Jerusalem Explored Part 35

_Harat el-Arman_ (the Armenian street), on the East of the Castle;

_Harat el-Yahud_ (the Jews' street) is situated on the Eastern slope of Mount Sion;

_Harat bab Hotta_, the street that runs parallel to the Temple in the central valley;

And many others, which are little frequented, and are not worthy of mention.

NOTES ON CHAPTER II.

NOTE I. The drainage system of the city is divided into the Southern, Northern, and Eastern sections, the division of the two former being marked by the street called the Street of David. The keeping in repair of the Southern section is the business of the local governor, and in consideration thereof he receives a fixed annual sum from the Armenians and the Jews, as inhabitants of that quarter. The Northern section as far as the central valley is kept in repair by the Latin and Greek convents, this district containing the quarters of their respective nations. All the drainage on the Eastern side is under the sole charge of the governor. The Arabs very seldom take the trouble to look after their own sewers, but are zealous enough in enforcing the execution of repairs which belong to the Christian communities; and since the latter have them executed with an ill-will, and employ men of no experience for the direction of the works, the drains are choked and flooded almost every year, and are constantly being opened for repairs; a cause of no slight annoyance in the city. It was during these works that, for eight successive years, I had the opportunity of examining their formation, their respective inclines, and directions, from which I found that they all run into the central valley (the Tyropoeon Valley of my map), and thence drain away to the S.E. outside the city, as far as the large pool, now filled up, below the fountain of Siloam.

The Christians have been obliged to accept the performance of these and other foul works since the commencement of the supremacy of the Arabs and Turks, who have submitted them to the most severe humiliations, and to the most vile and oppressive tasks.

NOTE II. On the subject of "cubits" and stadia, I transcribe the remarks of M. Munk, in his book ent.i.tled "La Palestine," subjoining an account of my own special observations on the subject.

"The measures of length, called _Middoth_, are generally referred to the hand and arm; the following are mentioned: (1) _Ecba_ (Jer. lii. 21), _the finger_, i.e. the breadth of the finger or thumb; (2) _Tephach_ (1 Kings vii. 26), or _tophach_ (Exodus xxv. 25), the _hand-breadth_, i.e.

the breadth of four fingers; (3) _Zereth_ (Exodus xxviii. 16), the distance between the tips of the thumb and little finger, or the _span_; (4) _Ammah_, the whole length of the fore-arm, or _cubit_. The relative value of these measures is not indicated in any part of the Bible; to fix it, we must consult Josephus and the Rabbinic traditions. In Exodus xxv. 10, the dimensions of the ark are stated as follows; length 2-1/2 cubits, breadth 1-1/2 cubits, height 1-1/2 cubits. Josephus, in the Antiquities (III. 6, -- 5), represents the 2-1/2 cubits by 5 spans, and for 1-1/2 cubits puts 3 spans: hence the span was the half of the cubit.

The Rabbins agree with Josephus; according to them the zereth is half a cubit, referring to the mean cubit[A] which contained six hand-breadths, each hand-breadth being equivalent to four fingers. These data may be adhered to as exact, because the same proportions recur in other ancient systems. Thus for example the Greeks had their cubits of 1-1/2 feet, which made six hand-breadths or 24 fingers; Herodotus (II. 149) speaks of a cubit of six hands in use amongst the Egyptians. We have then for the relative values of the Hebrew measures the following table:

_Ammah_ 1 _Zereth_ 2 . 1 _Tephach_ 6 . 3 . 1 _Ecba_ 24 . 12 . 4 . 1

"The knowledge of the absolute value of any one of these would therefore be sufficient to enable us to deduce those of the rest; but since on this point we have no positive datum, in the writings either of Josephus or of the Rabbins, we must be contented with an approximate estimate by the aid of the Egyptian measures, which modern discoveries enable us to fix with a certain precision. It is probable, besides, that the system of the Hebrews was borrowed from that of the Egyptians. The Rabbins determine their measures of length by the breadth of grains of barley placed side by side--a custom which also prevails amongst the Arabs and other Eastern tribes. It is easily seen that there is an uncertainty in this method of measurement, owing to the unequal sizes of the barley-grains. Maimonides, who has made minute calculations on the subject, has found that the Ecba of the Bible is equal to the breadth of seven average-sized grains of barley[B], which gives for the _Ammah_ 168. It is found by calculations sufficiently exact that the Arab cubit, which is estimated at 144 grains of barley (that is, twenty-four fingers of six grains each), when reduced to (Paris) lines and decimal parts of lines, gives 213.050[C], which would give for the Hebrew _Ammah_ of 168 barley-grains 248.564 (about 560 millimetres, or 22 inches). This result is not thoroughly exact, but it will be seen that it does not differ much from the probable value of the Egyptian measures;--at any rate it may serve to establish the connexion which existed between the measures of the Hebrews and those of the Egyptians.

"But another question presents itself. The learned have attributed to the Hebrews more than one kind of cubit[D], and while we reject mere conjectures that have no solid basis, we must at any rate admit two kinds; the one ancient or Mosaic, used for the measurement of sacred things, the other modern, for common use. In the second book of Chronicles (iii. 3), a 'cubit of the first measure,' or ancient cubit, is spoken of as employed for the measurements of the Temple of Solomon,--which implies the existence of a modern or common cubit. The prophet Ezekiel (xl. 5, xliii. 13) in a vision in which he sees the dimensions of the future temple, speaks evidently of a cubit containing a hand-breadth more than the ordinary cubit, from which we may conclude that between the two cubits there was a difference of a hand-breadth.

This difference the Talmud interprets in the sense, that the less contained only five of the six hand-breadths of the greater[E]; but it would be more consistent to give them the same ratio as the two different Egyptian cubits had, i.e. that of 7 : 6, approximately.

Further, it is probable that each of the two was divided into six hand-breadths; the Talmud speaks expressly of longer and shorter hand-breadths[F]. The old Mosaic cubit was, without doubt, the royal cubit of the Egyptians, and the different scales of this still extant, together with the measurements of several Egyptian monuments, give for its mean value about 525 millimetres[G] (or 20.67 inches). This result appears less doubtful since it differs by only 35 millimetres from that which was found by the very uncertain calculation of the breadth of the barley-grains. Admitting this, we obtain for the value of the ordinary cubit 450 millimetres or 433.5 (i.e. 17.71 or 17.07 inches), according as we take the Egyptian ratio 7 : 6 or that of the Talmud 6 : 5. Each of these two cubits was divided in the same proportion into two spans, six hand-breadths, and twenty-four fingers.

"With measures of length may be cla.s.sed those of distance, or road-measures; but the old Hebrews measured their roads in a very vague and uncertain manner; and as we shall not need to refer to their measurements in this book, I leave the discussion of them to turn to those which are necessary.

"In the Graeco-Roman period the Jews reckoned by stadia and miles; which measures are found in the Old Testament and in the Talmud, as is also the _Sabbath-day's journey_ (Acts i. 12), which was about 2000 cubits."

Josephus also often quotes his measurements in stadia, so I will speak of these. Three princ.i.p.al kinds of stadia are known; the Olympic, equivalent to 184.95 metres (or 606.8 feet); the Pythian, equal to 147.6 metres (or 484.3 feet), and lastly the Philaeterian, of 213 metres (or 698.8 feet). Through the whole of this work I have adopted the Olympic, because in the measurements taken in Jerusalem itself, and its environs, I have found that it alone corresponds with all the distances which are cited in stadia by Josephus. That author, speaking of the Mount of Olives, puts it at five stadia from the city, Mount Scopus at seven, the monument of Absalom at two, Herodium at sixty, and lastly, Anathoth at twenty stadia. All these distances I have verified, comparing them with the Olympic stadium, and have always found them exact. Hence it is that I employ this to measure the thirty-three stadia of the city's circ.u.mference, and the thirty-nine of the lines drawn round it by t.i.tus, &c. For the sacred cubit of the first measure I have adopted the Egyptian of 20.67 inches, and for the common cubit that of 17.71 inches, as a result of the extended observation and study of measurements that I have made on the old stones which are found in the Eastern wall of the Temple, or of the Haram es-Sherif; with considerable difficulty I have managed to measure many such which have suffered no mutilation, and have found them to correspond with the ordinary cubits and their aliquot parts of spans, hand-breadths, and digits.

