin's Well, however, which is at the foot of the 
 ridge south of the Temple on its eastern side, is in the 
 wrong part of the city, as the topographical indications 
 of St. John V. 2 are usually interpreted. The Greek is 
 somewhat ambiguous: E. V. has 'by the sheep [gate],' 
 where 'gate' is supplied and not expressed in the 
 original. There is a familiar ' sheep gate,' which is 
 known to have been north of the Temple ; but the word 
 may have had some different signification. Many 
 ancient authorities, in defiance of the grammar, combine 
 ' sheep ' with ' pool,' and some add that it was so called 
 because the sheep were collected there that were to be 
 used in sacrifice. 
 
 There is also a rather intricate if interesting question 
 of reading. The common text ' Bethesda ' has only 
 inferior authorities in its favour. "We have seen that the 
 oldest pilgrim, with Jerome, writes ' Bethsaida.' This 
 is also the reading of the Egyptian versions, of the 
 Harclean Syriac, of Tertullian and of Cod. B ; so that on 
 purely external grounds it would have a strong claim, 
 the combination of two authorities so wide apart as 
 Tertullian and B carrying it back to a remote antiquity. 
 On the other hand, the name may be an early corruption, 
 and it is not otherwise verified. The oldest Western 
 reading, found with varieties in the Old Latin and 
 supported by NL, 33, Eus., is Bethzatha or Bezatha. This 
 last is the well-known name of what was in Josephus's 
 ^ Art. 'Jerusalem' in Herzog-Hauck, R.-E. viii. 671. 
 
 •£ALIFOR!iii 
 
58 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 day the new quarter of the city north of the Temple. 
 It is therefore obvious that, even if not original, it must 
 have been introduced by a very early scribe who had 
 special acquaintance with the topography of Jerusalem. 
 
 This is bafaing. We might have liked to identify 
 the troubled pool with the Fountain of the Virgin, 
 which is the only one of which the intermittent character 
 can be verified; but we are, or seem to be, prevented 
 by the locality. On the other hand, we should like to 
 adopt the Western reading (which in this case would 
 be quite legitimate) ; but we cannot prove the existence 
 of such a pool as we require in the Bezethan quarter. 
 
 It may be taken as assured that three of the four 
 outer walls of the Temple platform are the work of 
 Herod, at least in their foundations and lower courses. 
 Only on the north side has the Temple enclosure been 
 lengthened to the extent of rather more than one-fifth, 
 7^ acres out of 35. The Herodian work extends about 
 as far as the Golden Gate. Beyond that the character of 
 the wall changes ; and the north wall of the enclosure, 
 east of the rock occupied by the Tower of Antonia, is 
 said to be later than the rest. The north-east portion 
 of the enclosed area needs further exploration; but it 
 appears probable that the greater part of it lay outside 
 the precincts of Herod's Temple. 
 
 It is almost certain that the Temple itself occupied 
 the highest point of the hill, a little to the west of the 
 rock over which the so-called Mosque of Omar is built. 
 This conclusion seems to follow from the fact, pointed 
 out by Colonel Conder, that the buildings of the Temple 
 proper, i.e. of the sacred portion reserved only for 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 59 
 
 Israelites, were erected on a series of terraces rising 
 one above the other. Such a succession of terraces 
 must have sloped downwards from the highest point 
 of the rock, or they would have required enormous 
 substructures to adjust them to the contours of the hill. 
 But that the Temple should be at the highest point is 
 only natural, and what we should expect ; and in any 
 case the expenditure of labour on substructures must 
 have been so vast that we may be sure that it would 
 be economized wherever it was possible. 
 
 Indeed it would seem that one of the main differences 
 in appearance between the Temple area as it is to-day, 
 and the Temple area as it was in the time of our Lord, 
 turns upon this fact. Whereas now there is just one 
 platform upon a platform, raised some twenty-five feet, 
 in the inner reserved portion of the Herodian Temple 
 there was first a rise of fourteen steps, then one of five ^, 
 and then a yet further rise of twelve to the entrance 
 of the Holy Place itself. 
 
 Except for the block formed by the Mosque el-ATcsd 
 we must think of the whole area as crowned by buildings 
 of a more massive iy^Q than those which we see to-day. 
 The impression made upon the spectator who looks down 
 from the Mount of Olives is still striking and beautifal. 
 But its beauty consists in the lightness and grace of the 
 structures which stand upon the upper platform, the 
 Dome of the Rock, the not less beautiful Dome of 
 the Chain {Kubbet es-Silseleh), and the minor arches and 
 
 ^ The fifteen steps leading up from the Court of the Women to 
 the Western Gate (which we believe to be the Beautiful or Nicanor 
 Gate) should not be reckoned, as the women's court appears to have 
 been on a lower level. 
 
6o SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 domes scattered about the area somewhat irregularly, 
 but in a way that is quite happy in its grouping. It 
 is a leading characteristic of Saracenic art that it appears 
 to be deficient in unity of design, but that the different 
 features usually harmonize well together ; and they 
 usually succeed in conveying an impression of lightness 
 and elegance which is not surpassed in any other 
 style. 
 
 The total effect of the Herodian Temple must have 
 been different from this. Lightness can hardly have 
 been its characteristic; but it must have compensated 
 for this by still greater magnificence and splendour. 
 The Herodian Temple had, what we have seen that 
 the Saracenic enclosure to some extent lacks, the im- 
 pression of unity and coherence between the whole and 
 the parts. It must have satisfied well the classic laws 
 of proportion. And the materials used in every part 
 of the building were such as to produce the maximum 
 effect upon the beholder. Even now the light is 
 reflected brilliantly from the limestone flags of the 
 pavement. What must it have been, when upon this 
 same marble-like pavement there were reared, first the 
 great Royal Cloister with its four rows of columns, and 
 on the three other sides like colonnades with two rows ; 
 and then nearly in the middle the successive tiers of 
 building, forming the courts and holiest shrine of the 
 Temple itself, their walls of gleaming marble, and those 
 of the Holy Place being further enriched with golden 
 plates and its roof of burnished gold, while gold and 
 silver and brass were also freely used in the gates 
 and approaches ! In ancient times it was held to be 
 one of the wonders of the world ; and he who had not 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 6i 
 
 seen it, felt that he had left one of the greatest of 
 sights unseen. 
 
 I must needs speak with all modesty of the valuable 
 model representing the Temple Hill at different periods 
 left by the late Dr. Schick. It has doubtless enabled 
 many a traveller to form an idea of the changes through 
 which the hiU has passed, such as he could not have 
 formed without it, and it is not for me to offer anything 
 really in the way of criticism. But there are one or 
 two remarks that an outsider and an amateur may be 
 permitted to make, and one or two facts that the 
 student of the model will do right to bear in mind. 
 
 The exigencies of a model representing the state of 
 things at four different periods do not allow of strict 
 accuracy. There are some details that must needs be 
 ignored, and many others that have to be filled in by 
 the imagination. 
 
 (i) One rather important fact that Dr. Schick has been 
 obliged to ignore is that the Herodian Temple occupied 
 twice the total area of the Temple of Solomon. Josephus 
 tells us expressly that while the breadth from east to west 
 remained the same, the length from north to south was 
 doubled ; so that the circuit was six stadia instead of 
 four. 
 
 (2) Dr. Schick is also compelled to leave out of account 
 the facts noted by Colonel Conder as evidence that the 
 area has been added to at its north-east corner. This 
 corner is filled in upon the model by a rectangular cloister 
 with towers, the existence of which in the time of Herod 
 I imagine must be very doubtful. 
 
 (3) I do not propose to speak of Solomon's Temple, 
 which does not come into my subject. But I may remark 
 
62 SITES IN JEEUSALEM 
 
 in passing tliat I believe that a more probable reconstruc- 
 tion of the group of Solomon's buildings is that given 
 by Benzinger in his Hebrciische Archaologie, p. 239, after 
 Stade. 
 
 (4) In a previous lecture I could not help expressing 
 some doubt as to the style in which the Temple of Herod 
 is represented by Dr. Schick. I conceive that this must 
 have been really more classical in its main features, 
 though I quite understand that some of these would be 
 too small to be reproduced in a model. 
 
 I referred to Josephus' statement that the columns of 
 the Royal Cloister (the great cloister on the south) were 
 of the Corinthian order. In the vaults below the Mosque 
 el-A7cm, near the so-called Double Gate, there is still 
 standing a huge monolith with a capital that might be so 
 described ^ It seems probable that this really belonged 
 to the Temple of Herod, and it may be taken as typical 
 of the style employed. 
 
 The question that I find it at once most interesting 
 and most difficult to answer is, how we are to conceive 
 of the fa5ade and portal of the Holy Place, which over- 
 topped the rest of the building by some thirty cubits. 
 This must have been of the nature of a pylon ; but if so, 
 on what model was it constructed ? We are familiar with 
 the Egyptian pylons, as well in the later (Graeco-Roman) 
 as in the earlier periods ; and we are also familiar with 
 Greek propylaea. "What relation did the Herodian 
 structure bear to either of these ^ ? I say ' Herodian ' and 
 
 ' See Fergusson in Smith. D. B. iii. 1461. 
 
 ^ The problem is thus concisely and comprehensively stated in 
 a work that has appeared since the above was written : ' The Temple 
 was divided into an oblong cella and a narrow building surrounding 
 it at the sides (ydma) which was portioned out into small chambers 
 
SITES IN JEEUSALEM 63 
 
 not ' Herod's,' because tlie Holy Place was built not by- 
 Herod but entirely by the priests ; and it is very likely 
 that tliey would keep as far as they could to an older 
 tradition. 
 
 The fact that considerable use was made of cedar-wood 
 in the roofing and panelling of the cloisters would also 
 give an opportunity for preserving features of the older 
 Temple that were borrowed from Phoenicia. 
 
 Generally we might describe the style of Herod's 
 Temple as eclectic, with the predominance of a quasi- 
 classical spirit. None the less it must have been wonder- 
 fully imposing, and the execution probably very skilful. 
 The great stones of Herod's building are laid without 
 mortar, but fit together so accurately that a knife could 
 hardly be inserted between them. 
 
 (v) The last point to be noted in regard to Dr. Schick's 
 
 model is that the reconstruction of the Temple Hill in 
 
 the time of Justinian is extremely hypothetical. The 
 
 one part of this which rests upon solid inference is the 
 
 great church, dedicated to the Virgin, which takes the 
 
 {selaoth). The cella in its turn consisted of two parts, the larger 
 hekfd and the smaller debir, the Holy of Holies. Before the hekdl 
 there stood in the front of the Temple the iildm (in the Sept. alXafi), 
 i. e. an open vestibule without doors. De Vogiie conceives of the 
 upper portion and wings of this nilam as a single lofty pijlon ; Perrot 
 and Chipiez on the other hand, after the manner of the Syro-Greek 
 tomb fafades and the representations on coins of the temple of the 
 Paphian Aphrodite, extend the wings into towerlike erections, over- 
 topping the ailam. Puchstein, following a hint of Koldewey's, calls 
 in Syrian Christian buildings, especially the fa9ades of Qalb-Luzeh, 
 Turmanin, Rueiha, Sueideh, and would like at this particular point to 
 start with his proof of the connexion between Christian buildings and 
 the Temple at Jerusalem. It must, however, at once be pointed out 
 that the motif oi the ailam with flanking pylons is confined to Syria, 
 and is foreign to all other early Christian architecture ' (Witting, 
 Die Anfdnge christlicher Architektur [Strassburg, 1902I, p. 48). 
 
64 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 place of the present Mosque el-Aksa. There is also 
 the advantage that by introducing it into this model 
 the Dome of the Rock can be represented at an earlier 
 stage. But that this stage really goes back to Justinian 
 is doubtful. That it did so has been strongly maintained, 
 especially by Dr. Sepp. It should also be remembered 
 that Mr. Fergusson as strongly maintained that the 
 original Dome was erected by Constantine. But I believe 
 that at the present time opinion inclines to take quite 
 literally the Cufic inscription at the base of the Dome, 
 which in its first state ascribed the building to the Khalif 
 'Abd el-Melik in the year 72 of the Hejra (= 691 a.d.); 
 a later Khalif, el-Mamtin, had this name erased and sub- 
 stituted his own. There is this amount of foundation 
 for the Justinian theory, that in the time of *Abd el-Melik 
 the Arabs were wholly dependent on Christian architects 
 and workmen, who naturally developed their design on 
 the lines of the Byzantine architecture that they were 
 in the habit of practising. It speaks volumes for their 
 inventive skill that they were able to develop a new 
 style from the old and to bring it to such rapid perfection. 
 It should also be borne in mind that the pillars, capitals, 
 and marbles came from Christian churches and other 
 buildings that had been destroyed by Chosroes. 
 
 The Arabian version is that 'Abd el-Melik first built 
 the smaller Dome, the Kubhet es-Sllseleh or Dome of the 
 Chain : and that he was so pleased with this that he went 
 on to build the great Dome on the same model ^ 
 
 Another interesting problem which is perhaps nearly, 
 if not quite, solved, is that as to the Golden Gate. The 
 problem here is double, architectural and historical. 
 ^ Hayter Lewis, Holy Places, p, 64. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 65 
 
 Arcliitecturally the dates assigned to this gate range 
 between the second century (Robinson) and the seventh 
 (Baedeker and Schick). Mr. Fergusson again referred 
 this to the time of Constantino. Professor Hayter Lewis 
 finally decides for the time of Justinian. 
 
 The gateway is now blocked up, but (like the so-called 
 Huldah Gate in the southern wall of the Temple plat- 
 form) was originally double, the vaults of the arches 
 resting upon columns ; and the rich Corinthian capital 
 of that upon the outer front, together with those of the 
 massive pilasters on either side, may still be seen. The 
 most characteristic feature is that the entablature of these 
 pilasters is carried bodily across the double arch without 
 any break in its mouldings. A similar feature is found 
 in Diocletian's palace at Spalato ; and a still finer example 
 at Damascus is referred to the time of Septimius Severus 
 (193-21 1 A.D.). 
 
 These parallels would seem to admit of a yet earlier 
 date than that of Justinian; but the literary evidence 
 goes to show that the arch in its complete state must be 
 later than his day. The pilgrim known as Antoninus 
 writing about 570, speaks of the ' gate of the city which 
 adjoins what was the Beautiful Gate of the Temple, 
 of which the lintel and framework is still standing ^' 
 [This appears to be the meaning of tabidatio, which 
 must be read conjecturally for tribulatio.] That is not 
 the way in which a writer would speak of a work that 
 was only just finished (Justinian died in 565). We seem 
 to be shut up to the view of Dr. Schick, with which 
 Baedeker practically agrees, that the gateway in its full 
 glory was erected by Heraclius in memory of his tri- 
 
 ^ Itin. Hieros. p. 202. 
 
66 SITES IN JEEUSALEM 
 
 umplial entry through it, with the true cross recovered 
 from the Persians, in 629 A.D. The Arabian conquest 
 in 637 prevented the work from being quite finished. 
 
 It is, however, possible that the gate as built by Hera- 
 clius may have been, in part, a restoration. I have not 
 seen noticed a reference to the Golden Gate {porta quae 
 aurea vacatur) in the apocryphal Gospel of Matthew 
 (cap. iv), which is referred by Lipsius to the latter half 
 of the fifth century. This Gospel describes the parentage 
 and birth of the Virgin. Joachim and Anna have been 
 separated for some time, when Anna is warned by an 
 angel to go to meet her husband at the ' Golden Gate,' 
 to which he also drives his flock. It would seem to 
 follow (if the Gospel is really of the date supposed) that 
 the name ' Golden or Beautiful Gate ' had already come 
 to be attached to it. This would really agree with 
 Antoninus {portae speciosae, quae fuit templi). The 
 theory of a restoration would thus appear to be not 
 without foundation. Sir C. Wilson has, I believe, some- 
 where thrown out the suggestion that one of the great 
 building periods at Jerusalem was in the time of the 
 Empress Eudocia (c. 444-460 a. d.). The first ornamenta- 
 tion of the gate may belong to this period or to that of 
 Constantine. 
 
