CIRCUIT OF THE THIRD WALL.

235

from Hippicus to Psephinus is a difficult task, for in doing this we encounter in our way, the disputed site of the holy sepulchre, and those who deny the identity of that place will, no doubt, say, that it is thus constructed, to meet the objection; but a careful examination of the ground, and of the several walls and cities, that have existed on this spot, will clear away many of the prejudices that have been entertained against its validity. The commencement of the wall was, in all probability, at the N. E. angle of the castle of David, or tower of Hippicus, because the ancient fosse, connected externally with the valley still surrounds the north side. The wall then sank into the Tyropoon, and joined the hill of Acra at its S. W. curve, opposite the small or shallow depression, in which stood Calvary, and where it was joined by the central, or second wall of Josephus, at Genneth. Now, bearing in mind the crescentic, or semilunar form and position of the hill Acra, which just here has its convexity toward the west, we must of necessity carry the wall along the brow of what we are expressly told was the old or lower city of Jerusalem that occupied this hill alone. The bending of this (naturally surrounding the hill) brings us a little eastward; and at the Bal-el-Shem, or gate of Damascus, are the remains of some old towers, the masonry, the construction, and the stones whereof demand particular attention; for they are similar to those in the northern wall of

236

THE ROYAL CAVES.

the enclosure of the Hareem Shereef that I referred to before. From this point it appears to me that the wall of ancient Jerusalem, long prior to the days of Herod Agrippa, was extended in a north-eastern direction, still following the outline of Acra, and by tracing it in this direction, we shall be able to follow the course of Nehemiah's wall. From that point outward, toward the N. is the district of Bezetha or Cenopolis, the part enclosed by the Roman governor; and that from David's castle to the Damascus gate, must have been the ancient city wall, even in the days of the Jewish historian which followed the natural course of the ground that I have laid down. From the Damascus gate, this wall proceeded to the tower Psephinus, up the gentle slope of Bezetha, in a N.W. direction. The historian tells us that it "then was so far extended till it came over against the monuments of Helena, which Helena was queen of Adiabne, the mother of Izates;" it then extended (or was prolonged) farther to a great length, and passed by the sepulchral caverns of the kings;" or, to use a more critical translation, the royal caves, (σrnλawv Baoiλik@v.) Now, here we come to another disputed point. Modern antiquaries not finding the monuments of Helena, must needs make the tombs of the kings, or royal caves, the places just referred to. This opinion was first proposed by Pococke, and it has since been adopted by Clarke and others, who not only

MONUMENT OF HELENA.

237

endeavour to make the two places synonymous, but conduct the Bezethean wall beyond the royal caves, and enclose them within the circuit of the city; a line I do not think at all warranted, for, we find these very monuments of the queen of Adiabne thus spoken of by Josephus. After the death of Helena and Izates, her son, Monobazus, "sent her bones, as well as those of Izates, his brother, to Jerusalem, and gave orders that they should be buried at the pyramids, which their mother had erected; they were three in number, and distant more than three furlongs from the city of Jerusalem;" evidently referring to the ancient or Nehemiahan wall. Now those pyramids were in existence up to the time of Eusebius, who as well as Pausanius, Valesius, and others, mention them; and the very fact of their destruction may be accounted for by their not being cut out of the rock, like the royal caves, but being erected above ground, they would be plundered for their contents, to assist in constructing more modern works. The text of the historian is, I conceive, too plain to require a further refutation of this objection, for he expressly says, "it then extended to a great length, and passed by the royal caves," very properly leaving this burialplace outside the city wall. But, to resume, having passed the sepulchres it "bent again at the tower of the corner, (or more correctly with a tower at the corner,) at the monument which is

238

THE EASTERN BOUNDARY.

called the Monument of the Fuller, and joined to the old wall at the valley called the Valley of Kedron." Where the pathway leading toward Galilee and Samaria crosses this line of wall, we find the evident and decided traces of the foundation of what appeared a gate, and leading east and west from it the remains of masonry is distinguishable. I have, therefore, made this the most northern part of the wall, and marked it in the map "Ancient Remains." Other traces of this wall, south of the royal caves were visible in the days of Pococke in 1778, toward the N. W. corner.

We have now completed the three walls of Josephus, by joining that last described to the ancient wall, at the valley of Jehoshaphat, or Kedron, near the ancient Fish-gate; but there is still a part of the city, on the east, un-encompassed by Josephus, that is, from the Fish-gate to Ophel, the place from whence we commenced at the S. W. corner of the temple. One-half of this wall he describes in another place, when speaking of the temple and its courts, as built by Solomon himself, upon the east side of it; all the rest of the house being at that time unenclosed. This refers not to the walls of the temple itself, but to the enclosure made round the brow of Mount Moriah. From the northern point of that wall, that is, from the tower that I described at page 233, to the Fish-gate, where it met the wall of Agrippa, the historian seems to understand as the "old wall," a term applied to it

WALLS OF NEHEMIAH.

239

as well as to the second, or "middle," or broad wall of Scripture.

Having thus completed the circuit of the city at the time of the Roman invasion and its destruction by Titus, let us take up the Scriptures and see whether these walls or any part of them correspond to those repaired by Nehemiah.* In the year B. C. 445, Artaxerxes, King of Babylon, to which country Judea was then tributary, gave permission to Nehemiah to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, broken down by Nebuchadnezzar.

The inhabitants took this work in parts, and it is said finished it in the astonishingly short time of fifty-two days. "Then Eleazshib, the high-priest, rose up with his brethren the priests, and they builded the Sheep-gate."† This, from its position with regard to Bethesda, (John, v. 2.) and its being in the east wall, I think there can be now little doubt corresponded in situation to the present gate of St. Stephen to the north of the enclosure of the temple-and it may have received its name from being the gate at which the

* Nehemiah, iii.

+ Doctor Adam Clarke, perhaps the most learned and critical biblical scholar of our time, speaks thus upon our knowledge of this ancient wall in his day-"we really know scarcely any thing about these gates, what they were, why called by these names, or in what part of the wall situated. All the places of Jerusalem, its temples, walls, and gates, are mere works of conjecture; and yet how learnedly have some men written on all these subjects !"