EXCURSIONS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF THE CITY ON THE EAST, SOUTH, AND SOUTH-WEST—THE VALLEY OF KIDRON, CALLED ALSO THE VALLEY OF JEHOSHAPHAT, WITH ITS MONUMENTS AND REMARKABLE PLACES—THE MOUNT OF OLIVES—BETHPHAGE—BETHANY—THE VALLEY OF HINNOM—THE MOUNT OF EVIL COUNSEL—SOUTH-WESTERN PART OF THE VALLEY OF GIHON—MOUNT SION—CHRISTIAN CEMETERIES—TOMB OF DAVID, AND SUBTERRANEAN VAULTS—THE CŒNACULUM—THE HOUSE OF CAIAPHAS—THE GROTTO OF S. PETER—THE LEPERS.

As we go out of the eastern gate, called S. Mary's and also S. Stephen's Gate, we see on the left-hand a pool, by name Birket-Hammam Sitti-Mariam (the Pool of the Bath of our Lady Mary). The origin of this name is that it receives the waters of the ditch outside the eastern wall, and then by a conduit supplies a bath inside the city, near the Church of S. Ann. This bath is a favourite with the women of Jerusalem, who attribute to it miraculous virtues; but unfortunately they can only profit by them for a few days in the year, as the neighbouring cisterns and the pool, instead of retaining the water, allow it to escape; since the reservoir and conduits are in a ruinous condition, and the proprietor of the bath is too blind to his own interest to repair them.

On the right of the gate, as we go out, we see a Saracenic monument, which is daily falling to ruin[532]. Some of the Arabs believe that it was built over a sepulchre; others, that it is a monument to mark the spot where the Khalif Omar pitched his tent after traversing the Valley of Jehoshaphat. Whichever be the true account, it ought to be preserved. But the Mohammedan makes no effort to arrest the ravages of time.

Hence a large portion of the Kidron valley is seen at a glance, especially that part which is called the Valley of Jehoshaphat[533], a name derived from the tomb attributed to that king, which is covered with earth on the east of that of Absalom. Adamnanus, the historian of Arculf's travels, is the first to mention the Valley of Jehoshaphat, and his description agrees with that given by Willibald, another author of the eighth century[534]. The celebrity of this valley is due to a belief, widely spread among both Christians and Mohammedans, that it will be the scene of the Last Judgement. This has arisen from the words of the prophet Joel, "I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land"[535]; and again, "Let the heathen be wakened, and come up to the valley of Jehoshaphat, for there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about[536]." In this same valley many of the ancient Jews, both high and low, have been interred, and the custom still continues; for they possess a cemetery extending along the eastern bank of the valley, while the two on the western belong to the Mohammedans. It appears that the Christians have also used the place for the same purpose, since, in November 1856, when the Greeks were cultivating a plot of ground on the western bank of the valley, a short distance from the tomb of Mary, they found a well-executed slab of Palestine breccia, on which a cross and the following words were carved: "The monument which contains Stephen and Juliana." On its removal the two skeletons were found. As the work went on, fragments of stone, stone crosses, and human bones were found, unquestionable proofs that it was the site of an ancient Christian cemetery. It is then certain that this valley has long been used for the cemetery of the city, as it is at the present day. In the reign of Josiah mention is made of the "graves of the children of the people[537]." Urijah, who was slain by Jehoiakim, was "cast into the graves of the common people[538]." Adrichomius[539] says that "it received the corpses of the common people and of the great." I believe that the ancients had a reason in selecting this place rather than any other for their graves, which was that the winds do not usually blow strongly from this quarter in Palestine, and therefore the effluvia from the cemetery would not be borne into the city, but would be confined to the lower parts of the valley.

It is then to this, also called the Kidron Valley, from the Arab name Wady Kedron, that I conduct the reader, in order that we may examine it thoroughly. After descending by the road nearly to the bottom of the slope, we come to a bare patch of yellow limestone-rock, said to be the spot were S. Stephen was stoned. The tradition however does not rest upon a probable foundation, and is more recent than the time of the Crusades; and as no mention is made in the Bible[540] of either the gate or the direction of the place where the Proto-martyr suffered, I must be allowed to doubt its truth. It however is so firmly implanted in the minds of the pilgrims of the different sects who visit the place, that their eyes are able to discover the Saint's effigy on the rock itself; and they forget that even if it had been sculptured there, it would have long ago disappeared under the hammers of the devout believers, who have for some centuries made a practice of breaking off fragments as relics. Several writers have demonstrated the worthlessness of the tradition, by shewing that from the fifth century to the close of the Latin kingdom at Jerusalem, the place of the Saint's martyrdom was believed to be outside the present Damascus Gate, which then bore S. Stephen's name[541]. It is not known for what reason this name was in the fourteenth century transferred to the east gate, which, during the Crusades, had always been called the Gate of Jehoshaphat.