 In any case there is little doubt that the name [^portal 
 aurea is really a corruption or misunderstanding of the 
 Greek wpata [Ovpa] ; but whereas the original ' Beautiful 
 Gate ' had been in the interior, leading perhaps from 
 the women's court into the Court of Israel (though 
 many good authorities believe it to be rather the eastern 
 gate of the women's court), the name had been trans- 
 ferred to a gate in the outer waU. The gate where the 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 67 
 
 lame man sat liad been of course destroyed witli the rest 
 of the Temple by Titus ; but the name naturally came to 
 be given to the later gate, which best seemed to deserve 
 the epithet ' beautiful ' or ' golden.' In the middle ages 
 another ' porta speciosa ' was shown on the west side of 
 the Temple. 
 
 There is a further very special interest in the Golden 
 Gate, that it is through this gate, or rather through the 
 older gate that stood on the same site, that One greater 
 than Heraclius made an entry that we call ' triumphal.' 
 Dr. Schick has shown convincingly ^, as I think, that the 
 indications point to this as the gate through which it 
 was natural for one coming over the brow of Mount 
 Olivet to enter the Temple precincts. Dr. Sepp had con- 
 tended for the Huldah Gate on the south (now concealed 
 among the substructures of the Mosque el-Ahsa) ; but 
 this would have involved both a considerable detour and 
 a steeper ascent. In this part of its course the city wall 
 was thrown forward a little in front of the wall of the 
 Temple proper, so that there would be two gates to pass ; 
 and here our Lord would dismount before entering the 
 Temple, and the procession which had hitherto accom- 
 panied Him with their shouts would break up. 
 
 The most burning question in regard to the topography 
 of Jerusalem at the present time is no doubt that as to 
 the Holy Sepulchre. Can we still accept the traditional 
 site as approximately the true one ? or must we transfer 
 its associations to the site that many English people are 
 inclined to substitute for it ? This is best called the 
 Garden Tomb, and not, as one sometimes hears, Gordon's 
 1 ZDPV. xxii (1899), pp. 94-101. 
 F 2 
 
68 SITES IN JEEUSALEM 
 
 Tomb. Ifc is true that General Gordon identified the 
 hill above the Tomb with Calvary ; but the selection of 
 this particular site for the Tomb has been made since 
 his day. The plot of ground in which it is found is now 
 in English hands ; it is being laid out as a garden, and 
 the Tomb is reverently preserved as nearly as possible in 
 the state in which it was found. 
 
 If this were merely another example of that grasping 
 after sacred sites which is too common in Palestine, 
 there are many who would regret that our country, 
 which has hitherto had clean hands in that respect, 
 should be mixed up in it. We need not, however, regard 
 it in this light ; and it is in any case well that a tomb 
 which presents near analogies to that in which our Lord 
 was laid should be rescued from destruction. I am 
 inclined myself to think that the traditional site has 
 still the higher claim : but just because it is traditional, 
 and because through all these centuries it has been the 
 object of Christian devotion, it has been so transformed 
 and overlaid with pious offerings, that it requires an 
 effort of the imagination to realize what it was ; and 
 that effort is not helped by what the eye sees, but is 
 rather hindered by it. 
 
 The three most recent English works dealing with 
 Palestine, Mr. Eider Haggard's Winter Pilgrimage, the 
 Eev. Hugh Price Hughes's Morning Lands of History, and 
 Macmillan's Guide to Palestine and Egypt, all warmly 
 advocate the new site. And at this I do not think we 
 can be surprised. The claims of the new site are just 
 such as appeal most directly to the eye. They are such 
 as every one can appreciate without effort. Tradition is 
 always a thing that is approached by different minds in 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 69 
 
 different ways. To some it has an ill name which rather 
 prevents justice being done to it. But every one is 
 familiar with the Scripture narrative, and every one can 
 compare what he reads with what he sees before his eyes. 
 
 The case for the new site starts from the name 
 Golgotha or 'place of a skull.' The argument drawn 
 from this takes different forms. At the present moment 
 there is a tendency, especially among tourists, to fasten 
 upon a curious resemblance to a skull in the markings 
 of the cliff side. There are two deep sockets that may 
 stand for eyes, and other lines that have something of the 
 appearance of nose and mouth. When General Gordon 
 fixed upon the hill to the east of the Tomb as Calvary, 
 he was not attracted by this, but rather by the general 
 outline of the hill, which has rather the look of a bare 
 skull. There is yet a third view which connects it with 
 a supposed ' place of execution ; ' this would have led us 
 to expect ' place of skulls ' rather than of ' a skull.' 
 
 The writer in Macmillan's Guide seems to think that 
 he can take advantage of all these possibilities at once. 
 Really we must make a choice, or at least we may be 
 sure that those who originally gave the name had in 
 mind asingle fact and not several facts* 
 
 However, it is very doubtful whether any one of the 
 three alternatives really holds good. 
 
 In the last two numbers of the Quarterly Statement 
 issued by the Palestine Exploration Fund, Sir Charles 
 Wilson has begun a really exhaustive examination of the 
 whole question. As a result of this, and of other re- 
 searches, it must be regarded as extremely doubtful 
 whether the Jews had any 'place of execution ' at all. And 
 if they had, this would not determine the action of the 
 
70 SITES IN JEEUSALEM 
 
 Romans, whose practice seems to have been to set up their 
 crosses at the first convenient place they came to. 
 
 Then as to the appearance of a skull, I was told that 
 what does duty for the sockets of the eyes was really the 
 result of quarrying in the face of the cliff. In any case 
 it must be extremely doubtful whether an appearance of 
 this kind at the present day would have been equally 
 marked some nineteen' centuries ago. 
 
 It is not even certain that Calvary was a hill at all. 
 In the fourth century Epiphanius speaks of it as a level 
 place. And though the Latin writers do use the di- 
 minutive monticulus, this would be abundantly satisfied 
 by such an elevation as that of the traditional Calvaiy. 
 
 The truth is that we do not know what was the origin 
 of the name. The Christian tradition which connects 
 the place of the Crucifixion with the skull of the first 
 man Adam, a tradition which will be familiar to many 
 of us through mediaeval pictures in which a skull is seen 
 under the cross, is strangely early. There seem to be 
 traces of it even as far back as Origen. And there is 
 evidence also that the Jews had curious traditions about 
 the skull of Adam as somewhere in the neighbourhood of 
 Jerusalem. The name may conceivably be in some way 
 connected with this. I should not like to affirm that it 
 was. The origin of local names is often difficult and 
 even impossible to trace. But I could not in any case 
 lay stress upon any of the other explanations given as 
 a basis of solid argument. 
 
 The supporters of the Garden Tomb seek to strengthen 
 their case by drawing graphic pictures of the course of 
 events on the Resurrection morning. The best of all 
 such descriptions, and perhaps the one that has suggested 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 71 
 
 the others, is that by the late Master of Trinity Hall, 
 Cambridge, in his interesting and attractive book The 
 Risen Master (Cambridge, 1901). In his hands the de- 
 scription had no direct reference to the Garden Tomb, but 
 was given to illustrate a particular conception of the 
 manner of the Resurrection. Some of those who have 
 applied similar descriptions to the support of the Garden 
 Tomb have rather allowed their imagination to run 
 away with them. It is true that there is a window or 
 opening in the side of the tomb through which any one 
 standing on the bank opposite to the entrance might 
 perhaps be able to see into the tomb without actually 
 entering. But those who adopt this explanation of the 
 action of the disciple who outran Peter, in St. John 
 XX. 5, forget to observe that the bank as it now exists 
 is made ground, the result of accumulation; and that 
 from the ancient level of the entrance to the tomb no one 
 could have seen through the opening at all. 
 
 It is true that there is a cross, or perhaps crosses, 
 rudely daubed on the inner wall of the tomb. But it is 
 very doubtful whether these are really early, and it is 
 strange that the writer in Macmillan, of all men, should 
 lay stress on this, when he sweeps away without a qualm 
 the whole mass of far more substantial tradition relating 
 to the historical Holy Sepulchre. 
 
 I cannot therefore regard the arguments adduced in 
 favour of the new site as having really any great weight. 
 They are mere possibilities of coincidence of a vague and 
 shadowy kind; and they are unsupported by even a 
 particle of direct evidence. 
 
 When we turn to the traditional site there is no lack 
 of this ; the only question is as to its value. I, of course, 
 
72 SITES IN JEEUSALEM 
 
 quite admit that if it can be definitely proved that the 
 line of the second wall included the present Holy- 
 Sepulchre, the evidence, whatever it may be, falls to the 
 ground. We have, however^ the significant fact that 
 Dr. Schick, who had been sceptical for the greater part 
 of his life, towards the end of it satisfied himself that the 
 course of the wall lay inside the existing buildings. 
 
 The Roman Catholic writer, Dr. Mommert, who also 
 made a close examination of the subject on the spot, 
 came to the same conclusion. And this conclusion has 
 been embodied in all the most recent maps — in that of 
 Baedeker's latest edition (1898), in that adopted by Buhl 
 (1896) and Benzinger (1894), and in the Encyclopaedia 
 Biblica (1901). 
 
 There is, however, still a certain conflict of testimony, 
 both Dr. Merrill (a good authority) and Colonel Conder 
 arguing on the other side ^ 
 
 We must leave this important point still open ; and 
 anything that may be said further must be taken subject 
 to this uncertainty. At the same time it is in our power 
 to test the weight of the literary tradition ; and that I 
 propose briefly to attempt to do. 
 
 It is now agreed on all hands that there is a con- 
 tinuous chain of evidence, that does not admit of any 
 break, from the time of Constantine in the year 326 to 
 our own day. The problem is to get back behind this 
 date. 
 
 And first, it is important to determine the exact data 
 
 that Constantine had before him. It is often assumed 
 
 that he had absolutely none, and that the only grounds 
 
 he had to go upon in selecting the site for his great 
 
 ^ Rider Haggard, Winter Pilgrimage, p. 313. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 73 
 
 church were Helena's dream and the supposed discovery 
 of the three crosses. It is somewhat noteworthy that 
 Eusebius, the nearest contemporary witness, makes no 
 mention of these, but only uses vague terms implying 
 Divine guidance, ' being moved in spirit by the Saviour 
 Himself ; ' acting as he did under the guidance of the 
 Divine Spirit ^' The construction we should naturally 
 put upon his language would be that the convincing sign 
 was the discovery of the Tomb. It is true, however, that 
 Cyril of Jerusalem, very little later, in the year 348 refers 
 expressly to the finding of the Cross. We ought to be 
 more sure of the facts before we go with some writers 
 (e. g. Macmillan's Guide, p. 40) to the length of imputing 
 deliberate fraud. 
 
 As I read Eusebius I am not so sure that he implies 
 that there was absolutely no knowledge of the site. His 
 language is rhetorical, and it certainly does imply the 
 absence of any precise knowledge ; but that the Christians 
 of the day had not a general idea where the Tomb of the 
 Lord was to be sought is by no means certain. 
 
 Nothing more than such a general idea was possible ; 
 because, as Eusebius tells us, the pagans had brought 
 earth from a distance and covered over the whole site, 
 constructing in fact such an elevated platform as they 
 were in the habit of making for their temples, which 
 they had then paved and built upon it a temple of 
 Venus. 
 
 It is natural that Eusebius should regard this as due 
 
 to the instigation of demons ; but it does not follow that 
 
 there was any intentional profanation of a site known 
 
 to be held sacred. If the building of the pagan temple 
 
 ^ Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 25, 26. 
 
74 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 dates, as it probably does, from the time of Hadrian, Roman 
 animosity was then directed not against the Christians 
 but against the Jews. And it is not likely that they 
 would have known of the associations attaching to a spot 
 that was unmarked by shrine or monument. The presence 
 of the temple would of course prevent Christian pilgrims 
 from visiting the site ; but it is another thing to say that 
 all memory had perished of the scenes of the Crucifixion 
 and the Resurrection. 
 
 "What sort of presumption is there that such a memory 
 would survive ? If we were to follow some of our mentors, 
 no doubt we should say that there was none. Many 
 writers assume that there was such a break in the history 
 of the Church of Jerasalem that no continuous tradition 
 was possible. For instance Mr. Hugh Price Hughes says : 
 ' For generations after the destruction of Jerusalem, no 
 Jew and no Christian went there ^' And Macmillan's 
 Guide, as usual, is stiU more emphatic : — 
 
 ' All Jews and Christians were expelled from Jerusalem 
 in A. D. 130, by the Roman Emperor Hadrian, who rebuilt 
 the city as a heathen Roman Colony, altering its name 
 to Aelia Capitolina, and changing the whole aspect of 
 the city. For three generations, i. e. for nearly 100 years, 
 no Christian was allowed to enter Jerusalem ; and when, 
 in the earlier part of the third century, they did come 
 back, there was no Christian living who remembered the 
 respective positions of the various localities of the city 
 and suburbs ^.' 
 
 We may leave the word ' Jew ' in this extract, but we 
 must certainly strike out ' Christian.' There was no such 
 
 * Morning Lands, p.. 233. 
 
 3 Guide to Palestine and Egypt, p. 32 f. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 75 
 
 yawning breacli in the history of the Christian Church 
 of Jerusalem between its first founding and the time of 
 Constantine. - During the troubles of the first Jewish 
 war (66-70 A. D.) it fled for a time to Pella ; and it no 
 doubt underwent some dislocation and disturbance at 
 the time of the outbreak which ended in 135 a. d. 
 Those members of the Church who were born Jews 
 would probably be banished with their countrymen. 
 I say ' probably,' though it is possible that the authorities 
 went by some such tangible mark as circumcision, in 
 which case Christian Jews might escape. 
 
 This is the real extent of the two breaks. But we will 
 work our way backwards from the time of Constantine, 
 and try to estimate more exactly the presumption that 
 a knowledge of the great Christian sites would be pre- 
 served. As a first step in this direction I had intended 
 to collect the evidence which went to show that interest 
 was taken in the sacred sites before Constantine. But 
 I am spared the trouble of doing this, as it has been 
 already done with conciseness and accuracy by Mr. C. H. 
 Turner, in vol. i. p. 551 of the Journal of Theological 
 Studies : — 
 
 ' The movement by which the Church of Aelia began 
 to see in itself the inheritor of the august traditions of 
 the Holy City must have had its roots back in the second 
 century. The impulse perhaps came from outside, as 
 pilgrimages to the Holy Places grew in favour, and 
 pilgrims expressed their veneration for the Church which 
 had such memories in its keeping. Melito of Sardis 
 visited the East, and " reached the Place where the Gospel 
 was proclaimed and the Gospel history was acted out 1." 
 Alexander, according to the local tradition which in this 
 
 1 Eus. H. E. iv. 26. 14. 
 
76 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 point there is no reason at all to doubt, was visiting 
 Jerusalem from Cappadocia, " for tlie sake of prayer and 
 investigation of the Places V' when he was made coadjutor 
 to Narcissus. Origen, before he wrote his Commentary 
 on St. John, had " been at the Places for investigation of 
 the footsteps of Jesus and of His disciples and of the 
 prophets ^" Firmilian, of Cappadocian Caesarea, inter- 
 viewed Origen while on a visit to Palestine "for the 
 purpose of the Holy Places ^. " It would seem that soon 
 after a. d. 200 " The Places " was already a technical term 
 in the language of pilgrimage, though it is clear that 
 it applied to the Holy Land at large and not to the Holy 
 City only. But one can easily understand how the 
 consciousness of living at the centre of things would fill 
 more and more space in the minds of the faithful of Aelia, 
 and how, as the old controversies between Jewish and 
 Gentile Christians faded into a forgotten past, a new 
 generation would lay stress on the possession of the sites 
 of the Gospel history, and therewith on the continuity 
 of a tradition which testified to and guarded them.' 
 