In case the reader should desire to examine more minutely the question of Jewish measures, I refer him to the following works, to which the numerals in the text above relate.

[A] David Kimchi's Dictionary, s. vv. 'Zereth' and 'Tephach;'

Maimonides, _Comment. on Mishna_, part 5, tract _Middoth_, ch. 3, -- 1, part 6; tract _Kilim_, ch. 17, -- 9.

[B] Maimonides, _Mische Thorah_, or _Summary of the Talmud_, Bk. II.

sect. 3 (_Sepher Thorah_), ch. 9, -- 9.

[C] Bockh's Metrologische Untersuchungen, p. 247. Bertheau, ch. 1, p.

60.

[D] Leusden, Philologus Hebraeomixtus, p. 211, where four kinds of cubits are mentioned; the _common_, the _Sacred_, the _royal_, and the _geometrical_.

[E] Maimonides, Comment. on the Mishna, tract _Middoth_, III. 1; _Mishna_, tract _Ketim_; the commentaries of Raschi and Kimchi on Ezek.

xl. 5.

[F] Babylonish Talmud, tract _Succa_, fol. 7, a. Compare Buxtorf, Lexicon Talmudic.u.m, coll. 900 and 2370.

[G] Bockh finds 524.587 millimetres, nearly 232.55 lines. See Bertheau, c. 1, p. 83.

NOTE III. The Armenians, in the various new edifices that they have built on Mount Sion, have found remains of walls, stones, reservoirs and cisterns of the most remote antiquity, generally at a depth of eighteen or even twenty feet below the surface, sometimes more. Before my arrival in Jerusalem, whilst digging for foundations they found a large quant.i.ty of small blocks of limestone of five and seven inches cube, dressed on every side, and so many in number that they employed them to build high and long unmortared walls, which to this day surround their property on the south inside the city. These stones were found collected together in one place, and were not scattered about: it is not impossible that they had been prepared to line the walls of a large pool. I say this because stones of this shape are now found in the pool of Bethesda, but in this reservoir they are wrought with more accuracy and uniformity. In my own time, in 1859, they discovered a pool, cut in the solid rock, which shewed however that the work had not been completed; it was 18 feet long, 10 broad, and 10 deep. In its neighbourhood were seen traces of conduits that they had begun to cut out in the rock.

On the same site I have examined a wall made of blocks of stone roughly squared, combined with others of a polygonal form; the size of the stones for the most part being from two to four cubic feet, and all the interstices between them on the two faces and inside being filled with small stones well fitted together without any trace of cement. At an angle where the stones were larger I observed that they were secured together by means of tenons and mortises of parallelepipedal form cut in the stone itself. The wall was about 5-1/2 feet broad by 6 feet high; but it was evident that it must have been mutilated at some time. I a.s.sign it to the age of the Jebusites.

Another wall, six feet broad, was composed of large irregular blocks of stone of from four to eight cubic feet. In it could be distinguished four rows placed one above the other, whose stones were fastened by clamps of iron or of stone, and in each was discernible more or less some trace of rude rustic work: in the interstices of the interior were inserted small stones well packed together without cement, so that the internal building of the wall formed a solid ma.s.s. To their discredit the Armenians do not trouble themselves about antiquities, and consequently take no pains to preserve such ancient remains as they meet with, but destroy or hide them, or avail themselves of the materials for the building of new walls.