Near this pretended site of the Saint's martyrdom is the opening of a cave, which some consider to have been the entrance into the vaults of a church, erected by the Empress Eudoxia. I endeavoured to clear it out, but was prevented by the quantity of stones and earth it contained; however, I was able to ascertain that it had been an ancient cistern, and did not present any indications of the presence of tombs. I think that the letters at the opening, now scarcely visible, are the work of pilgrims. Eudoxia's church was a little distance from the Damascus Gate (as I will presently explain); and the steepness of the rocks and the unevenness of the surface here precludes us from believing that this can have ever been the site of a church, and there are no traces of ancient walls, nor hewn stones lying about, to shew that any building has been erected here.

Following the road eastward from this point, we arrive at the dry bed of the Kidron torrent, crossed by a small stone bridge, the lower part of which is evidently very ancient. Above this is some masonry of the time of the Crusades, and the rest, including the arch, is old Arab work. In the present day the Kidron is only full of water after a heavy fall of rain, and quickly becomes dry again as soon as this ceases. Kidron is a Hebrew word, meaning 'darkness;' derived either from the former depth of the valley down which it flowed, or from the circumstance that its ancient bed was narrow and choked with projecting rocks, or from the cedar-groves, which some believe to have once flourished upon the slopes of the valley[542]. This torrent is famous in both the Old and New Testament. David crossed it in his flight from his rebellious son Absalom[543]; Asa burnt and destroyed an idol here[544]; Hezekiah and Josiah, in restoring the worship of God, cast down here the uncleanness from the Temple and the broken idol altars[545]. Our Saviour frequently crossed it on his way from the Mount of Olives and Bethany; especially it is mentioned on that night when he went to the garden of Gethsemane[546]. At the present day the Kidron is a means of discovering antiquities, in the following way. In the spring of 1855, after a heavy rain-fall, I noticed that some peasants of Siloam were examining the mud which had been brought down by the torrent. I approached them, and learnt that they were searching for old coins. I at once determined to imitate them, and every year at the time of the heavy rains went to the Kidron with a couple of men, and constructed small dykes to retain the mud; and when the water had fallen, I riddled the soil thus deposited, and always found coins; sometimes of considerable value, such as shekels, medals of Alexander and Antiochus, and of others[547]. The reason that these things are found in the Kidron is that the rubbish from the city, and especially from Mount Moriah, was from the earliest periods thrown down the western bank of the valley; consequently all the ground on that side is artificial and not well consolidated; so that the heavy rains wash down the earth into the torrent, together with the objects hidden in it. There is no difficulty in the process, and the supply is by no means exhausted; so that any collector of Jewish coins may profit by the above description.

After crossing the bridge just mentioned, we see, immediately on our left hand, a cubical building, three of whose sides are buried in the ground, while the faÇade[548] (on the south) is uncovered. Before this is a little open platform reached by some steps[549]. It is said to cover the tomb of the Virgin Mary, but we have no evidence which enables us to fix the date of its erection. An examination of the tomb itself would lead us to suppose that the buildings around it were contemporaneous with S. Helena: for it is a small chamber hewn in the rock, which I have seen on the inside and outside of the eastern wall, in the lower parts (close to the ground), and underneath the marble slabs covering the Greek altar, which has been constructed upon a shelf along the chamber-wall, originally made to support a corpse, exactly like that in the Sepulchre of Christ. It is, then, beyond all question, an ancient Jewish tomb; and at the erection of the church the rock was hewn away all round, in order to detach it from the main mass (which is seen close by), and isolate it in the middle of the building; just as was done at the Holy Sepulchre. We may therefore infer that this work was contemporaneous with that at the Church of the Resurrection, and that it was executed by order of S. Helena[550], as is stated by Nicephorus Callistus, an author of the fourteenth century. I hold that S. Helena began the work, but did not complete it, because at this time not only was the traditionary site of the tomb a matter of dispute, but also the question of the Assumption of the Virgin was as yet undecided by the learned; a point which was not settled till after A.D. 431, when it was declared by the third General Council, held at Ephesus, that the tombs of the Virgin and S. John were in that city. Besides, if S. Helena had erected a building over the tomb, I cannot account for the silence of Eusebius, the historian of that Empress and her son Constantine, upon that point. I am confirmed in my opinion, that S. Helena did not do more than commence this work, by the fact that neither S. Jerome nor S. Epiphanius, who visited and described Jerusalem, make any mention of this as a sanctuary. Had it then existed, they would not have omitted to name it; especially since, in the fourth century, the belief was widely spread that the Virgin had not died, but had been borne away by the Angels into heaven in her bodily form; and therefore these authors would not have neglected so important a matter as her tomb. Consequently I do not assign the building to the time of Helena.