 The list of pilgrims takes us back to Melito, i. e. well 
 before the year 180, when Hamack places his death. 
 There is a further guarantee for the continuity of tradi- 
 tion in the list of bishops, Jewish and Gentile, in his 
 criticism of which I am inclined to think that Mr. Turner 
 is rather too drastic. I must defend this opinion else- 
 where. The defence turns mainly upon the discovery 
 of the ' Chronographer of 147,' who is another important 
 link in the chain, and upon a solution which I think I can 
 offer for the unusual number of names *. 
 
 ^ Eus. H. E. vi. II. 2. ^ Comm. hi Joh. vi. 40. 
 
 ' Jerome, de Vir. HI. 54. 
 
 * Let us suppose that the principle of selection of the eaily bishops 
 was seniority, and we have a simple cause for shortness of tenure. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 77 
 
 These are the data. I do not think that I need attempt 
 to put a precise estimate upon them, because they are, 
 I hope, sufficiently clear for every one to form an estimate 
 for himself. If we are to think of the Church of the 
 Holy Sepulchre as standing on a site that is in itself 
 possible and suitable — in other words, if it is a site that 
 lay outside the second wall — then I think there is an 
 appreciable probability that it would be remembered and 
 handed down, even though it was buried. When I say 
 ' remembered,' I mean remembered in the general sense 
 that the successive generations of Christians would know 
 roughly and approximately within what area the Lord's 
 Body had lain. We can understand that if that were 
 so, when the Temple of Venus was taken down and the 
 earth that formed its platform removed, if the workmen 
 came upon a tomb that at all answered to the description 
 in the Gospels the discovery would seem very convincing. 
 And if in an old disused rock-hewn reservoir near, there 
 were found beams such as might conceivably have been 
 crosses, that would seem to be striking confirmation. 
 Under the circumstances, we must not expect that the 
 examination would be very closely critical. But I think 
 we may say with some confidence that the enthusiasm 
 that was evidently felt and shown on the occasion was 
 not without tangible grounds. 
 
 There is only one site at all comparable in importance 
 to that of the Holy Sepulchre : and that is the site of the 
 Cenaculum or Upper Room. I have purposely reserved 
 this till the last, because I believe that of all the most 
 sacred sites it is the one that has the strongest evidence 
 in its favour. Indeed the evidence for it appears to me 
 
78 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 so strong that, for my own part, I think that I should be 
 prepared to give it an unqualified adhesion. 
 
 But before I come to speak of the Cenaculum, there is 
 a larger question involved in the smaller which should 
 be cleared out of the way. When the interest in the 
 topography of Jerusalem began to revive, there was much 
 lively debate as to the right application of the name 
 'Zion.' 
 
 The general description of Jerusalem, as it is now and 
 as it has been for many centuries, is that it consists of 
 two projecting tongues or ridges with a valley between 
 them (the Tyropoeon), and joined together by a sort of 
 yoke at the northern end. The western ridge is the 
 broader and higher, the eastern is the narrower and 
 lower. Now from the fourth century onwards down to 
 the present day the western ridge has continuously 
 borne the name of Zion. It may, however, be taken as 
 made out to the satisfaction of the best authorities that 
 the name rightly belongs not to the western ridge but 
 to the eastern ^ All through the Old Testament period 
 and down to i Maccabees it is to this, and only to this, 
 that the name was applied. But in the interval between 
 the first century b. c. and the fourth century a. d. it was 
 transferred from the one ridge to the other. 
 
 The most probable account of the change would appear 
 to be as follows-: — Zion at first denoted the Jebusite 
 
 1 The arguments on which this conclusion is based are conveniently 
 summarized by Sir C. Wilson, art. ' Zion ' in Hastings' Diet, of the 
 Bible. It is, however, right to add that the theory is challenged at 
 length in a new work by Dr. Mommert, Topographie d. alien 
 Jertmdem, Leipzig, n. d. (published in January, 1903). Dr. Mommert 
 would question both the two statements that follow. 
 
 2 I borrow this account from Dr. Guthe, art. ' Jerusalem,' PRE', viii. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 79 
 
 stronghold, which became after its capture the ' city of 
 David.' After the building of the Temple on the 
 northern portion of the ridge the name was naturally 
 extended so as to include this ; and the Temple became 
 more and more the distinguishing and central feature in 
 the whole city. Thus from a religious point of view 
 Zion meant especially the abode of Jehovah, the sanc- 
 tuary which He had chosen to place His Name there. 
 As a merely local designation it appears to have fallen 
 into disuse ; it is not found at all in this sense in Jose- 
 phus. And in Christian times it is the religious sense 
 which is the first to be revived : e. g. in Heb. xii. 22, ' Ye 
 are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the 
 living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.' It was natural 
 therefore that the name should be attached to that part 
 of the city which for Christians had the most sacred 
 associations. There was, as we shall see, for a long time 
 but a single church for the whole of Jerusalem, and that 
 one enshrined many memories. This church was on the 
 western ridge, and in the fourth century we find it 
 described simply as ' Zion.' From being the name of the 
 church it came to be also the name of the quarter ; so 
 that the Christian Zion was localized on the western 
 ridge, as the Jewish had been on the eastern. "With the 
 expulsion of the Jews under Hadrian the Christian 
 tradition obtained the upper hand, and it also passed 
 over to the Moslem, so that it has prevailed ever 
 sijice. 
 
 It should further be remembered that, on the recon- 
 struction of the pagan city by Hadrian, it assumed a new 
 
 688. It is a pleasure to find that this judicious writer accepts the 
 tradition as to the Cenaculum. 
 
8o SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 form which it has practically retained to the present day. 
 As compared with the Jerusalem of the time of our Lord 
 the city has expanded to the north, but contracted 
 considerably on the south. It is probable that the course 
 of the present northern wall corresponds roughly to that 
 of the third wall built by Herod Agrippa I in 43 a. d. 
 This wall therefore was not standing at the time of the 
 Crucifixion, though considerable suburbs were thrown out 
 on that side especially to the north-east. But whereas 
 the whole of the western as well as the eastern space had 
 been embraced within the older wall, the lower portion 
 of this was entirely destroyed and so much of the city 
 as lay within it wasted; and a new wall was erected, 
 much as we now see it. It has thus happened that the 
 traditional Cenaculum and the traditional House of 
 Caiaphas, that once were in the midst of the most 
 splendid and fashionable quarter of Jerusalem, now stand 
 almost in the open and are surrounded by fields and 
 gardens and cemeteries. It is in the near neighbourhood 
 of the Cenaculum, a little to the north-west, that the 
 German Emperor has recently presented a plot of ground 
 to the German Roman Catholics, where they propose to 
 build a church, as the Lutherans have done near the Holy 
 Sepulchre. The block of buildings containing the Cena- 
 culum is in the hands of the Moslems, who are 
 uncongenial custodians. They claim to possess within 
 the building a sanctuary of their own, the Tomb of 
 David. The nearest of the city gates also bears the 
 name of David {Bdb en-Nehi Ddud). 
 
 The question of the site of the Cenaculum has recently 
 been the subject of two elaborate monographs : first, on 
 the Protestant side, an article by the eminent Erlangen 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 8i 
 
 professor, Dr. Theodor Zahn ^, d propos of the German 
 Emperor's visit to Jerusalem and gift of land to the 
 German Eoman Catholics in 1898 ; and then, growing 
 out of the same occasion, a monograph separately issued 
 by the Roman Catholic Dr. Karl Mommert^. The 
 agreement of these two writers is considerable, and the 
 array of evidence produced by them imposing. I shall 
 use it freely in what follows. 
 
 Here again, the real problem is how we are to span 
 the interval from the time of the Apostles to that of 
 Constantine. From the fourth century onward it may 
 be taken that the continuity of tradition is unbroken. 
 And here again we may utilize the indications just 
 collected of interest in the Holy Places from Melito to 
 Eusebius, and the proof that the history of the Church of 
 Jerusalem was not seriously interrupted. But in addi- 
 tion to this, there is an interesting piece of evidence 
 from the time of Hadrian. There is also, as I think we 
 shall show, a stronger presumption than in the case of 
 the Holy Sepulchre from the Apostolic age itself. And 
 it must be borne in mind throughout that in this case we 
 are dealing not with a site that was buried or concealed, 
 but with one that was not only visible but in constant 
 use by Christians. 
 
 The evidence from the time of Hadrian consists in 
 a circumstantial statement by Epiphanius that when 
 Hadrian came to Jerusalem, 
 
 ^ ' Die Dormitio Sanctae Virginis und das Haus des Johannes Markus,' 
 in Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, vol. x (1899), p. 377 ff. 
 
 ^ Die Dormitio und das deutsche Grundstilck auf dem traditionellen 
 Zion (Leipzig, 1899). There is also a full excursus on the subject in 
 Diekamp, Hippohjtus von Tlielen (1898), pp. 96-113. 
 
82 SrrES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 ' He found the whole city razed to the ground [after 
 the destruction by Titus] and the Temple of God trodden 
 under foot, with the exception of a few buildings and of 
 the little church of God, on the site where the disciples 
 returning after the ascension of the Saviour from Olivet, 
 had gone up to the upper room, for there it [i. e. the 
 little church] had been built, that is to say in the quarter 
 of Zion ; the church which had been left over from the 
 destruction, and parts of the building on Zion itself and 
 the seven synagogues which alone remained standing in 
 Zion, like so many cabins [with reference to Isa. i. 8], 
 of which one continued till the time of Maximonas the 
 bishop and the Emperor Constantine, like a " booth in 
 a vineyard," according to the scripture [Isa. i. 8, as above ; 
 the passage is repeatedly quoted as prophetic of the desola- 
 tion of Zion] ^' 
 
 It does not appear from what source Epiphanius drew 
 this piece of information ^, but I do not think that its 
 historical character need be questioned. It is not the 
 only reference to the ' seven synagogues ^.' The whole 
 passage is a welcome glimpse of Jerusalem in its 
 desolation ; and the epithet ' little church ' is a mark of 
 verisimilitude : there was but a little flock of Christians 
 in those days; but there were witnesses to the Name 
 even then. 
 
 This is the last of the stepping-stones from Constantine 
 backwards, and a sufficiently broad and firm one. But 
 
 ' Weights and Measures, c. 14 (ed. Dindorf, iv. 17), 
 
 "^ It is natural to think of the ' Chronograi^her of 147 ' or of Ariston 
 of Pella and the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus. Mr. F. C. Conybeare 
 published in 1898 a certain Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila, which 
 appears to have made use of the same document as Epiphanius. Cf. 
 Anecdota Oxoniensia, viii. pp. xxv-xxxiii. 
 
 ' Cf. the Bordeaux pilgrim: 'Et septem synagogae, quae illic 
 fuerunt, una tantum remansit, reliquae autem arantur et seminantur, 
 sicut Isaias propheta dixit.' Cf. also Optatus, De Schism. Donat. iii. 2. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 83 
 
 now what is the landing-place thrown out to meet them 
 from the other side, the age of the Apostles ? In other 
 words, what are the Biblical data ? 
 
 I do not think there is any reason to doubt that where 
 the ' upper room ' is mentioned in the Gospels and Acts 
 it is the same upper room that is meant. Nor is it, I 
 suppose, a very precarious step to identify this upper room 
 as in the house of Mary, the mother of Mark. Zahn 
 maintains the widely held opinion that the youth who 
 left the cloth that he had hurriedly cast about him in the 
 hands of his pursuers on the arrest of the Lord, was 
 probably the son of the house, the later evangelist. 
 Whenever we have obscure little incidents of this kind 
 singled out for narration, we may be sure that there is 
 a reason for it, and most often a personal reason. It 
 seems to me that the combinations are quite legitimate, 
 and only give unity and compactness to the history, 
 if we suppose that the house of Mary and her son was 
 the one central meeting-place of the Church of Jerusalem 
 throughout the Apostolic age. Our latest direct evidence 
 for it is on the occasion of the release of St. Peter in 
 44 A. D. But there is no reason to think that there would 
 be any change between that date and the flight of the 
 threatened community to Pella in the year 66. 
 
 All the presumptions that we draw from the Biblical 
 data are confirmed by the state of things that we find on 
 the other side of the gap. If there was but a single church, 
 and that a little one, in the time of Hadrian, we naturally 
 conclude that itwas,as the language of Epiphanius implies, 
 the direct descendant of the single house that appears to 
 have done duty for a church (or at least for the principal 
 permanent church) in the days of the Apostles. Indeed 
 
 G 2 
 
84 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 the memory of this fact appears never to have been lost. 
 Cyril of Jerusalem 1 in the year 348 calls the church on Zion 
 the ' upper church of the Apostles ' (17 avoiTipa tG>v anoaTokc^v 
 UKkrja-la) ^ where it is not quite clear whether ' upper ' 
 refers to the high ground on which the church stood, or 
 to the fact that the services were held in an ' upper story ' 
 corresponding to the 'upper room 3.' Cyril thought it 
 fitting that he should speak of the Holy Ghost in this 
 church where He had descended upon the Apostles. 
 The lady Silvia (c. 385 a. d.) in like manner identifies 
 it with the scene both of the Easter appearance (John 
 XX. 19-25) and of Pentecost, and describes the special 
 services held there at and between Easter and "Whitsun- 
 tide *. The Liturgy of St. James speaks of the descent 
 of the Holy Ghost as taking place ' in the upper room of 
 the holy and glorious Sion,' and again of the ' holy and 
 glorious Sion, the mother of all the churches ^' The 
 same description is given to it by the pilgrim Theodosius 
 in 530, who adds that it was ' the house of the evangelist 
 St. Mark ^ ; ' by Antiochus of St. Saba, who records the 
 destruction of the church by the Persians in 614 and its 
 restoration by Modestus ; by Alexander Monachus, of 
 Salamis in Cyprus, about the middle, and Hippolytus 
 of Thebes (probably, as it would seem) about the end of 
 the seventh century'. The last-named writer gives a 
 
 1 It is a debated point whether or not the church of Zion was men- 
 tioned by the Bordeaux pilgrim: Mommert maintains the affirmative, 
 Zahn and Diekamp the negative. I incline to the latter view. 
 
 * Catech. xvi. 4. 
 
 ^ On the one side see Diekamp, p. 97, and on the other Mommert, 
 pp. 72, 97 ff". 
 
 * Itin. Ilieros. pp. 92-94. ^ Brightman, Liturgies, pp. 53, 54. 
 ' Itin. Hieros. p. 145. 
 
 ■' Mommert, p. 66; Diekamp, pp. 21, 100 f. 
 
SITES IN JEEUSALEM 85 
 
 very full list of the events associated with this spot, but 
 making it the house of St. John rather than of St. Mark ; 
 and it would seem that the house of St. John may have 
 been really not far away ; from whence came the tradition 
 that the Virgin Mary 'fell asleep' here^ Arculf, the 
 Frankish bishop who made his way here in 685 2, left 
 with his host Adamnan at lona a plan drawn on a wax- 
 tablet, and duly reproduced in Adamnan's account of his 
 pilgrimage, and to be seen still in photographic facsimile 
 from a MS. of the ninth century ^. 
 
 It is really remarkable to see what I believe to be a 
 perfectly valid tradition preserved thus clearly and 
 consciously throughout the centuries. It is the strength 
 of a cord made up of many strands. The meeting-place 
 of a whole church would not be likely to be forgotten. 
 Though many even of its members were slain or dis- 
 persed, ' a remnant ' to continue the tradition would 
 always remain. 
 
 This is the great advantage that the site of the Upper 
 Room possesses over the site of the Holy Sepulchre. As 
 I have said, it was not only all the time visible but also 
 continuously in use, or so nearly continuously as not to 
 make a real break in the chain. 
 
 One or two points still remain open. Perhaps the 
 most considerable is that as to the orientation of Arculf 's 
 
 ^ There is a double tradition as to the death of the Virgin : it was 
 placed, as we see, in or near the Cenaculum ; but, from the fifth century 
 onwards, it was also placed where the Church of the Tomb of the 
 Virgin now stands, in the Valley of Jehoshaphat. On these traditions 
 see Mommert, pp. 60-94. 
 