NOTE IV. In the environs of the city, with the exception of the north and north-west, are frequently found walls, conduits, and scattered stones of large size, rusticated or not, and with or without marks of clamps; but they have been constantly broken up because of the want of will, and also of mechanical means, to make the most of them, or to remove them. Owing to this vandalism, the most precious remains of antiquity are daily disappearing from the soil of Jerusalem. Not seldom trunks of columns, capitals, pedestals, have been found, but some rude clown has broken them up, to be able the more easily to transport the fragments into the city. Sometimes old walls have been broken up by blasting, without any one's taking the trouble to preserve them, or even to delay their destruction, so as to allow of some examination of them.

These cases are repeated daily on Mount Sion, on the east of the Mount of Olives, and on the western side of the valley of Kidron; but never in any part where it is not known from human memory, or received tradition, that there have been found remains of Jewish buildings, or large stones scattered over the soil.

On the north and north-west I have made various excavations in order to recover, if possible, one of the Herodian stones of twenty cubits (Josephus, Jewish War, V. 4, -- 2); but after repeated and careful research I have failed to find a single one, I do not say of twenty cubits, but even of four: nothing is found there but rock and small unshapen stones, which do not however give one the idea that they have ever formed part of blocks of larger dimensions.

NOTE V. To facilitate the reader's understanding of the allusions in the course of the work, it is necessary that I should indicate the t.i.tles by which I characterise the different walls and stones which are found at Jerusalem.

_Jebusite Walls_. This name and age I a.s.sign to those that are built of unsquared stones of different sizes, some of which are fastened together by tenon and mortise; the interstices being filled with small stones.

(See Note III.)

_Walls of David_. By this name I indicate those walls whose stones are of considerable size and rudely squared, and which present some trace of irregular rustic-work, and are always fastened by tenons of stone or clamps of iron.

_Walls of Solomon_. (See Plate X.) Walls of Solomon I call those that are composed of large blocks of stone, that have not all the same breadth and height, and whose rude rustic-work, about two inches in relief, is surrounded by a flat band of from two inches to two inches and a half. They are fastened together by tenons and mortises in the stone itself, or by cubical pieces inlaid, of a different stone from the block itself, and contain no cement. The various layers of stone one above the other are in one vertical plane, and diminish in thickness the higher they rise; but the vertical joinings of the stones of any layer do not correspond with any regularity with those of a higher or lower layer (Fig. 1): this kind is especially found in the bas.e.m.e.nt of the east wall of the Haram.

By the _wall of Nehemiah_ I mean that which presents many blocks of the same character with those of the walls of Solomon; but these are joined together in an irregular manner, that is to say, the several layers are not formed of stones of equal heights, some stones appear to be turned upside down, in some the rustic-work is mutilated in places, many are placed aslant, and lastly, not a few shew the holes where the clamps have been (that is, the side is put in front); and besides, there are mixed with these small stones which appear with a portion of rustication, which shews that the large stones of the old wall have been broken in order to place them more carefully in their position. I a.s.sign them to Nehemiah, because the Bible informs us (Neh. iv. 17, 18, vi.

15), that he conducted the work in the midst of alarms, the workmen being all armed, so as to render the walls fit to sustain the a.s.saults with which their enemies were threatening them every moment. Accordingly to this they owe the irregularity with which they were formed (Fig. 2).

What I have described may be observed in the east wall of the Haram towards the southern end.

_Herodian walls_ I judge to be those which present large squared blocks, polished with accurate exactness, and joined together without cement, but with the most delicate care: they have a rustication, much wrought, standing two or three lines in relief, and surrounded by a band of about an inch and a half wide. In these walls the sizes of the stones diminish regularly as they rise higher from the ground, and the vertical joinings of alternate layers correspond exactly throughout, and are at the middle points of the stones which separate the two layers; lastly, every layer is an inch and a half in rear of the preceding. Walls of this kind are found at the S.E. corner of the Haram, and in its western enclosure towards the south (Fig. 3).