In course of time, when all questions concerning the Assumption were settled, the Sepulchre of Gethsemane rose in importance; and in the fifth century a church was standing there, which we find mentioned for the first time by S. John of Damascus[551], in connexion with the following incident. The Empress Pulcheria, wife of the Emperor Marcian, was anxious to obtain the corpse of the Virgin to be the chief treasure of the church, which she and her husband together had erected in honour of the Mater Dei, in the district BlachernÆ (Constantinople)[552]. Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, arrived at the capital of the Empire on the occasion of the Council of Chalcedon, held A.D. 451, and had an interview with the Empress, who asked him to search in the church at Gethsemane, which was erected over the spot where the Virgin was buried; and if he discovered the sacred relics, to transport them to Constantinople[553]. The Patriarch, however, answered that the tomb was empty, and that the place was regarded with veneration, because the body of the Virgin had been deposited there for a few days. Indeed, at that time it was commonly believed that she had lain three days in the grave like her Son[554]. We have therefore to enquire who founded this church mentioned by Pulcheria. The authors of the eighth and ninth centuries are silent upon this point, and one only of the tenth, Sayd-Ebn-Batrik (an Arabian) says, that it was the Emperor Theodosius II. Hence Quaresmius[555] conjectures that the monument was built between the years A.D. 429 and 457. This would explain the silence of S. Jerome, who died A.D. 420. Antoninus of Piacenza[556], A.D. 600, speaks of the Holy Virgin's house, whence, he says, she was taken up into heaven. A short time after, A.D. 614, it was plundered by the Persians under Chosroes II.[557] The Khalif Omar, A.D. 636, found the church built over the Sepulchre, and twice visited it for prayer. It was still standing at the end of the seventh century, when it was seen by Arculf, who gives the following description of it: "The lower part, beneath a wonderful stone flooring, is a rotunda. The altar is on the eastern side, and to the right of it there is the hollow Sepulchre of S. Mary in the rock in which she once rested after her burial.... In the upper and round Church of S. Mary four altars are shewn." These words clearly prove that the present church is not the one seen by Arculf: since in that there were two rotundas, which have now disappeared. This is also proved by the following fact, that, in the seventh century, when the Khalif Abd-el-Melik was erecting the great mosque of the Kaaba at Mecca, he commanded the columns to be cut away from the Church of Gethsemane, but rescinded the order owing to the prayers of certain Christians of high rank, who promised some other marbles; so that the church was preserved for that time[558]. In the eighth century it was seen by Willibald[559], who mentions, but does not describe it; and says that the tomb did not contain the corpse of the Virgin Mary, but was dedicated to her burial. He states distinctly that it was in the valley of Jehoshaphat. Bernard the Wise[560], A.D. 870, saw the rotunda, and the tomb within it, and says,—"Besides, in that very village (Gethsemane) is the round Church of S. Mary, where is her sepulchre; which, though unprotected by a roof, is never wetted by the rain." The account shews that it was then in a very ruinous condition. From this time until the arrival of the Crusaders we have no further mention of this monument; and the first to notice it again is SÆwulf, A.D. 1103. At that time service was performed by monks wearing a black habit, of the order of Cluny[561]. "These," according to M. de VogÜÉ[562], "gave to the church in the valley of Jehoshaphat the form which it has retained up to the present day." But, I ask, did the church of SÆwulf contain the same rotundas as that which Arculf visited, and Bernard saw in ruins? The want of evidence makes the question a difficult one, because in such an interval of time they might have fallen to the ground, or have been altered during the persecutions of Hakem, A.D. 1010. We may then suppose that it might have been repaired, or entirely rebuilt, and its plan changed at that time. If the Khalif had found it standing, he would probably have respected it, on account of the reverence felt for it by the Mohammedan women; which protected it in the days of Saladin, and continues to do so at the present day. Again, SÆwulf relates that, during the siege, A.D. 1099[563], all the churches without the city were completely destroyed. How then did he find it standing in 1103? Were the monks of Cluny installed there at once and enriched by Godfrey[564], so that they were able to rebuild it in four years? Had this been the case, surely SÆwulf would have mentioned it. "The anonymous author of the Gesta Francorum expugnantium Hierusalem, who wrote in 1106," M. de VogÜÉ goes on to say[565], "also states that in his time the church built over the Virgin's tomb by the early Christians was quite in ruins." Now if we are to believe this author, we cannot accept the statement of SÆwulf as exact, that all the churches were destroyed. Consequently, I hold that the monks of Cluny rebuilt it after, not before this time.