 2 For the date see E. W. Brooks in the Eng. Hist. Review (1896). 
 p. 95 f., referred to by Diekamp, p. loi n. 
 
 ^ Itin. Hieros. p. 244. 
 
86 
 
 SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 plan as represented by Adamnan. The plan is something 
 of this kind. 
 
 locus 
 cenae 
 dm 
 
 hie columna 
 marmorea 
 stat cui dni 
 adhaerens 
 flagellatus est 
 
 porta 
 
 hie spa scs 
 super apostoloa 
 deseendit 
 
 hie sea 
 Maria obiit 
 
 Are we to suppose ourselves looking north, as with a 
 modem plan? Mommert (p. 86 ff.) thinks that we are, 
 arguing that pilgrims as a rule came up from the S. or 
 SE., by steps leading up from the Pool of Siloam. 
 Zahn {NTcZ. x. 382) thinks that the plan should be 
 turned found, arguing that the great procession, or 
 processions, at Whitsuntide [and Easter] ^ came from the 
 Church of the Holy Sepulchre on the north. I should 
 perhaps have been inclined to side with this view on 
 another ground, viz. that the present approach and entrance 
 are from the north, and that in such matters usage is apt 
 to be conservative. There is, however, one little detail 
 which appears to turn the scale in favour of Dr. Mommert. 
 It will have been observed that there are two curious 
 little square excrescences in the plan. These no doubt 
 represent two more objects of traditional veneration, not 
 included in the church : that on the left side petra super 
 quam stetit dominus lesus religatus ad columnam, and 
 * iS'. Silviae Peregr., ut sup. 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 
 
 that at the bottom petra marmorea super quam lapidatus 
 prothomartyr S. Stephanus ^. Now we are expressly told 
 by Adamnan (§ i8) that the first of these was ad occiden- 
 talem partem. This seems decisive ; and it agrees with 
 the fact that the other two plans (of the Church of the 
 Holy Sepulchre and the Church of the Ascension on the 
 Mount of Olives) have the same orientation. 
 
 I see that Dr. Mommert (p. 94) speaks of the church 
 restored by Modestus as ' of very small dimensions,' 
 This, however, conflicts directly both with the Breviarius, 
 which describes it as basilica magna nimis (Itin. Hieros. 
 p. 154), and with Adamnan, who calls it pregrandis. So 
 that the conclusions built upon the other assumption 
 would fall to the ground. 
 
 The church, as reconstructed by the Franciscans in 1333 
 (this order was allowed to remain in the Holy Land 
 after the last Crusade), was a large church, and they 
 gave the ' Upper Eoom ' its present form. The Moslems 
 succeeded in dispossessing them in 1547. 
 
 About a stone's-throw from the Cenaculum is the 
 so-called House of Caiaphas. The traces of this tradition 
 go back to the Bordeaux pilgrim, the Breviarius, and 
 Theodosius {Itin. Hieros. pp. 22, 141, 155), who form 
 a good chain from 333 onwards. Early as this evidence 
 is, it would not carry with it the same guarantees as that 
 for the Cenaculum. If there were no primitive tradition 
 as to the site, one would soon be invented. But in any 
 case the guess is probably not far wrong. The house of 
 another high priest, Ananias son of Nebedaeus^, the 
 palaces of Agrippa and Bernice, the Xystus, and the 
 Hippodrome were all in this quarter, which was also the 
 
 ^ Mommert, p. 91 (after Bede). - Ant. xx. 5. 2 ; B. J. ii. 17. 6. 
 
88 SITES IN JEEUSALEM 
 
 chosen site of the great palace of Herod. There was, 
 moreover, direct and easy access to the council-chamber 
 of the Sanhedrim Probably the whole quarter was 
 more open and stately than the crowded alleys of the 
 Lower City or the space occupied by the trades within 
 the second wall. So that a wealthy and important 
 family like that of Annas and Caiaphas would be quite 
 likely to take up its abode here. 
 
 To sum up our results. I cannot feel sure of Bethesda, 
 either as to the exact form of the name or as to the 
 locality. But I have considerable confidence as to the 
 place of our Lord's trial and condemnation. I think that 
 there is still a certain balance of probability in favour of 
 the traditional sites of Golgotha and of the Holy Sepul- 
 chre, and a yet higher degree of probability in favour of 
 the traditional Cenaculum. And these are the two sites 
 in regard to which any kind of assurance is most 
 welcome. 
 
 NOTES ON PLATES XXXVII— L. 
 
 Plate XXXVIII. It is right to say that Dr. Schick identified 
 the tower in the right of the picture, not with Hippicus but with 
 Phasael. I have not seen his arguments ; but we know that 
 Hippicus formed the north-west angle of the old city, and the 
 terrain does not seem suitable for another tower further to the 
 west. The tower on the left seems to be, even in its lower 
 courses, later than the time of Herod. 
 
 Plate XLII. It is probable that these substructures are not 
 the actual work of Herod or his predecessors, but a later imita- 
 tion of it, built up largely of old material. 
 
 Plate XLVI. It will be seen that the entrance to the Tomb 
 has been made good with modern masonry. The trough in 
 
Plate XXXVII. 
 
 JERUSALEM : SITE OF HEROD's PALACE (S.W. AN(3LE). 
 
Plate XXXIX. 
 
 SO-CALLED POOL OF BETHESDA. 
 
I UfvlVERSiTY 
 
 OF 
 
Plate XI. 
 
 POOL OF SILOAM. 
 
/'^ 
 
 \ P R ^. R 
 
.:> 
 
 UNIVERSITY , 
 
 OF / 
 
Plate XLIII. 
 
 THE GOLDEN GATE. 
 
r 
 
 

 :-ii 
 
-'^'J-'t-"OI ', 
 
SITES IN JERUSALEM 89 
 
 front is that in which the stone was rolled before the entrance. 
 The photograph will illustrate the statements made in the text 
 (P- 71)- 
 
 Plate L. It will be remembered that the architecture of 
 the Cenaculum dates from the fourteenth century (1333 a.d.). 
 The room itself is an upper story just to the right of the Dome 
 in PI. XLIX. 
 
 ^Lali 
 
IV 
 
 SOME HECENT LITERATURE 
 
 The stream of literature on Palestine is always running, 
 and just of late it lias been running in specially ample 
 volume. Some of the works that have appeared are of 
 considerable importance, and by taking a rapid survey 
 of this literature we shall serve the double purpose, at 
 once of bringing our investigation up to the latest possible 
 date, and of defining our conclusions rather more closely 
 by the combined method of agreement and difference. 
 
 We will work our way backwards, beginning with the 
 publications that are most recent. At this Christmas 
 season two reach me from Germany that would in any 
 case command peculiar attention — the first by one of the 
 foremost authorities on Palestine at the present time, and 
 the second by a veteran in the study than whom none 
 was more prominent thirty years ago. Prof. Guthe of 
 Leipzig has just brought out a concise Bible Dictionary, 
 to which he has himself contributed the topographical 
 articles ; and Prof. Konrad Furrer has an article in 
 the current number of the Zeitschrift fiir die Neutest. 
 Wissenschaft on the geographical allusions in the Gospel 
 of St. John. Dr. Guthe's new Bihle Dictionary is aston- 
 ishingly compact and convenient. The system of abbrevia- 
 tions is indeed somewhat severe, especially for other than 
 German readers ; and it may at first sight seem to offer 
 less than it does. For instance, under Bethesda, we are 
 told only that it is ' a pool in Jerusalem Jn. v. 2 ' ; but 
 
SOME EECENT LITERATURE 91 
 
 a full, or at least quite sufficient, account of this and the 
 other pools is given under ' Jerusalem.' The style of 
 treatment is admirably terse and direct, and the selection 
 of points is excellent. It would probably not be possible 
 to give a greater amount of trustworthy information in 
 the same compass. 
 
 It is a satisfaction to me to find that on the most 
 important points discussed in the preceding lectures 
 Dr. Guthe, and so far as he goes also Dr. Furrer, endorse 
 the conclusions arrived at. Both are agreed in identifying 
 the Praetorium with Herod's palace ; both are in favour 
 of the traditional site of Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre ; 
 and Dr. Guthe accepts without reserve the site of the 
 Cenaculum. 
 
 On several smaller points there is the same consensus. 
 Both writers postulate but one Bethsaida. Both appear 
 to adopt the common view as to Jacob's Well and Sychar. 
 I note however that whereas both writers speak of the 
 scarcity of water on the side of Mount Ebal as compared 
 with its abundance on that of Gerizim, neither mentions 
 the fact that there is a spring at 'AsTcar itself. Both 
 explain the origin of Jacob's "Well as having been sunk 
 by some one who was refused access to the springs in the 
 neighbourhood. Both take the negative side as against 
 those who would identify Aenon and Salim with the two 
 places of like name in this vicinity. Dr. Guthe would 
 go further, and approves the identification with the site 
 visited by the pilgrim Sylvia. Dr. Furrer has a view of 
 his own which shall be mentioned presently. 
 
 To set against this agreement there are three points 
 on which Dr. Guthe gives his vote otherwise than I had 
 done, though in each case recognizing the alternative — 
 
92 SOME RECENT LITEEATUEE 
 
 in regard to Capernaum, Emmaus, and the country of 
 the Gerasenes. 
 
 In regard to Capernaum I was aware that he was 
 inclined to prefer the site of Tell Hum; and I could 
 myself only sum up doubtfully. Dr. Guthe however 
 agrees in placing the Fountain of Capernaum at *Ain 
 et-Tdbigha ; and it is natural to ask whether it must not 
 be straining a point to give this fountain the name of 
 Capernaum at a distance of three kilometers. This seems 
 to me still to be the turning-point in the decision, though 
 I admit that there are arguments which tell the other 
 way. [Compare what is said as to the break in Christian 
 tradition, below, p. 102.] 
 
 As to Emmaus Dr. Guthe hardly does more than state 
 the two solutions, Kaloniyeh and el-Kubebeh, side by side. 
 But he strengthens the case for the latter slightly by 
 pointing out that the Crusaders in 1099 found the name 
 Castellum Emmaus already existing, and that their 
 church cut the foundations of an older building probably 
 Byzantine. It is however difficult in any case to lay 
 stress on this, because the yet older tradition of the 
 fourth century definitely identified St. Luke's Emmaus 
 with Emmaus Nicopolis. The arguments for Kaloniyeh 
 would thus remain in full force. 
 
 As to the country of the Gerasenes and the modern 
 Kersa I cannot in the least give way. Here again Dr. 
 Guthe does but continue the tradition of his late colleague 
 Prof. Socin in expressing a certain amount of doubt. He 
 observes that Schumacher gives the name as Kursi. But 
 that writer is quite express in giving both names, Kersa 
 and Kursi ; and for the former we have the emphatic 
 testimony of Dr. Thomson. Then, as to the readings, 
 
SOME EECENT LITERATURE 93 
 
 Dr. Guthe will forgive me for saying that he is quite at 
 sea. He dismisses summarily ' Gerasenes ' in St. Mark 
 and St. Luke, where the evidence for it is exceedingly 
 strong, being a combination of the two oldest families. 
 I shall be curious to see how Prof, von Soden deals with 
 these readings, as in spite of the revolution which he 
 promises it is hard to see how he can here at least go 
 against his predecessors ^ 
 
 Textual criticism is ;not the strong point of either of 
 the two writers of whom I have been speaking. Dr. Furrer 
 begins his account of the Pool of Bethesda by saying 
 quite naively that he does not intend to follow the best 
 MSS., because he thinks that the inferior ones suit the 
 local indications better. The principal interest of his 
 article lies in his adoption of two or three identifications 
 that are either new or hitherto but little supported. He 
 would place Bethesda at the Hammdm esh-Shifd, which 
 is near the ' Gate of the Cotton Merchants,' the usual 
 entrance about the middle of the west side of the Temple 
 area. There is a pool here with pillars and masonry, 
 some sixty-six feet below the present surface, which is 
 still supposed to possess healing properties. Dr. Furrer 
 compares this with the water ^ of Gihon (the Virgin's 
 
 ^ It is with real regret that I find myself also in opposition to 
 Dr. Zahn, who in the December number of the Netie kirchliche 
 Zeitschrift defends with great wealth of detailed argument the 
 Origenian reading V(pyiar}vuiv, and, mainly in order to bring the 
 scene of the miracle within the district of Gadara, localizes it 
 near es-Samra in the SE. corner of the lake. I hope that I may 
 some day discuss this argument on a more adequate scale elsewhere ; 
 but I am afraid that even here I have the feeling that the textual 
 criticism is rather constructed ad hoc than based upon broad objective 
 principles. I also greatly doubt whether the topographical conditions 
 are really satisfied. 
 
 ^ As to the water there is an ominous note in Baedeker (p. 55). 
 
94 SOME RECENT LITERATURE 
 
 Fountain) and thinks that it may have been one of the 
 arms of the intermittent source underneath the Temple. 
 This is really the attractive factor in the theory ; but 
 even so, much is conjecture, and I am afraid that the 
 whole rests on a very slight basis of evidence, besides 
 the question of reading. 
 
 Dr. Furrer suggests ^ for ' Bethany beyond Jordan ' the 
 site of certain ruins called Betdne { = Batneh in Baede- 
 ker's map of Peraea), in the Wddy Abu Muhair about an 
 hour SW. from es-Salt. This appears to be rightly 
 identified with Betonim in the territory of Gad (Josh, 
 xiii. 26). Eusebius writes the name Bori/ia tj kox Uothiv 
 (Lagarde), and in a later list (Hierocles, &c., ed. Parthey, 
 p. 92) it appears as Bardyews. Dr. Furrer remarks : — 
 
 ' No one can object to the equation Betonim — Betdne ; 
 on the other hand BrjOavia with a different ^-sound seems 
 further removed. But, when the vernacular transmutes 
 place-names into another idiom, we ought not to expect 
 strict regularity, but should be prepared to find re- 
 semblances of sound with other well-known place-names 
 play a considerable part. . . . Greek-speaking Christians 
 might transmute the name into Bethania with an echo 
 of the Judaean Bethania.' 
 
 Aenon Dr. Furrer would locate at ^Ain-Fdra (the Wddy 
 Fdra in which this lies must not be confused with Wddy 
 el-Far a in Samaria), about two hours NNE. of Jerusalem. 
 The gorge from which these springs break forth is said 
 to be called higher up Wddy Seldm or Sendm. 
 
 'The water is bad, being rain-water which has percolated through 
 impure earth, but it is still extolled for its sanatory properties.' 
 
 ' The same suggestion also appears in that mine of learning. 
 Dr. Zahn'e Einleitung in d. N. T. ii. 561. 
 
SOME RECENT LITERATURE 95 
 
 This last suggestion is I believe new, and may be worth 
 consideration. 
 
 Coming as he does from Zurich, the home of Prof. 
 Schmiedel, we are not surprised to find that Dr. Furrer 
 regards the Fourth Gospel as a work of the second century. 
 Under the circumstances it shows moderation on his part 
 that he makes use of the form ' Sea of Tiberias ' in xxi, i 
 as proof that the last chapter only is a supplement to the 
 Gospel added later than the rest (vi. i is got rid of by an 
 emendation of the text). It is however laid down that the 
 form ' Sea of Gennesar or Gennesaritis ' is characteristic 
 of the first century, being found in Strabo, Pliny, and 
 Josephus, while ' Sea of Tiberias ' became the ofiicial 
 designation from the second century onwards, being 
 found throughout in the Jerusalem Talmud. Considering 
 how conservative Jewish usage was, and how much old 
 material is preserved in the Talmud, the conclusion 
 (which is not indeed expressed with any stringency) 
 seems precarious. 
 
