Page images
PDF
EPUB

1846.]

Courses of Walls.

649

After breaking through the outer wall into the new city, Titus transferred his head-quarters to the camp of the Assyrians within the same, “having first taken possession of the whole intervening tract (inozor nãv tò μɛtaşú) quite to the Kidron, and being still out of the reach of weapons from the second wall." This language would seem to imply, that the spot in question must have been in the western part of the new city. To the same effect is another passage, where it is said of Titus, that having begun his own wall "from the camp of the Assyrians, where his own troops now lay, he carried it down upon the lower new city (ἐπὶ τὴν κατωτέρω Καινόπολιν ήγε), and thence through the Kidron to the mount of Olives."2 From all these notices it seems clear,

that the camp of the Assyrians, so called, must have been upon the eastern declivity below the tower Psephinos; and far enough towards the north to be out of the reach of weapons from the second wall; which, as we have seen, probably did not vary much from the line of the present northern wall.3 Here, in the northwestern quarter, the new city was apparently not fully built up; and thus Titus found space along the declivity for the encampment of his troops within the city.

IV. COURSES OF VARIOUS WALLS. The specifications of the German writer in regard to the courses of some of the walls, seem to admit of further investigation.

1. Third or outer Wall. The general course of this wall is rightly given upon the new Plan of Kiepert, so far as the ancient traces of it extend on the east of the corner tower Psephinos. Beyond this point the Plan represents it as carried northwards quite to the valley of Jehoshaphat, where the latter runs east; and then as following the brow of this valley down to the city; thus taking in the Tombs of the Kings so called, and the other similar sepulchres in that quarter.4 This course is laid down by the German writer mainly on the presumption, that he has discovered the sepulchre of Helena in another spot, on the northwest of the city.5 But-to say nothing of the improbability that the Tombs of the Kings and the adjacent sepulchres should all have been within the city-so long as the strong proof above adduced exists to show that the main sepulchre in question is identical with the mausoleum of Helena, it is certain that the third wall could not have made so great a circuit towards the north.

1 Jos. B. J. V. 7. 3.

3 See above p. 452.

2 Jos. B. J. V. 12. 2.
4 See Bibl. Res. I. p. 534.

Schultz, p. 62 sq. See above, p. 645, 646.

Josephus describes its course from Psephinos as follows:1 " Thence it was carried along (xaðйxov) over against the tomb of Helena; and being prolonged through the royal caves, it turned by the corner tower at the Fuller's monument so called, and, joining the old enclosure, terminated at the valley of the Kidron." This language necessarily implies, that the third wall left the tomb of Helena at some distance on the outside.

2. Second Wall. From the ancient gate now that of Damascus to Antonia, the second wall, according to the German writer, followed the course of the present wall; that is, it ran along the northern brow of the hill Bezetha, as understood both by this writer and myself. But, according to Josephus, Bezetha lay outside of the second wall and lower city; and was first taken in when the third wall was built.3

3. Wall of Titus. After Titus had taken the second wall, and made several unsuccessful assaults upon Antonia and the upper city, he went to work more cautiously, and built a new wall around the whole city so far as it was not yet subdued, in order to prevent all egress and hope of escape to the Jews.4 "Beginning at the camp of the Assyrians within the third wall, where Titus himself was now encamped, he carried the wall down upon the lower new city; thence through the Kidron to the mount of Olives; there turning it took in the mount as far as to the rock called Peristereon (IIɛqioteqewr) and the next hill, which lies over the valley at Siloam; thence turning west it went down into the valley of the fountain; beyond which ascending by the tomb of the high-priest Ananus, and taking through (Staλaßár) the hill where Pompey encamped, it turned northwards, and going on as far as to a certain village called Chickpea-house ('Egeẞírðar oizos) and beyond this including the monument of Herod, it joined again towards the east upon his own camp, where it had begun." The length of the whole wall was thirty-nine stadia; and it was completed by the whole army in three days.

The camp of the Assyrians, as we have seen,5 was probably on the declivity below the tower of Psephinos, some distance further north than the place assigned to it upon Kiepert's Plan. This position at once saves what appears upon the Plan as a very awkward angle in a wall of this description. My purpose here, however, is mainly to call the reader's attention for a moment to

1 Jos. B. J. V. 4 2.

2 Schultz, p. 62; comp. p. 56.
4 Jos. B. J. V 12. 1, 2.

3 Jos. B. J. V. 4. 2. See above, p. 438. See above, p. 647, 648.

1846.]

Wall of Titus.

651

one or two other points in connection with the wall. We may, I think, take it for granted, that the Romans would not make the wall longer, or give it a larger circuit, than was necessary for their purpose; they did not introduce into it curves or angles where a straighter line would answer as well. On the east and south the wall would naturally be carried along the side of the mount of Olives and of the southern hill, on a line not higher up than was absolutely necessary to render the wall defensible and secure against the efforts of the Jews. This then is all that can well be meant, when it is said of the wall, that it "took in_the_mount of Olives." The meaning cannot be, that it took in the whole mount, either as far as to Bethany or even to the summit; for why should the Romans subject themselves to all the trouble and toil of dragging their materials up hill, and of lengthening the wall by at least half a mile, without the slightest necessity? I cannot but think, therefore, that the "rock called Peristereon and the next hill lying over the valley at Siloam," were points on the western declivity not much above the valley, and are mentioned here simply to mark out more exactly the course of the wall.