I think that the plan of the church in the fifth century was not very different from the present one, because I believe that the great work of making the stairs was executed when the first building was erected, in order to reach the tomb which was situated, as we have seen, low down, being covered, by the lower rotunda, mentioned by Arculf, with the other above it. In confirmation of this, we find mention made of a platform before the building in the year 1100, (perhaps the present one, though it might be somewhat larger,) which was enclosed by a cloister, where were buried Werner de Gray, cousin of Godfrey, who died at Jerusalem in the month of May, A.D. 1100, and the Knight Arnulph, Prince of Oudenarde, who was slain by the people of Ascalon in 1107[566]. Therefore, I consider this platform to be the only natural entrance into the subterranean church, as it still is. With regard to the building of the present walls, and particularly of the vaults, and to the alterations in the plan with reference to the tomb, I agree with M. de VogÜÉ, that the monks of Cluny rebuilt the church early in the twelfth century, availing themselves (at least in my opinion) of the ancient foundations. Since that period it has been noticed by many authors; and from their remarks it is evident that the work of the monks has not been changed. Indeed Edrisi, A.D. 1154, describes the church under the name of Gethsemane; stating that it was a mile distant from the Gate of Jehoshaphat, and was a very large and handsome edifice. Here M. de VogÜÉ very justly remarks, that this expression could not have been applied to the ruins seen by the author of the Gesta Francorum. John of WÜrtzburg[567] minutely describes the interior of the church as it was during the twelfth century. The Sepulchre of Mary, he says, was situated in the middle of a cave, with a 'ciborium' over the sacred remains. He also tells us very clearly how the monument was isolated, and in what way this had been effected; and that it was covered with marble, and with many ornaments in gold and silver. He also mentions some inscriptions that were in the church, with many other points of detail. The description of the church given by John Phocas, A.D. 1185, is not less distinct, and is equally applicable to the present monument[568]. "The church, which stands about the tomb of the Mater Dei, is beneath the ground; it has a vaulted stone roof, is prolonged, and rounded at its extremity. The Sepulchre is placed like a tribune, in the middle. It is excavated out of the rock in the form of a rectangle, and the vaulting is with sharp groins. Inside a kind of bench is hewn out of the eastern wall, of the same rock as the monument; on this the Virgin's body was laid, being brought hither from Mount Sion by the Apostles."