 Another argument employed directly in proof of second- 
 century origin is that Bethsaida in xii. 21 is described 
 as ' Bethsaida of Galilee.' The point there is that for 
 Josephus, Galilee ended with the right bank of the 
 Jordan, while Claudius Ptolemaeus in the second century, 
 with Eusebius and Jerome, reckons Bethsaida Julias as 
 belonging to Galilee. 
 
 For a sufficient answer to this argument we have only 
 to turn to Dr. Guthe, who points out that Gamala, E. of 
 the lake, is twice described by Josephus as in Galilee. 
 
 Taken as a whole, the tendency of Dr. Furrer' s article 
 is not at all in favour of assigning the Gospel to the 
 second century. He repeatedly calls attention to the 
 
96 SOME EECENT LITERATUEE 
 
 accuracy and clearness of its topographical statements. 
 One passage in particular I should like to quote as 
 bearing upon this point. Explaining that h tw ya(o(f)v- 
 XaKiw (John viii. 20) does not mean actually in the 
 treasure chamber but in the colonnade between it and 
 the open court, Dr. Furrer adds : 
 
 ' The Evangelist was aware that the hot sun of Jeru- 
 salem does not allow an audience to listen to a teacher 
 directly exposed to its rays. Just as little could Jesus 
 .have spoken on December 25th in the open air, because 
 He would most likely have been hindered by pouring 
 rain or falling snow. Therefore He preached at the 
 Feast of the Dedication in Solomon's Porch, This porch 
 must have been specially frequented for religious dis- 
 cussions, cf. Acts iii. II, V. 12,' &c. 
 
 "We have to remember that if the Gospel had been 
 really written in the second century, both Solomon's 
 Porch and the Treasury would have been swept away 
 since the year 70 ; and if we need not suppose that the 
 site of either was exactly forgotten, it is yet not probable 
 that the local conditions would have been so present to 
 the mind of a writer far removed from the spot as to 
 cause him to reproduce them with so much fidelity. 
 
 Side by side with these German works special mention 
 should be made of the series of articles by Sir Charles 
 Wilson on ' Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre ' which 
 have been coming out in the Quarterly Statement during 
 the year. When this series is finished it will no doubt 
 constitute the classical monograph on the subject. Sir 
 Charles writes judicially, but brings out much that really 
 favours the traditional site\ We note that both the 
 
 ^ I submit, with all deference, that the last sentence of the April 
 article (1903'! goes somewhat beyond the evidence on the other side. 
 
SOME RECENT LITERATURE 97 
 
 German writers of whom I have been speaking (Guthe. 
 s. V. * Jerusalem/ p. 308 f., and Furrer in Z. nil. Wiss., 
 p. 265) definitely associate the name Golgotha with the 
 legend about the skull of Adam. 
 
 Late in the autumn of 1902 there appeared a little 
 book by Prof. W. M. Ramsay of Aberdeen called The 
 Education of Christ. Many readers will be grateful for 
 this book in more aspects than one. The writer's religious 
 convictions come out in it more clearly than they had 
 ever done before ; and they are summed up thus : 
 
 ' The conclusion to which all our lines of thought point 
 is that the belief in a Divine "Will ruling in and directing 
 the evolution of history logically and inevitably involves 
 the belief that the historical Jesus is the eternal Christ ' 
 (p. 128). 
 
 But the more immediate object of the book is that 
 implied in the title. It seeks to describe the ' Education 
 of Christ ' especially with reference to the physical influ- 
 ences of nature, 'the outward shows of earth and sky.' 
 The sub-title, ' Hillside Reveries,' indicates the fact that 
 the volume, which originally took the form of lectures, 
 grew out of impressions received by the author in a visit 
 to Palestine. 
 
 This may suggest one remark — I wiU not call it a criti- 
 cism — arising out of the main topic. 
 
 I believe that Dr. Ramsay in the main is right. Our 
 Lord Jesus Christ was full and true Man ; and what may 
 be predicated of a full and true humanity may be predi- 
 cated of Him. This would include impressions derived 
 from external nature. 
 
 Still He was not only the ' historical Jesus,' but also 
 the 'eternal Christ.' And our sense of this latter aspect 
 
98 SOME EECENT LITERATURE 
 
 comes in to qualify what we infer as to the former. "We 
 hesitate to think of Him as dependent on external im- 
 pressions quite in the same degree and kind as we are. 
 "We feel it better to exercise a certain reserve, and not at 
 once to transfer to Him all of which we are conscious in 
 ourselves. "We desiderate evidence like that supplied by 
 such passages as ' Consider the lilies of the field.' There 
 is there a real analogy to the poetic emotion of Tenny- 
 son's ' Flower in the crannied wall.' But when we think 
 of ' moulding and shaping influences ' we cannot but 
 remember that these are not all of one kind. 
 
 The wind, the tempest roaring high, 
 
 The tunault of a tropic sky. 
 
 Might well be dangerous food 
 
 For him, a youth to whom was given 
 
 So much of earth— so much of heaven, 
 
 And such impetuous blood. 
 
 Whatever in those climes he found 
 
 Irregular in sight or sound 
 
 Did to his mind impart 
 
 A kindred impulse, seemed allied 
 
 To his own powers, and justified 
 
 The workings of his heart. 
 
 "We cannot associate the Lord Jesus Christ with such 
 
 contexts as that. And when we compare ' Consider the 
 
 lilies ' with ' Flower in the crannied wall ' there is brought 
 
 home to us the difference, that whereas the one gives 
 
 utterance to a far-off, unattainable dream or wish — 
 
 Little flower— but (f I could understand 
 What you are, root and all, and all in all, 
 I should know what God and man is — 
 
 the other is the expression of perfect insight and know- 
 ledge ; it is not an aspiration after a glimpse of God's 
 working in nature, but a clear unclouded vision of that 
 working. 
 
SOME EECENT LITERATURE 99 
 
 Perhaps one would wish for a little more allowance 
 for this difference, a little more safeguarding of the main 
 thesis, a little more reserve in transferring to our Lord 
 what might be the consciousness of any one of ourselves, 
 a rather more explicit limitation to data supplied directly 
 by the Gospel. 
 
 I hardly like to say even as much as this ; I so 
 thoroughly appreciate in these ' hillside reveries ' the 
 broad strong grasp, the sincerity and freshness of ap- 
 prehension which distinguish all Prof. Ramsay's writings, 
 and in this instance the special seriousness and earnest- 
 ness which lifts his thought to a yet higher plane. It 
 is like him to seize at once on what is really the most 
 characteristic feature in the landscape of Palestine. The 
 introductory chapter is headed, ' On the Power of the 
 Great Plains ' ; but this is only a prologue to the main 
 argument, intended to illustrate the power of land- 
 scape in the abstract — the plains of Palestine, even 
 Esdraelon or Sharon are not 'great' in the same sense. 
 The next chapter, ' On a Mountain-top,' goes to the mark 
 more directly. The peculiar long backbone, or central 
 ridge lifted up, most of it, from fifteen hundred to three 
 thousand feet above the sea, throws out frequent side- 
 glances on the one hand to the Mediterranean and on 
 the other to the yet deeper trench of the Jordan ; it is 
 this succession of 'Pisgah views' that puts its stamp 
 upon the landscape of Palestine, and this also — Dr. 
 Ramsay would say, and I think rightly say — that has 
 left a special mark upon the life of our Lord. 
 
 ' As one reads the biography of Jesus, one cannot fail 
 to be struck with the effect that seems to have been 
 exercised on His mind and nature by the wide prospect 
 H 3 
 
loo SOME RECENT LITERATURE 
 
 from a lofty elevation. Try to cut out the mountain 
 scenes from His life. How much poorer would the 
 Gospels be'.' 
 
 And again, of the Third Temptation : 
 
 'Only the dullest and most witless of critics will 
 make the objection that it is impossible to see all the 
 kingdoms of the world from any mountain. The man 
 whose temptation came in this form was one to whom 
 the wide prospect of a great stretch of country was 
 inspiring and creative, revealing far more than the eye 
 beholds, lifting the mind on the wings of imagination 
 to a far-reaching outlook over history and time, and 
 suggesting a vision of the authority and glory of a 
 world-wide empire 2.' 
 
 There is a just criticism of Renan's comments upon the 
 view of Jerusalem : 
 
 ' The Jesus whom Renan pictured to himself and set 
 before his readers had a positive dislike for that city of 
 pedantry, acrimony, quarrels and littleness of mind, set 
 in its parched and dreary landscape ; but the Jesus of 
 history and reality could not look at it or think of it 
 without an outbreak of love and despair: Hov) often 
 would I have gathered thy children together, &c.^ ' 
 
 This is both truly and finely said ; it hits a one- 
 
 sidedness which is present in other writers besides 
 
 Renan. In speaking of this writer, however, we must 
 
 do him the justice to acknowledge that on one point he 
 
 has a — rather accidental — advantage over Prof Ramsay. 
 
 The latter, naturally and rightly, enlarges upon the 
 
 impression of the wonderful view from the edge of 
 
 the hills of Nazareth, looking over the plain towards 
 
 Megiddo and Carmel. But he does not seem to be aware, 
 
 » The Education of Christ, p. 37 f. ^ Ibid. p. 35 f. 
 
 5 Ibid. p. 81 f. 
 
SOME EECENT LITERATUEE loi 
 
 as Renan was aware \ of the other even more striking 
 and significant prospect from the hill above and at the 
 hack of Nazareth, which has the advantage of looking 
 not only to the front but to the rear, and so commands 
 at once the Plain of Esdraelon and the sweep of Northern 
 Galilee, ending in Antilibanus and Hermon. I do not 
 think that my experience includes a view so speaking 
 as this ; one in which so great an extent of country lay 
 spread out in such clear articulation. And the associa- 
 tions, if less concentrated than at KMn Minyeh, are 
 more far-reaching. There is no spot in Palestine that 
 so suggests a Gospel cradled among the quiet hills, 
 but carried out from thence over the habitable 
 world. 
 
 One allusion of Dr. Ramsay's awakens our curiosity. 
 He remarks (Preface, p. ix), that although for brevity 
 he has ' spoken of Nain as if it were on the site of the 
 modern village at the foot of the hill, yet there can be 
 little doubt that the ancient city was on the top.' 
 Dr. Ramsay is a most experienced explorer, and is 
 certainly not speaking at random. He tells us elsewhere 
 (p. 45) that he spent ' a long Sunday afternoon ' on the 
 slopes of the hill in question, so that he has examined 
 the ground for himself, and the view put forward would 
 seem to be a novelty. 
 
 An interesting point is brought out by Prof. Harnack 
 in his new book on the Mission and Extension of 
 Christianity in the First Three Centuries; viz. that the 
 Jews were so strong in the very birthplace of Christianity 
 that they would not tolerate a Christian among them. 
 This is vouched for by Epiphanius, who mentions 
 * See the well-known passage, Vie de J4sus, p. 29 ff. 
 
102 SOME RECENT LITERATURE 
 
 expressly not only Tiberias and Sepphoris but Nazaretb 
 and Capernaum ; there bad been no Christian church 
 in either place before the time of Constantine ^ In this 
 region we must not look for continuity, and it is not 
 therefore surprising if the tradition (e.g. as to the 
 Miraculous Feeding) is not of much value. 
 
 Enough will have been said about what may be called 
 the recent ' tourist ' literature. But I should like in 
 passing to pay a word of tribute to Mr. Rider Haggard's 
 Winter Pilgrimage. Mr. Haggard is not only a clear- 
 sighted observer, but he shows a laudable caution in 
 pronouncing on the identification of localities. Compared 
 with this book the late Mr. Hugh Price Hughes' 
 Morning Lands is thin and superficial. But the most 
 valuable recent work of travel is, there can be little doubt, 
 the richly illustrated volume by Messrs. Fulleylove 
 and Kelman {The Holy Land: London, 1902). The 
 (coloured) pictures and the descriptions are both up to 
 a high level. Mr. Kelman had the advantage of travelling 
 in the company of Prof. G. Adam Smith, and he was long 
 enough in Palestine to obtain a considerable insight into 
 the character of both the land and the people. Mr. Kelman 
 writes like an apt pupil of the author of the Historical 
 Geography ; and it happens that the headings of his 
 chapters follow much the same analytical lines as the 
 first of these lectures, but with much greater fullness 
 of presentation. For the partictdar purpose that I have 
 had before me his opinions are of less importance ; if he 
 goes farther than I can do in speaking of the identity of 
 Capernaum with Khan Minyeh as ' almost certain ' (p. 124), 
 on the other hand he has a leaning towards the ' Garden 
 ' Harnack, Die Mission, &c., p. 21 ; Epiph. Haer. xxx. 11. 
 
SOME EECENT LITERATURE 103 
 
 Tomb,' which the photographs in this book may show to 
 be quite intelligible, though I cannot think it really 
 well founded. 
 
 Mr. Kelman claims to have tried to write ' with his eye 
 on the object ' ; and so far as my own knowledge goes 
 I should endorse the claim. I am glad to see that he 
 endeavours to balance the two sides of his picture. The 
 impression may be partly due to the fact that we were 
 travelling in the early spring, the best and freshest time 
 of the year, still I have the impression that more than one 
 recent estimate of country and people is too depreciatory, 
 I should say this with some confidence of the following 
 summary verdict by Prof. H. von Soden : — 
 
 ' The general impression of the land is that of a dreary 
 desolation. Apart from the east of Jordan and the Plain 
 of Jezreel, with its wheat-growing, only quite small 
 districts have any real tillage. The rest lies almost 
 entirely waste and uncultivated. The impression left 
 by the population is like the picture of the land: that 
 of idleness, decadence, want of energy. They only grow 
 what they want themselves, and prefer to live by their 
 flocks and herds ^.' 
 
 Even Prof. Ramsay on p. 78 of his book above quoted, 
 while every sentence is no doubt true of parts, seems 
 to me rather too unqualified. 
 
 All round Bethlehem there is surely abundance of 
 excellent cultivation. I should have said the same of 
 the Plain of Makhna and the Nablus valley. On the way 
 up country from Jerusalem to Nazareth we saw many 
 signs of life ; there seemed to be quite a fair amount of 
 traffic, strings of laden camels, horses and donkeys 
 
 ^ Paldstina u. seine Geschkhte, p. 106. 
 
I04 SOME EECENT LITERATUEE 
 
 coming or going ; olive trees were numerous and the 
 terraces in good preservation ; tlie peasants at work in 
 the fields seemed industrious and paused to look at 
 passers-by less than they would have done in England. 
 Then again the boatmen at Jaffa and on the Sea of Galilee 
 were fine specimens of manhood ; and the Syrian middle 
 class, from whom (e. g.) the dragomans were taken, many 
 of them trained in the Mission schools, seemed full 
 of enterprise and energy. We certainly owe a debt of 
 gratitude not only to our dragoman, a Syrian Christian 
 who had all these qualities, but also to our two Mahometan 
 muleteers, who were thoroughly loyal, trustworthy and 
 considerate. 
 
 It should be remembered that if the people have 
 hitherto shown no great eagerness to do more than 
 provide for their own simple wants, they have not had 
 much encouragement to do so. There is a vicious circle. 
 Palestine has no good harbours. Therefore its products 
 do not find a ready market. ^ Therefore it is not worth 
 while to produce. Therefore the people fall into some- 
 what indolent habits. The construction of a good 
 harbour would soon set the blood circulating. 
 
 So far as my own experience and knowledge go the 
 account of the character of both land and people that 
 commends itself most is Colonel Condor's in his Tent 
 Work in Palestine. He seems to me to see with equal 
 eye both the faults and the virtues. 
 
OF 
 
,.^ 
 
SOME EECENT LITEEATURE 105 
 
 NOTES ON PLATES LI— LV. 
 
 Plate LI. The luxuriant palms, of which Tacitus speaks 
 as characteristic products of Palestine, are found now only at 
 or near the coast and on or (as at Tiberias) below the sea-level. 
 