The German author, however, carries the wall nearly to the summit of the mount of Olives, in order to take in the Tombs of the Prophets so called; which, led away by a fanciful analogy, he holds to be the Peristereon of Josephus. In like manner he makes the wall run high up towards the summit of the southern hill, where he assumes that Pompey first encamped on his arrival from Jericho.2 This seems to me to be without good reason, and against all probability. A far more probable position both for Pompey's camp and for the course of the wall, would be the

1 Schultz, p. 72. The manner in which this author connects the two together, is an instance of the haste with which he sometimes jumps at a conclusion. He says: "Peristereon (Epιotεpεwv) means Columbarium, which signifies not only dove-cote, but also a sepulchre with many niches.' Therefore it is here a name for the tombs of the Prophets, in which are many niches." Now both the Greek and this Latin word were certainly figuratively applied to things having resemblance to a dove-cote; the former being used as the name of a kind of weed, and the latter as the name of the hole for an oar and other like apertures in walls, etc. But no classic author ever employed either word to denote" a sepulchre with many niches." Honest Sandys, indeed, by way of comparison, once speaks of the large room in the tombs of the Judges as being "cut full of holes in manner of a dove-house;" Trav. p. 136.-For a full account of the tombs of the Prophets, by Rev. S. Wolcott, see Biblioth. Sacra, 1843, p. 36, 37. 2 Josephus says not a word of Pompey's encampment on his arrival from Jericho; but only speaks of his encamping afterwards on the north of the temple; Antt. XIV. 3. 4, comp. 4. 2. B. J. I. 6. 6, comp. 7. 3.

less elevated ground on the west of the valley of Hinnom over against Zion. To this quarter indeed the language of Josephus seems rather to point; and here one portion of the troops of Titus afterwards encamped, as did likewise in later ages a division of the army of the crusaders.

V. VIA DOLOROSA. I have formerly made the remark, that "the Via dolorosa seems to have been first got up during or after the times of the crusades ;" and that "the earliest allusion I had been able to find to it, is in Marinus Sanutus in the fourteenth century." The opinion thus advanced, I am happy to find, is most fully confirmed by the description of Jerusalem in the thirteenth century, to which allusion has already been made.3 From that work it appears conclusively, (what indeed might be inferred from the silence of Brocardus,) that in the thirteenth century no such name of a street existed in Jerusalem. The one now so called then bore two names in different parts. leading south from the Damascus gate, it was called the street of the Sepulchre (la rue du Sepulcre); while east of the same, quite to the gate at the valley of Jehoshaphat, it was known as the street of Jehoshaphat (la rue de Josaphat).4

West of the street

At the same time, we may perhaps discover the immediate occasion of the subsequent name Via dolorosa, as applied to this

In the highest part of the said street of Jehoshaphat was a gateway (porte) over against the temple, which was called Portes doulereuses.5 This was doubtless the present arch or gallery Ecce Homo; but no reason is assigned why it was then so called.

1 Jos. B. J. V. 3. 5; see above p. 648. Will. Tyr. VIII. 5. Bibl. Res. 1. pp. 344, 372. Marin. Sanut. III. 14, 10.

3 See above, p. 459, n. 2. First published by BEUGNOT, Assises de Jerusalem, Paris 1843, fol. Tom. II. p. 531 sq. Extracts in Schultz, App. p. 107 sq.

4 Descript. of Jerus. in Schultz App. pp. 112, 113, 114; comp. pp. 119, 120. 6 Ibid. Schultz, p. 114.

1846.]

True Date of Christ's Birth.

653

ARTICLE II.

THE TRUE DATE OF CHRIST'S BIRTH.

From the German of Wieseler: Continued from Bib. Sac. No. IX. p. 184. By Rev. George E. Day, Marlborough, Mass.

Or the four data for calculating the year of Christ's birth, with which we are furnished in the gospels, two have already been considered, viz. the reign of Herod the Great and the appearance of the star in the east. We now proceed to the

THIRD DATUM. The census instituted by Augustus Caesar, in consequence of which the parents of Jesus journeyed from Nazareth to Bethlehem and during the taking of which he was born. Luke 2: 1-7. To the credibility of Luke's narrative in respect to this census, five objections have been brought. It is said that during the entire reign of Augustus, history informs us of nothing beyond the censuses of single provinces; that admitting a general census of the empire to have occurred, it could not have been taken in Judea at the time Jesus was born, because Judea during the reign of Herod was not a Roman province; that if such a census were taken in Judea, by the Romans, they would not have obliged Joseph to travel to the city of his ancestors, because their rule was to take the census in the place of actual residence; that the journeying of Mary to be enrolled, considering her situation, is doubtful; and that, even if a census was taken at about the time Christ was born, Luke in affirming that it occurred during the procuratorship of Quirinus under whom a census was actually taken ten years later, has at least confounded the two.

1. In regard to the occurrence of a general census of the Roman empire, at about the time Jesus was born, the difficulty has been exaggerated both by friends and enemies. Admitting that the phrase nãoa oixovμévn does not admit of being confined to Judea, but must be understood according to the usus loquendi of the age, as designating the Roman empire, the existing orbis terrarum, we think it can be conclusively shown that such a census was taken. We think it can be proved that Augustus did institute a general census of the provinces, and that the edict to this effect was issued before the year 750 U. C.

For, aside from the testimony of Luke we have the witness of VOL. III. No. 12.

57

« PreviousContinue »