_The Roman walls_ are formed of fine squared stones, well wrought, joined by means of cement. They may be seen on the south and at the south-west corner of the Haram (Fig. 4).

The walls built by the Crusaders, or by the old Arabs (Saracenic work), reveal themselves at once by the economical proportion of the stones, by the excellent way in which they are joined, and sometimes by their being formed of rows of different colours, red, white, and black (Fig. 5).

The Arab walls of the present day are distinguished by their miserable appearance.

NOTE VI. At the first entry of Omar into the city he was conducted by the Patriarch Sophronius to visit the Holy Sepulchre. Whilst he was lingering there, mid-day struck, whereupon the Khalif went out to perform his devotions, and retired to the place where afterwards the little mosque was built;--a remarkable instance of moderation on the part of the Khalif, seeing that, if he had prayed in the Christian church, it would by Mohammedan law have been converted into a mosque. It is owing to this that the sons of Islam have left it to the Christian wors.h.i.+p. The adjoining minaret was built by the Mohammedans at the expense of the Christians in the 13th century.

NOTE VII. M. Munk, in his book on Palestine writes, "We enumerate here the gates of Jerusalem in their actual order, as ascertained, if not with certainty, at any rate with probable accuracy, starting from the North-west and pa.s.sing thence to the West, South and East, so as to make the circuit of the walls.

(1) The gate called the _ancient_ or _first gate_ on the North-east; (2) the _gate of Ephraim_, or of _Benjamin_, on the North, leading to the allotments of these two tribes; (3) the _Corner-gate_ on the North-west, at a distance of 400 cubits from the preceding; (4) the _Valley-gate_, on the West, leading probably to the _valley of Gihon_, and the dragon-well (Neh. ii. 13); (5) the _Dung-gate_ on the South-west, 1000 cubits from the preceding (Ibid. iii. 13), apparently the same which was afterwards called the _gate of the Essenes_; (6) the _Fountain-gate_ on the South-east, so called from the fountain of Siloam (?), possibly the same which Jeremiah (xix. 2) calls _Harsith_ (_Pottery-gate_), and which led to the valley of Hinnom. On the South side, where Mount Sion is inaccessible, there were probably no gates. There remain still five gates, which must have been on the East or South-east of the Temple in the following order from South to North; (7) the _Water-gate_; (8) the _Horse-gate_; (9) the _gate of the Review_ or _numbering_ (vulg. Porta Judicialis, Neh. iii. 31); (10) the _Sheep-gate_; (11) the _Fish-gate_;--the _Prison-gate_ (Neh. xii. 39) appears to have been one of the gates of the Temple."

NOTE VIII. The present castle is called by some the Castle of the Pisans; and Adrichomius says that it was built by them when the Latins were the masters of Jerusalem. His words are, "The castle of the Pisans, surrounded by broad fosses, and by towers, was built on the West side of the city by the Christians of Pisa in Italy, at the time when they occupied the Holy Land. Where the Pisans formerly were, the Saracens, and at the present time the Turks, levy a sacrilegious tribute on the pilgrims to the Holy Land."

I cannot attribute to the Pisans the entire building of the edifice, but I grant that they may have restored it in great part. It is certain that Solyman repaired this castle in the year 1534; the inscriptions above the entrance tell us thus much.

NOTE IX. Traditions in the East are very unwavering, a fact recognised by all. For instance, we are told that the Judgment Hall was near to the Temple, on the west side; to this day the Mohammedan tribunal is there, and the Arabs say that their judges sit in the very Judgment Hall not only of the Crusaders but of Solomon. I grant that the walls of the building do not indicate that it is of the age of Solomon, but I shall discuss this building more in detail hereafter.