 Plate LII. 'Ain Karim is the traditional birth-place of 
 St. John the Baptist. The photograph will give an idea of the 
 scanty covering of soil on the grey rocks which is character- 
 istic of the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. The streaks of soil 
 by their greater or less thickness lend varied colour to the 
 landscape, different shades of ochre and grey preponderating, 
 Kaloniyeh (which I believe to be the Emmaus of St. Luke) is 
 in the valley just over the hill on the right. 
 
 Plate LIII. This plate will probably contain a small part 
 of the view referred to by Prof. Ramsay (see p. 100 ; and com- 
 pare the note on PI. XXIII B). The plain below is the eastern 
 end of the Plain of Esdraelon. 
 
 Plate LV. The top of this cliff was fortified by Herod the 
 Great. After the fall of Jerusalem a band of Zealots with their 
 leader Eleazar succeeded in gaining possession of it, and were 
 besieged here by the Romans. For a long time they defended 
 themselves desperately, and at last, when the place was no 
 longer tenable, they slew first their wives and children and 
 then themselves. When the Romans entered, they found 960 
 dead bodies ; only two women and five children escaped. This 
 was in the year 73. 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 [Paul TVateehouse] 
 
 Theke are three sources to which we m&j look for 
 primary information in reconstructing the plan, disposi- 
 tion, and detail of the Herodian Temple, and it is on 
 these three sources that the drawings here produced rely. 
 The first is Josephus, the second the Talmudic tract Mid- 
 doth, and the third is, naturally, the holy site itself, where, 
 in spite of the destruction of the Temple buildings, there 
 are sufficient evidences in the masonry of the outer walls 
 to give testimony as to the size of the external courts. 
 
 Josephus in one place {Ant xv. ii. 3) states that the 
 extreme circuit of the outer terrace was four lurlongs — 
 a farlong to each side, whereas in another {B. J. v. 5. 2) 
 he gives the outside measurement as six furlongs ; but 
 inasmuch as this larger figure is stated to include the 
 fortress xlntonia, situated at the north-west of the Temple 
 enclosure, there is no necessary discrepancy. 
 
 Happily, in view of the difficulty of placing all the 
 Temple accommodation on so small a site, we find that the 
 tract Middoth gives a larger dimension for the Mountain 
 of the House (as the outer court is termed), viz. 500 
 cubits square (the furlong was 400 cubits), and an appeal 
 to the site reveals the fact that the south embankment 
 wall, which apparently is unchanged in dimension, 
 measures no less than 922 feet (about 615 cubits). 
 
 There are good reasons for supposing that the area of 
 the large enclosure visible at the present day is much 
 longer northward than was the original Temple platform, 
 and the fact that beyond the so-called Golden Gate 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEEOD 107 
 
 (which is a comparatively late structure in the eastern 
 wall 1,090 feet north of the south-east angle) the character 
 of the masonry changes points to the probability that 
 the original external wall formed an approximately 
 rectangular enclosure averaging 1,000 feet each way. 
 That it was surrounded by cloisters is asserted by 
 Josephus, who gives their dimensions, and further 
 explains that the south cloister (named the ' Ro^^al ') was 
 triple, whereas the others were double, and that the 
 eastern range of columns was Solomon's Porch. 
 
 That there were at least five gates to the outer court is 
 attested by Middoth, which mentions two on the south, 
 one on the north (by name Tadi), and one each on the 
 east and west. Josephus, silent as to an Eastern Gate, 
 confirms the existence of gates on the south (as do also 
 the evidences of the existing remains), and amplifies the 
 single Western Gate of Middoth into no less than four ; 
 one of these, he says, led by a stairway to the bottom of 
 the valley between the Temple and the city, and another 
 crossed by a bridge to the Royal Palace. Tempting as 
 it is from an architectural point of view to assume that 
 the Bridge Gate was placed at the west end of the Royal 
 Portico, it is sounder archaeology to look for remains of 
 this bridge, not in the arch named after Dr. Robinson, 
 but in the 'Wilson' arch some 200 yards further north. 
 It is certain that the worshipper entering by either of 
 the southern gates found himself not on the level of the 
 Temple platform, but at the foot of a stairway leading up 
 to the platform and probably debouching on the north 
 front of the Royal Colonnade. Inasmuch as Middoth (i. 9) 
 mentions a subway for the priests to the Northern, or 
 Tadi, Gate it is possible that here also the public entered 
 by ascending stairs. The northern end of the subway 
 was perhaps common both to priests and laymen. 
 
 The main features of the outer enclosure being thus 
 established, it remains only to consider one point before 
 proceeding to the arrangement of the inner buildings. 
 
io8 THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 What was the position of the castle Antonia ? Josephus 
 states that it was at the corner of the western and 
 northern cloisters (B. J. v. 5. 8) ; but, since the northern 
 frontage of the Temple terrace lay along a valley, 
 there is some reason to think that though the entrance 
 towards the castle was in the north-west corner of the 
 colonnades, the castle itself may have been separated 
 from the Temple by a double bridge at the head of the 
 valley (B. J. v. 5. 8). The steps leading up to these 
 bridges would be those made famous by St. Paul in Acts 
 xxi. 35. 
 
 The written authorities give no very certain indication 
 of the size and shape of the enclosure within the Court 
 of the Gentiles, but Josephus and the tract Middoth are 
 agreed that it was surrounded by a low wall or screen 
 bearing at intervals pillars or panels inscribed with words 
 of caution prohibiting entry to all Gentiles. These in- 
 scriptions were in Greek and Latin, and one of them is 
 extant. The height of the wall is given in Middoth as 
 ten handbreadths, by Josephus as three cubits, and its 
 name was Soreg. 
 
 In the absence of data as to the size of this inter- 
 mediate enclosure, we are left to determine it by 
 inference ; the plotting out of the buildings contained 
 therein, for which the Middoth supplies fairly fall 
 figures, determines its minimum extent, and it is soon 
 found that if we are to adhere to the statement in 
 Middoth that the south court of the Gentile enclosure 
 was the largest, the east next large, and the north larger 
 than the west, there is not much choice left as to the 
 position or size of the aggregate assembly of buildings. 
 We are indeed confirmed in the accuracy of the result by 
 finding that the arrangement thus secured places the 
 great altar approximately upon the spot which is the 
 highest natural level of the hilltop. This coincides with 
 the present Dome of the Rock, a building which (how- 
 ever seriously its traditions may have been perverted) 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEEOD 109 
 
 can reasonably be supposed to mark a spot of original 
 sanctity. On the general arrangement of the courts 
 within the Soreg there is little doubt. From the Soreg 
 twelve (Mid. ii. 3) or fourteen steps (B. J. v. 5. 2) led to a 
 platform ten cubits wide known to the Talmud writers as 
 Chel, and from the level of Chel there were nine en- 
 trances to the inner enclosures by means of nine gate- 
 ways or gate-houses, as to the number and size of which 
 the Middoth and Josephus are in substantial harmony. 
 The fact that Middoth (i. 4) speaks of seven gates only 
 and that Josephus, in spite of his enumeration of ten 
 gates in B. J. v. 5. 3, speaks, in Ant. xv. 11. 5, of three 
 gates on the north and three on the south, is easily 
 explained by the supposition that two of the side-gates 
 (north and south) were entrances to the women's enclosure, 
 and were consequently not reckoned either by Josephus or 
 the Rabbis in enumerating the gates of the Court of 
 Israel, which is understood to have three northern, three 
 southern and one eastern gate. 
 
 That the women's court lay east of the enclosure to 
 which the men of Israel only were admitted is clear from 
 Josephus, but on the subject of its size and arrangement 
 there is divergence of antiquarian opinion. The book 
 Middoth states clearly that it measured 135 cubits each 
 way and that it had at each corner a roofless room forty 
 cubits square. The purposes of these rooms as indicated 
 on the plan are those detailed in Middoth. Modem 
 writers, unwilling to accept such large dimensions for the 
 women's court and experiencing a difficulty in reconcil- 
 ing the Talmudic figures with the small total breadths 
 given by Josephus, have felt at liberty to reject the 
 testimony of Middoth ; but, taking as we do our outside 
 dimensions from the actual site, not from Josephus (or 
 even from Middoth itself), we have no arithmetical reason 
 for rejecting the Talmudic dimensions of this court. 
 
 That the Court of Women was colonnaded is probable 
 from Josephus, B. J. v. 5. 2, also from Ant. xv. 11. 3, 
 
110 THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 a passage which may be held to imply the existence 
 of a double row of columns along the whole of the wall 
 separating the women's court from that of Israel. Such 
 a portico, providing a partition without obstructing vision, 
 may well be the ' lattice ' of Middoth ii. 5, which allowed 
 women to see from above and men from beneath. There 
 would be no doubt a stairway at each end to the women's 
 upper platform, and beneath these stairs might be the 
 rooms for the musical instruments of the Levites (Mid. 
 ii. 6). 
 
 The gateway in the centre of this colonnade or lattice 
 gallery was probably the Nieanor Gate of Middoth, whose 
 brass glittered like gold — identical with the Corinthian 
 Gate, or gate of Corinthian brass, which Josephus says 
 opened on the east over against the Holy of Holies — 
 identical also, we may believe, with the Beautiful Gate 
 of the Acts of the Apostles. The fifteen steps which led 
 up to it, semicircular like the half of a threshing-floor 
 (Mid. ii. 5), formed the platform on which the Levites 
 chanted. Middoth speaks of an Eastern Gate on which 
 was portrayed the city Shushan. It is implied that 
 this is a gate of the outer enclosure, in which case 
 it may be identical in position with the more recent and 
 still existing Golden Gate (at the north-east angle of 
 the site). 
 
 From the passage Chel to the Court of Israel five steps 
 ascended, but from the women's court were, as we have 
 seen, fifteen steps. This proves either that the women's 
 court was some few feet lower than Chel or, as Spiess 
 opines, that whereas the five steps from the Chel were each 
 nine inches high (Middoth) the steps out of the women's 
 court were but three inches each in height. The latter is 
 the interpretation adopted in this restoration. 
 
 It will be observed that on the plan a certain obliquity 
 is indicated in the women's court, and further that the 
 northern portion of the Court of the Gentiles is depicted 
 as being on a higher level than the Gentile court on the 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEROD iii 
 
 south-east and west sides. The reason for both these 
 inequalities is to be found in the nature of the existing 
 remains. There is to be seen at the present day an upj^er 
 platform (forming the terrace on which the Dome of the 
 Rock stands), the outline of which is so definite that it 
 seems impossible to regard it as entirely a modern crea- 
 tion. The very fact that this platform is oblique on its 
 eastern side points strongly to the probability that it is 
 the survival of some ancient oblique structure, and the 
 further fact that its south and west limits coincide 
 respectively to the expected position of the southern 
 Chel and the western flank of the Temple terrace almost 
 forces the conclusion that its northern and western out- 
 lines are also to be respected as vestiges of antique form. 
 By admitting the possibility of a change of level in the 
 northern Court of the Gentiles, the question of the north 
 boundary is settled ; for the limit of the present platform 
 coincides with our already-established line of northern 
 cloister. Further, the admission of obliquity on the east 
 solves this eastern boundary also. Such an obliquity 
 would no doubt be primarily brought about by the con- 
 formation of the virgin rock, and though its divergence 
 from rectangularity is conspicuous in a plan on paper it 
 is not so great as to be a noticeable inequality in an 
 actual building, nor does it interfere with the possibility 
 of a direct coup d'oeil through the two eastern gates to 
 the door of the sanctuary over the centre of the great 
 altar. The only unexpected feature which the adoption 
 of this eastern line of the upper platform introduces 
 is an extended platform or raised terrace along the 
 western side of the women's court ; but, as we are aware 
 that extended standing room on the higher level would 
 be valuable at this point, there is every reason for accept- 
 ing the arrangement here indicated. 
 
 The tract Middoth gives 187 cubits by 135 as the 
 dimensions of 'the whole of the court' — a statement which 
 has given rise to much natural confusion. The reasonable 
 
112 THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 assumption that the space so figured is the entire area 
 bounded by the wall containing the gates leads to a 
 variety of difficulties, and it is only by realizing that 
 the 'whole of the court' means the priestly enclosure 
 exclusive of the general Court of Israel that the ad- 
 justment of the measurements becomes easy. A further 
 confusion arises from the statement in Middoth that the 
 ' place for the tread of the feet of Israel ' and the ' place 
 for the tread of the priests' were each of them ii 
 cubits wide by 135 cubits long. Some have supposed 
 that the former insignificant passage represented the 
 entire Court of male Israelites, but since the Court of 
 the Priests at all events could not be confined into a 
 space of small dimensions it is only right to suppose 
 that the 'place of the tread of Israel' was a separate 
 enclosure from the general Court of male Israelites. 
 It is indeed clear that (in spite of the fact that the 
 Talmudic description of the House Moked favours the 
 notion that it opened directly into the more sacred 
 enclosure) the six gates led into a Court of Israel which 
 surrounded on three sides the compound enclosure ('whole 
 of the court'), measuring 187 cubits by 135 cubits, which, 
 besides encircling the Holy Place (Jos., B. J. v. 5. 6) 
 contained two narrow passages for priests and people 
 respectively engaged in special ritual connected with the 
 altar of burnt sacrifices which stood within the priestly 
 enclosure. There would seem to have been a metal 
 fence between the priests' court and that of the men of 
 Israel, and the latter was apparently 2I cubits lower. 
 
 Josephus and the tract Middoth differ as to the di- 
 mensions of the altar. The height given by Josephus 
 (15 cubits) is not necessarily at variance with the dimen- 
 sions of Middoth iii. i, but his width of 50 cubits 
 can only be approximately harmonized with the 32 
 cubits of Middoth by assuming that to the 32 cubits of 
 the altar proper we may add the 16 cubits which make 
 the width of the inclined ascent. 
 
I 
 
 THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 113 
 
 Whatever doubts and discrepancies may hinder the 
 restoration of the outer portions of the Temple buildings, 
 there need be no uncertainty as to the disposition and 
 size of the sanctuary. That its front or facade was 100 
 cubits wide and the same in height is attested by both 
 our written authorities, and both agree that the western 
 portion of the building was narrower. Josephus puts 
 the width at 60 cubits, Middoth at 70, a difference 
 which is not material. Both agree that there were 
 three compartments of the Holy House — a 'porch' or 
 outer hall (which Josephus considers to be 20 cubits 
 wide, but Middoth puts at 11), a central chamber which 
 both describe as 40 cubits by 20, and the Holy of Holies, 
 20 cubits square. Opinions have differed as to the size 
 and form of the outer door of the porch, and English 
 students are familiar with the late James Fergusson's 
 ingenious and plausible attempt to find in the description 
 given by the book Middoth a reflex of the 'Toran' of 
 an Oriental temple. Without entering into the details 
 of the argument for or against this assumption, we may 
 remark that a building which was the joint product of 
 Jewish tradition and of Herod's Roman culture is not 
 likely to have borrowed the architectural symbolism of 
 disconnected Oriental religion, and that unless it can 
 be conclusively proved that this doorway was the repre- 
 sentative of the Jachin and Boaz of Solomon's building, 
 and that they in turn actually were the supports of 
 a wooden erection of a kind similar to these Eastern 
 Torans, there is little reason for forcing the descriptions 
 of our two authorities to an interpretation which they 
 do not very readily bear. Josephus and Middoth differ 
 in the dimensions of the great doorway, but if we may 
 assume that it was formed with inclined jambs like the 
 doorway of the Erechtheum, and that it had, like the 
 synagogue at Kefr Bir im, an arch above the wooden 
 lintels which the Talmud so accurately describes (Mid. 
 iii. 7), then it may well happen that Josephus' 25 cubits 
 
114 THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 and the 20 cubits of Middoth may be respectively the 
 widths at the bottom and top of the opening, while the 
 two heights 70 cubits (Joseph.) and 40 cubits (Mid.) may 
 be the heights of the lintel in one case and the arch in 
 the other. One is tempted to take the ivicftaivc of 
 Josephus (B. J. V. 5. 4) literally and to imagine there- 
 from that the first chamber or hall was hypaethral, 
 exhibiting (not symbolizing) the 'universal visibility of 
 heaven.' But the undoubtedly metaphorical use of the 
 same word by Josephus in a neighbouring passage and 
 the ' roof alluded to in Mid. iii. 8 compel us reluctantly 
 to consider this chamber as being closed in. Josephus 
 insists on the fact that the centre of the Temple was 
 taller than its sides, an arrangement which, in spite of 
 the ' upper chamber ' recorded by the Eabbis, would give 
 the opportunity of illumination by a sort of clerestory 
 over the roof of the side buildings. The Holy of Holies 
 we assume to have been without windows, but the central 
 chamber and the outer hall must undoubtedly have 
 needed light. The gallery, or more properly sloping 
 passage, of Mid. iv. 5 is by some writers assumed to be 
 a winding stair ; but the very circumstantial description 
 of the course of this passage round the north, west, and 
 south sides of the building leaves no doubt that it was 
 in reality an inclined way giving circuitous access to 
 the upper chamber. Owing to its continual change of 
 level, it is obvious that it could only provide approach 
 to some of the small chambers, of which there were three 
 stories. It was no doubt for this reason that every one 
 of the chambers communicated not only with those on 
 each side of it, but also by a trap-door with the room 
 above or below. 
 
 There were, say the writers of Middoth, six chambers 
 or houses in the Temple court, three on the north and 
 three on the south, and of the three on the south one 
 was Gazith, the chamber of hewn stone, the hall of the 
 Sanhedrin. But Josephus is in disagreement here, and 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 115 
 
 appears to place the hall of the Sanhedrin in the neigh- 
 bourhood of the Xystus (the colonnaded building over 
 against the -Temple on the southern hill). It has been 
 assumed in the plan that it was an erection adjoining the 
 bridge leading from the Temple to the town. 
 
 Note. The quotations from Middoth are all taken from 
 the English version reprinted in Fergusson's Temples of 
 the Jews from Dr. Barclay's work on the Talmud. 
 
 I 2 
 
Vide Middoth, ch.i. and 
 } ch. ii. Joseph. B. J. v. 
 5-3. 
 
 ii6 THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 HEEOD'S TEMPLE 
 
 Alphabetical references to the plan. 
 
 A. I. The gate-house Nitzus. \ 
 
 A, 2. The gate-house of the Offering. 
 
 A. 3, The gate-house Moked. 
 
 A, 4, The gate-house of Jochania (?). 
 
 A. 5. The gate-house of Flaming. 
 
 A. 6. The gate-house of Offering, 
 
 A. 7. The Water gate-house. 
 
 A. 8. The gate-house of the Firstborn (?). 
 
 A. 9. The Beautiful or Nicanor Gate. Mid. ii. 3 ; Joseph. B. J. v. 5. 3. 
 
 A. 10. The gate of the women's court (?). 
 
 Note. The thirteen circular objects ranged on either side 
 of the women's court in front of the columns are the 
 trumpet-mouthed money-boxes for receipt of alms. 
 
 B. I. The gate Tadi (Mid. i. 3 and ii. 3) with a subway to the House 
 
 Moked. 
 B. 2. Probable position of the Shushan Gate (Mid. i. 3), being the 
 
 position of the still existing Golden Gate. 
 B. 3, 4. Two Huldah gates (Mid, i. 3) from which, being at a low 
 
 level, staircases led up to the Court of the Gentiles underneath 
 
 the Royal Porch. 
 B. 5. A gate with descending steps. Joseph. Ant. xv, 11. 5. 
 B. 6. A gate with a bridge. Joseph, ibid. 
 
 B. 7, 8. Two gates to conduct to the commercial suburb. Joseph. 
 
 ibid. 
 
 C. A conjectural portico with steps forming the entrance to the 
 
 bridges or causeways leading to the fortress Antonia. This 
 portico is the probable scene of St. Paul's speech. Acts 
 xxi. 40. 
 
 D. I. The chamber of Lepers, d. 2. The chamber of Wood. D. 3. The 
 
 chamber of Oil. d. 4. The chamber of Nazirites. All these were 
 roofless. Mid. ii. 5, 
 
 E. The Holy of Holies. 
 
 F. The Sanctuary, containing the Candlestick, the Table of Shew- 
 
 bread and the Altar of Incense. Joseph. B. J. v. 5. 4. 
 
 G. The Porch, and the House of the Instruments of Slaughter. Mid. 
 
 iv. 7. 
 H. The Slaughter-house. Mid. iii. 5. 
 
PLAN OF HERODS TEMPLE 
 
 A RESTORATION BY 
 W. SANDAY D.D.AND PAUL WATERHOUSE M.A. 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 117 
 
 I. J. K. The chamber of Salt, the chamber of Parva and the chamber 
 
 of Washers. Mid. v. 3. 
 L. M. N. The chamber of Wood, the chamber of Captivity, and the 
 
 chamber of the High Priest {?). Mid. v. 4. 
 o. The Place for the Tread of the Priests. i ^^.^ ^ ^ 
 
 p. The Place for the Tread of the Feet of Israel. \ 
 Q. Chel. A passage way or terrace. Mid. ii. 3 and Joseph. B.J. 
 
 V. 5. 2. 
 R. The wall or partition Soreg. Mid. ii. 3 and Joseph. B. J. v. 5. 2. 
 s. Fifteen steps of semicircular form (Mid. ii. 5). The platform west 
 of the steps is conjectural, but the outline of the present upper 
 platform makes its existence more than probable. 
 T. Conjectural position of the council-chamber where the Sanhedrin 
 met. Josephus favours some such position. The Talmud 
 assigns the meetings to the chamber of Hewn Stone (Gazith), 
 which Middoth would place in the same block with L. m. n. 
 Note. The smallness of the scale has rendered impossible 
 the delineation of the full number of steps in each stair- 
 case. The Chel should be 12 (Mid.) or 14 (Joseph.) steps 
 above the southern Court of the Gentiles, and the steps 
 of the Holy House are 12. Mid. iii. 6. 
 
THE PLAN OF JERUSALEM 
 
 [W. Sanday] 
 
 This plan is based on the work of F. Spiess, Bas Jerusalem 
 des JosepJms (Berlin, 1881), brought up to date by the help 
 of more recent works, especially Bliss and Dickie's Excavations 
 at Jerusalem, 1894-7, ^^^ with some additions and variations. 
 
 It should be understood that the assignment of sites is, and 
 must be, in many cases very approximate. We know in 
 general terms that there were seven synagogues in the neigh- 
 bourhood of the Cenaculum (p. 82, sup.) ; we know in general 
 terms that the Upper Agora, the House of Ananias, and the 
 Monument of Hyrcanus were in the region in which they are 
 placed ; but anything more precise than this must be conjecture. 
 Still there is usually some slight reason, in default of a better, 
 for the particular sites selected. 
 
 For instance, Spiess and others have, I do not doubt rightly, 
 seen that the modern Haret el-Maiddn (" Eacecourse Lane') 
 ought to be the site of Herod's Hippodrome. I place the 
 Theatre near it, not only because the juxtaposition is in itself 
 natural, but also because there is a curve in a modern street, 
 which looks as if it might preserve the configuration given 
 when the Theatre was standing. In like manner the Upper 
 Agora is placed on the line of a main thoroughfare which 
 probably existed in ancient times much where it does now. 
 There is also a second street parallel to this which might be 
 taken to mark the breadth of the Agora. The thoroughfare 
 would carry with it the position of the gate in the ancient 
 wall. 
 
 Spiess has, I believe, rightly fixed the position of the Council- 
 Chamber, the Archives, the Xystus, and the Maccabean Palace, 
 except that it seems to me better to place the two latter side by 
 side, than one below the other. I did not think it worth while 
 to alter the plan, but I now incline to think that the Hyrcanus 
 
THE PLAN OF JERUSALEM 119 
 
 Monument would be better placed on the other (western) side 
 of the Agora. It was a landmark several times mentioned in 
 the history of the siege ; near it the Eomans made one of their 
 main attacks, after they had broken through the second wall. 
 
 I have gone upon the assumption that both the eastern and 
 the western ridge had inner walls of their own. The Upper 
 City had to be taken separately, after the Lower had fallen. 
 And the line suggested in each case follows the trace of old 
 foundations. It is however a question precisely how old these 
 foundations are ; and this the data in Bliss and Dickie do not 
 quite enable one to solve. I have left out of the map, as 
 needlessly confusing, traces of other foundations that might 
 perhaps have a claim to be considered. These are points that 
 the experts on the spot must settle for us more exactly. I may 
 say that I chose the line which seemed to follow the natural 
 scarp of the hill. 
 
 On the vexed question as to Akra and the ancient Zion, I 
 have simply followed those whom I believe to be the best 
 authorities. But I have noted (p. 78) the important dissent 
 of Dr. Mommert (1903), to whom should be added his co- 
 religionist Prof. Kuckert (1898). The decision involves points 
 of Old Testament exegesis on which I am not prepared to 
 enter. 
 
 The use of colours must not be pressed too strictly. I have 
 sometimes used red for buildings known to have existed in the 
 early Herodian period, although they may be considerably 
 older. 
 
OF 
 
INDEX 
 
 'Ahdra, 23. 
 
 Abbreviations, xii. 
 
 •Abd el-Melik, Khalif, 54. 
 
 Abgarus, Apocryphal Letter 
 
 of, 21. 
 Adam, Skull of, 70, 97. 
 Aelia CapitoUna, 74, 76. 
 Aenon, 23, 33-35, 91, 94- 
 Agriculture, 4, 16, 103 f. 
 Agrippa II, Palace of (see also 
 
 Maccabean Palace), 87. 
 'Ain, 31. 
 'Askar, 31. 
 el-Barideh, 22. 
 J^am, 94. 
 el-Fuliijeh, 22. 
 Kdrim, 105, PI. LII. 
 el-Mudaivivara, 44. 
 et-Tabigha {Heptapegon), 38- 
 4o,44f.,47, 92,P1. XXXIII. 
 eM'iw, 40, 44. 
 Alexander, bishop of Jerusa- 
 lem, 75. 
 Monachus, 84. 
 Alliance Israelite, 6. 
 Antiochus of St. Saba, 84. 
 Antonia, Castle of, 52, 54, 106, 
 
 108. 
 Antoninus, pilgrim known as, 
 
 C.57OA.D., 65 f. 
 Arculfus, pilgrim c. 585 a.d., 
 
 45f.,85£f. 
 Aristobulus, Maccabean prince, 
 13- 
 
 Baedeker's Palestine (see So- 
 cin), 26, 65 f., 72, 93 f. 
 
 Bailey, Dr. H. J., 31 f. 
 
 Baniyds (Panias, Caesarea 
 Philippi), Castle of, PI. 
 XII. 
 
 Beautiful Gate, 65-67, no. 
 
 Beersheba, 40. 
 
 5e/sdw (Scythopolis), 12, 34 f. 
 
 Belfort (Kal'at esJi-ShaMf), PI. 
 XL 
 
 Belvoir, Castle {KoJcah el-Hawa), 
 12. 
 
 Benzinger, Dr. I., 62. 
 
 Betdne {Batneh, Betonim), 94. 
 
 Bethabara {'Ahdra), 23, 35. 
 
 Bethany {el- Azariiieh), 20, 24, 
 49, PI. XXVI. 
 beyond Jordan (see also 
 Bethabara, 'Ahdra, Betdne), 
 23, 35, 94. 
 
 Bethesda (vv. 11. Bethsaida, 
 Bethsatha, Bezetha, &c.). 
 Pool of, 55-58, 93 f. 
 
 Bethlehem {Bet Lalm) of Ju- 
 daea, 3, 19, 24 f., 49, Pll. 
 IX, X, XXVII. 
 of Galilee, 24 f. 
 
 Bethsaida, Bethsaida Julias, 
 
 . 4if-,.4S 48, 91, 95- 
 Bible Dictionaries, 38, 90. 
 BlancJiegarde{Tell es-Sdfiyeh), 12. 
 Bliss, Dr. F. J., li." 
 
 and Dickie, Mr. A. C, 118. 
 Bordeaux Pilgrim (333 a. d.), 
 
 21, 56. 
 Biirkner, Dr. E., 14. 
 Buhl, Dr. F.,37f., 72. 
 Burchardus, 28. 
 
 Caesarea Palaestina, 14, 16, 
 PI. XX. 
 Philippi (see also Baniyds), 
 14. 
 Caiaphas, House of, 54, 80, 87. 
 Calvary : see Golgotha. 
 Cana (= Kefr Kenna, or Kdmt 
 
122 
 
 INDEX 
 
 el-JelU, or more probably 
 'Ain Kana), 24, PI. XXIV. 
 
 Capernaum (Capharnaum ; see 
 
 also Khan Mlnijeh, Tell 
 
 Hum), vi, 36-48,49, 92, 102. 
 
 Fountain of {Heptapegon, 
 
 'Ain ct-Tabirjha), 44, 92. 
 
 Caspari, Dr. C. E., 30. 
 
 Cenaculum (Upper Eoom, 
 Church of Zion), 77-88, 
 89, 91, PU. XLVIII— L. 
 
 Cheyne, Dr. T. K., 25. 
 
 Chorazin [Kerdzeli), 24, 29, 48. 
 
 Chosroes II, 18. 
 
 ' Chronographer of 147,' 76, 82. 
 
 Colonia [Kaloniyeli), 30. 
 
 Conder, Colonel C. E., 37, 56 f., 
 58 f., 61, 72, 104. 
 
 Constantino, Empei-or, 10, 72 f. 
 Age of, 51, 72, 75, 81. 
 Architecture of, 3, 8, 19, 
 PI. X. 
 
 Corinthian style, 62, 65, no. 
 
 Criticism, Higher, 26. 
 Lower, vf., 26, 93. 
 
 Crusaders, 2, 1 1 f., 30. 
 
 Cyril of Jerusalem, 73, 84. 
 
 Dalman, Dr. G., 22. 
 Dalmanutha, 22. 
 Decapolis, 36. 
 Demoniac, The Gadarene or 
 
 Gerasene, 25-29, 92 f. 
 Dome of the Chain [Kubhet es- 
 
 Silseleh), 59, 64. 
 of the Kock (Mosque of 
 
 Omar, Kubhet es-SaJchra), 
 
 2 f., 18, 58-64, pii. IV— 
 
 VI. 
 
 ' East, The unchanging,' i f. 
 Ebal, Mount, 31, 91, PI. XXX. 
 Edessa, 21. 
 
 Emmaus, 29-31, 49, 92, PI. 
 XXVIII. 
 Nicopolis, 30, 92. 
 Encyclopaedia Bihlica, 25, 37. 
 
 Epiphanius, 70, 81 if. 
 
 Eucherius, 56. 
 
 Eusebius, 29, 34, 44, 73 if. 
 
 Fellahin (see Palestine, Inhabi- 
 tants ofj, 4, 6, 17, 103 f. 
 Fergusson, James, 64, 65. 
 Firmilian, 76. 
 Five Thousand, Feeding of, 
 
 45 f- 
 Florus, Gessius, 53 f. 
 Fourth Gospel, 95 f. 
 Franciscans, 30, 41, 87. 
 Frank Mountain {Herodium, 
 
 Jebel el-Fureidis), 49. 
 Fulleylove, Mr. J., 6, 102. 
 Furrer, Dr. K., 28 f., 37, 90, 
 
 93-96. 
 
 Gabara {Kubra), 28. 
 
 Gadara, Gadarene, 26-29, 93- 
 
 Galilee, Inhabitants of, 13, 36. 
 Villages of, 16. 
 
 Gates : see Jerusalem, Temple. 
 
 Garden Tomb, 67-71, 88, PI. 
 XLVI. 
 
 Gennesar, or Gennesaritis, Sea 
 of, 95- 
 
 Gerasa, of Decapolis, 19, 27, 
 PI. XXL 
 on the Sea of Galilee {Kersa, 
 Kursi), Gerasene, 25-29, 
 92 f. 
 
 Gergesa, Gergesene, 26-28, 93. 
 
 Gerizim, Mount, 33, 91. 
 
 German properties in Jerusa- 
 lem, 80 f. 
 
 Gezer {Mont G-isart, Tell Jeser), 
 12. 
 
 Golden Gate, 64-67, 106, no, 
 PI. XLIII. 
 
 Golgotha (see also Holy Sepul- 
 chre, Chapels in the Church 
 of the), 19, 54 f., 79 ff. ; cf. 
 Pll. VIII, XLIV, XLV. 
 
 Gordon, General C. G., 67-69, 
 PU. XLIV, XLV. 
 
INDEX 
 
 123 
 
 Graeco-Eoman civilization, 13- 
 
 16. 
 architecture, 14 f., 60, 62 f., 
 
 113, Pll. XIV— XXI. 
 Grove, Sir G,, 35. 
 Guerin, Mons. V., 37. 
 Guthe, Dr. H., 37, 78 f., 90- 
 
 93- 
 
 Hadrian, Emperor, 74 f., 81 f. 
 Haggard, Mr. Eider, 51, 37 f., 
 
 68, 102. 
 Hajar en-Nusara, 46. 
 Hammdm esh-Shifd, 93. 
 Harnack, Prof. A., 76, io2f. 
 Hastings, Dictionary of the 
 
 Bihk, 37. 
 Height, Views from a, 99 f. 
 Helena of Adiabene, Queen, 
 
 35 ; cf. PL XV. 
 Heptapegon : see 'Ain et-Ta- 
 
 higha. 
 Heraclius, Emperor, 65 ff. 
 Hermon, Little [Nehi DaM), 
 
 24. 
 Herod's Palace (see also 
 
 Hippicus, 14, 52-55, 
 
 91 ; cf. Pll. I, XXXVII, 
 
 XXXVII. 
 Herodian architecture, 14 f., 
 
 58 ff., 113, Pll. XIV— 
 
 XVI B. 
 Herodium: see Frank Moun- 
 tain. 
 Hippicus, Tower, 88, PI. 
 
 XXXVIII. 
 Hippolytus of Thebes, 84. 
 Hogarth, Mr. D. G., 4. 
 Holy Sepulchre, Church of 
 
 the, 8 ff., 20, 67-77 ; cf. 
 
 PI. XLIV. 
 Chapels in the, 8ff., 19, Pll. 
 
 VIII, XLVII. 
 Hughes, The late Eev. H. P., 
 
 74, 102. 
 Hyrcanus, Monument of, ii8f. 
 
 Identification of Sites, 21 f., 
 23 f., 91 f., a,nd passim. 
 
 Jericho, 20, 36. 
 Jerome, St., 29, 34, 44, 56. 
 Jerusalem (see also Bethesda, 
 Castle of Antonia, Cenacu- 
 lum. Church of the Holy 
 Sepulchre, Dome of the 
 Chain and of the Eock, 
 Garden Tomb, Golden Gate, 
 Herod's Palace, Hippicus, 
 House of Caiaphas, Prae- 
 torium. Tombs, Zion), 
 18, 78, 100, Frontis- 
 piece, PIL I, XLIV, 
 XLVIII. 
 
 Akra, 119. 
 
 Ananias, House of, 54, 87, 
 118. 
 
 Anne, Church of St., 55. 
 
 Archives, 118. 
 
 Chm-chof, 74 ff., 81 ff. 
 
 Council Chamber, 54, 114 f., 
 118. 
 
 Gates, 18, 54, 67. 
 
 Hippodrome, 87, 118. 
 
 Kingdom of (Crusading), 12. 
 
 Pools (see also Bethesda, 
 Hammdm esh-Sliifd, Twin 
 Pools, Virgin's Fountain), 
 55-58, 91, 93 f., Pll. 
 XXXIX— XLL 
 
 Synagogue, 82, 118. 
 
 Theatre, 118. 
 
 Trading quarter, 88, 
 
 Tyropoeon, 78. 
 
 Upper Agora, 53, 118. 
 
 Walls, 3, 72, 80, 119. 
 
 Xystus, 14, 87, 118. 
 Jewish Colonization Society, 6. 
 Jews, 5 ff., 12 f., 16 f. 
 
 of Galilee, 13. 
 
 of Gilead, 13. 
 John, Monasteiy of St. (on 
 the Jordan), 36. 
 
124 
 
 INDEX 
 
 John the Baptist, St., 34-36. 
 Jordan, Fords of the, 36, PI. 
 
 XXII. 
 Josephus, 16, 31, 44, 53 f., 
 
 106-117, 118. 
 Judaea : see Palestine. 
 Inhabitants of, 13. 
 Wilderness of, PI. LIV. 
 Justinian, Emperor, 63, 65. 
 
 Kalordyeli : see Emmaus. 
 
 Kasr Berdaivil, 12. 
 
 Kelman, Rev. J., 6, 102 f. 
 
 Kerazeli: see Chorazin. 
 
 Kersa, Khersa, Eursi, Kursu : 
 see Gerasa. 
 
 Kharesmians, 7 f. 
 
 Khan Minyeh (see also Caper- 
 naum), 37-48. 
 
 el-Kubebeh : see Emmaus. 
 
 Kreyenbiihl, Dr. J., 52. 
 
 Lachish, 10. 
 
 Landscape, Influence of, 97 fF. 
 Latham, The late Rev. H., 
 Master of Trinity Hall, 71. 
 Lazarus, Tomb of, 49. 
 Lees, Rev. Robinson, 6 f. 
 Legends, 20 f. 
 Lejjun, 30. 
 
 Lewis, Prof. Hayter, 64, 65. 
 Loti, Pierre, 2, 9. 
 
 Maccabean Palace (see also 
 
 Agrippa II), 118. 
 Macmillan's Guide, 33 f., 40, 
 
 68f., 71, 73f. 
 Magadan, 22. 
 Magdala (Blejdel), 22, 24. 
 Magdalutha, 23. 
 el-Mamun, Khalif, 64. 
 Marino Sanudo, 29. 
 Masada, 105, PI. LV. 
 Matthew, Apocryphal Gospel 
 
 of, 66. 
 Megiddo {Lejjun), 30. 
 Melchizedek, 34. 
 
 Melito, 75. 
 
 Merrill, Dr. S., 37, 72. 
 
 Middoth, Talmudic tract, 106- 
 
 114. 
 Mills, Mr., 31. 
 Modestus, abbot and patriarch 
 
 of Jerusalem, 10, 87. 
 Mommert, Dr. K., 10, 72, 78, 
 
 81-87, 119- 
 Mommsen, Prof. Theodor, 55. 
 Mosque el-ATisu, 8, 18, 59, 67. 
 
 Ndhlus, 31, 103. 
 Nain, 24, loi, PI. XXV. 
 Nazareth, 3, 20, 24, 49, 100 f., 
 102, Pll. XXIII A and B. 
 Neubauer, Dr. A., 37, 43. 
 
 Orientation, 85 f. 
 
 Origen, 23, 26, 28, 70, 76, 93. 
 
 Palestine, Agriculture of, 4, 
 16, 103 f. 
 Ancient and modern com- 
 pared, 16 f. 
 Commerce of, 16, 104. 
 Harbours of, 16, 104. 
 Inhabitants of, 13, 17, 102, 
 
 I03f. 
 Intrusive elements in, 2, 11. 
 Misgovernment of, 5. 
 Plains of, 16, 99, 105. 
 Pi-oducts of, 16. 
 Ruins of, II. 
 Saracenic element in : see 
 
 Saracens. 
 Semitic element in, 15 f. 
 Perrot and Chipiez, MM., 15, 
 
 63. 
 Persians, 7, 66. 
 Pilgrims, 21. 
 
 Early to the sacred sites, 75 f. 
 See also Antoninus, Ar- 
 culfus, Bordeaux Pilgrim, 
 Silvia, Theodosius. 
 Pompeii, i, 16. 
 Praetorium, 53-55, 91. 
 
INDEX 
 
 125 
 
 Precipitation, Cliff of, 49, PI. 
 
 XXIII B, cf. LIII. 
 Probability, 21. 
 Processions, 86, cf. 54 f. 
 Puchstein, Dr. 0., 63. 
 
 Ramsay, Prof. W. M,, 97-101, 
 cf. 105 and PI. LIII. 
 
 Eenan, Ernest, 100 f. 
 
 Riehm, Uandworterbuch, 37. 
 
 Road to Damascus, Caravan, 
 46-48. 
 
 Robbers, Caves of the, 47 f., 
 50, PI. XXXII. 
 
 Robinson, Dr. E., 24, 34, 37, 65. 
 
 Riickert, Prof., 119. 
 
 Safed, 39, 49. 
 
 Salim, 23, 33-35, 91. 
 
 Sdlim, 331, 91. 
 
 Samaria, city, 19, Pll. XVI A 
 
 and B. 
 district, 16. 
 es-Satnra, 93. 
 Saracens, Saracenic element, 
 
 2 if., II, 18, 59 f., Pll. 
 
 II-VI. 
 Schenkel, Bibel-Lexikon, 37. 
 Schick, Dr. C, 9, 11, 15, 61- 
 
 64, 65, 67, 72. 
 Schliemann, Heinrich, 10. 
 Schiirer, Dr. E., 37 f., 41. 
 Schumacher, Herr G., 28 f., 92. 
 Scythopolis : see Beisdn. 
 Sedinia, 34. 
 Sephardim, 6. 
 
 Sepp, Dr. J. N., 37, 46, 64, 67. 
 Sepphoris, 13, 102. 
 Silvia, of Aquitaine, pilgrim 
 
 known as, 21, 34 f., 44, 84. 
 Sinjil (St. Giles), 12. 
 Smith, Prof. G. Adam, 37, 43, 
 
 102. 
 Socin, Dr. A. (see also Baede- 
 ker), 26, 37, 92. 
 Soden, Freiherr Prof.von, 37f., 
 
 93> 103. 
 
 Spiess, F., no, 116. 
 Stanley, Dean, 37. 
 Swete, Dr. H. B., 54. 
 Sychar, 31-33, 91. 
 Syrians, 17, 104. 
 
 Tacitus, 16. 
 Tell, 42. 
 
 Hum, 37-47, 92, PU. XVII, 
 XXXV. 
 
 Jezer, 12. 
 jRidhghah, 35. 
 es-Sdfiyeh, 12. 
 et-Tell : see Bethsaida Julias. 
 Temple area, 2f., 58 f., 106 f., 
 Frontispiece, PI. IV. 
 of Herod, 14 f., 58-63, 106- 
 117, Frontispiece. 
 Altar, ii2f. 
 Chambers or houses, 109, 
 
 112, 114, ii6f. 
 
 Gates (see also Golden 
 
 Gate), 59, 62, 64-67, 107, 
 
 io9f., 112 f., 116 f. 
 
 Holy Place, 60, 62!, 115 f. 
 
 Porches or cloisters, 60, 62, 
 
 96, 107. 
 Stairways, steps, and ter- 
 races, 59, 107 f., II 6 f. 
 Treasury, 96, 116. 
 Walls (outer), 58. 
 Model of, 61. 
 of Solomon, 15, 61 f. 
 Substructures of (ef. 'Solo- 
 mon's stables '), 59, 88, 
 PI. XLII. 
 Terraces (agricultural), 16, 104. 
 Textual Criticism : see Lower 
 
 Criticism. 
 Theodericus, 29. 
 Theodosius, pilgrim e. 530 a. d. 
 
 44 f. 
 Thomson, Dr. W. M., 27 f., 37. 
 Tiberias, 5, 13, 46, 102, PI. 
 XXXVI. 
 Sea of (see also Sea of Galilee, 
 Sea of Gennesar), 95. 
 
126 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Tissot, Mons. J. J., 7. 
 Tombs, 14. 
 Tradition, 5if., 68f. 
 Tristram, Dr. H. B., 22, 44. 
 Trumbull, Dr. H. C, 33. 
 Turner, Mr. C. H., p. 75 f. 
 Twin Pools, 56. 
 
 Umm el-'Amddn, 35. 
 
 Upper Koom : see Cenaculum. 
 
 Venus, Temple of, 73, 77. 
 Virgin, Death of the, 85. 
 Fountain of the (Jerusalem), 
 56-58, 93 f-, PI. XLI. 
 (Nazareth), PH. XXIII A 
 and B. 
 
 Wddy Abu Muhair, 94. 
 
 Fdra, 94. 
 
 el-Far a, 33, 94. 
 
 elrHmmm, 48. 
 
 Seldm or Scndm, 94. 
 
 Semak, 25. 
 Wilson, Sir Charles W., 35, 
 
 37, 4'6, 69, 78, 96. 
 Willibaldus, 29. 
 Wirziburgensis, Johannes, 29. 
 Witting, Herr Felix, 62 f. 
 Wolff, Dr., 37. 
 
 Zahn, Prof. Theodor, vi, 80- 
 
 86, 93 f. 
 Zion, 78 f., 119. 
 
 Church of (see also Cenacu- 
 lum), 82-87. 
 
126 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Tissot, Mons. J. J., 7. 
 Tombs, 14. 
 Tradition, 5if., 68f. 
 Tristram, Dr. H. B., 22, 44. 
 Trumbull. Dr. H. C, 33. 
 Turner, Mr. C. H., p. 75 f. 
 Twin Pools, 56. 
 
 Umni el-Amddn, 35. 
 
 Upper Eoom : see Cenaculum. 
 
 Venus, Temple of, 73, 77. 
 Virgin, Death of the, 85. 
 Fountain of the (Jerusalem), 
 56-58, 93 f-, PI. XLI. 
 (Nazareth), Pll. XXIII A 
 and B. 
 
 Wddy Abu Muhair, 94. 
 
 Fara, 94. 
 
 el-Far'a, 33, 94. 
 
 el-Hatmm, 48. 
 
 Selam or Sendm, 94. 
 
 SemaJc, 25. 
 Wilson, Sir Charles W., 35, 
 
 37, 46, 69, 78, 96. 
 WilUbaldus, 29. 
 Wirziburgensis, Johannes, 29. 
 Witting, Herr FeHx, 62 f. 
 Wolff, Dr., 37. 
 
 Zahn, Prof. Theodor, vi, 80- 
 
 86, 93 f. 
 Zion, 78 f., 119. 
 
 Church of (see also Cenacu- 
 lum), 82-87. 
 
#1» 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 n J 
 
 ^ 
 
 o <; 
 
 U. 
 
 z X 
 
 =3 
 
 
 -3 
 
 ' K 
 
 w 
 
 H 
 
 
OXFORD 
 PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
 BY HORACE HART, JI.A. 
 PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO 50 CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 1 
 
 OCT 6 194UM 
 
 
 
 
 <^CT 7 1940 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 Ll) 21-100m-7,'39(402s) 
 
Yb 09463 
 
 
 « 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS | 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 1 
 
 OCT 6 194UM 
 
 
 
 
 OCT 7 1940 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 Ll) 21-100m-7.'39(402s) 
 
THE TEMPLE OF HEROD 
 
 TWO SECTIONS INDICATING THE PROBABLE 
 ARCHITECTVRAL CHARACTER OF THE BVILDINGS 
 
 C O V R T 
 
 THE GENTILES 
 
 SECTION LOOKIN 
 
 SCALE OF CVBITS 
 
 'T ^ y ^ f 
 
 <CH-( SANCTVARY - OF ■ ■ 
 
 K ■ ■ rrH 
 
 A PLAN OF THE HOLY HOVSE 
 
 SCALE OF CVBITS t-rf ffyt^fffr 
 
 FOR PLAN O 
 
 COVRT OF THE GENTILES 
 
 SECTION LOOKIN* 
 
COVRT OF THE MEN OF ISRAEL 
 
 )K1NG SOVTH