In the time of the Latin kingdom a monastery was erected close to the church for the monks who officiated therein. This is frequently mentioned by the historians of the time of the Crusades, in the Cartulary of the Holy Sepulchre, and by Sebastian Pauli, who gives the names of the different Abbots, with dates. One of them, Julduinus, in 1126, was a witness to a deed of gift from Hugo Lord of Joppa (Jaffa) to the Hospital of S. John, in which he is called Abbot of S. Mary's in the Valley of Jehoshaphat[569]. When Saladin took Jerusalem, A.D. 1187, the Saracens utterly destroyed the convent, and used the stones to repair the city-walls[570]; but they spared the church, owing to the reverence with which the Mohammedans (especially the women) regarded the mother of Isa (Jesus). The church then from the time of the Crusades, up to the present day, has not been altered; as is proved by the descriptions of Willibrand, Brocardus[571], Marinus Sanutus, and others, in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, who all agree on this point. Sanutus[572] states that it was only lighted by an aperture in the vaulted roof, on the side of the Mount (of Olives), and by the staircase; as all the other openings were closed up. Therefore for the last five centuries it has remained in its present condition. After A.D. 1187, the church was for a long time abandoned; and the Christian pilgrims, who desired to visit it, were obliged to obtain the keys from its Mohammedan owners; but, in the year A.D. 1363, it was ceded to the Friars Minors of the Observance[573] by the Sultan of Egypt, at the request of Joan, Queen of Naples. At the same time they obtained permission to rebuild a convent; which is a strong proof that the convent of the monks of Cluny no longer existed. This design, however, was not carried into execution for want of funds. Owing to various difficulties the Franciscans were unable to take possession of their sanctuary before the 30th of March, 1392. The only effect of this concession was to give them the right of performing service in the church, for the Mohammedans were still its owners. This privilege excited the jealousy of the Eastern Christians, who strove by intrigues, backed by large bribes to the authorities in Constantinople, to deprive the Latins of the sanctuary; to whom it rightly belonged, not only by the treaty of 1362, but also as it had been built by the Crusaders. Eventually all the Eastern Christian sects obtained the right of using the place; the Latins, however, retaining the exclusive privilege of performing service in the tomb itself. This also was abrogated by the artifices of the Greeks in 1740; but afterwards the Sultan restored it by a firman to its former owners. Thereupon their enemies, by the aid of calumnies and bribes to the ministers of the Sublime Porte, not only succeeded in retaining possession of the tomb, but also in obtaining the keys of the whole building; which they now hold, enduring with resignation the presence of the Syrians, Armenians, and Copts, who occupy small chapels in the interior of the church. The Latin monks retain the right[574] of performing service during certain days of the year, especially on the Assumption of the Virgin; but they do not avail themselves of it, and justly protest, whenever they have a good opportunity, against the iniquitous usurpation to which they have been subjected.

Let us now proceed to examine the exterior and interior of the building; noticing those parts that are of greater importance, and leaving the explanation of the rest to the Plates[575] and their descriptions. The church has unquestionably been buried by the accumulation of the soil around it; which has partly been deposited by the water running down the slopes of the hill, and by the Kidron torrent; and partly raised by the quantity of rubbish cast down here from the city. I have already said that the church was originally built in a low situation, as is shewn by the great staircase, the platform in front of it, and the windows and doors in it; which prove that it was formerly lighted from without. It was enclosed by an outer wall, whose remains may still be seen projecting from the surrounding earth. This was no doubt erected chiefly with a view of protecting the building against streams of rain-water and land-slips, and preventing its windows from being obstructed. It has however proved an inadequate barrier. The terrace-roof is apparently in the usual style of the country, being nearly flat. It is covered with a strong cement, but this is not sufficient to keep the damp out of the vaults, because it is so overgrown with vegetation, that it resembles a field more than what it really is.

In the interior of the church we see, on the right hand, a door, now closed up, which, in the days when the Latins had possession of the place, communicated with the Grotto of the Agony by an outside passage, which was not, as many assert, subterranean. I am convinced of this, because I have carefully examined the grotto, and found that it has no other entrance than the one still in use, which is now reached by a passage leading from the north-east corner of the platform. This passage is much later than the church, as it was made by the Franciscans about the middle of the eighteenth century, when they were wrongfully compelled to give up the tomb to the Greeks[576]. After descending some steps we come to two chapels; the one on the right dedicated to the tombs of S. Joachim and S. Ann, the other on the left in honour of the tomb of S. Joseph. Most of the monks of all the sects and the ignorant guides inform the stranger that the saints themselves are buried here. On this point neither the Bible nor history give us the slightest clue, either to the time, place, or manner of their deaths, or to the spot where they are buried. The tradition is worthless, as it only dates from the fifteenth century, and has never been mentioned by any author of importance before or since; but only by those who, for the sake of making a book, and acquainting the world that they have been at Jerusalem, publish all that they hear without any inquiry into its truth or falsehood. I maintain that it is impossible these can be the tombs of the parents of the Virgin, because there is not an atom of rock in any part of the place where they stand, not even in the ground; and the tombs themselves are constructed of masonry. Besides, the shape of the two chapels shews that they were built to contain sarcophagi, in which probably (as AbbÉ Mariti and M. de VogÜÉ assert) the bodies of members of the families of the Latin kings were deposited. This opinion is confirmed by the testimony of William of Tyre[577], who says: "The Lady Milisendis of blessed memory, who will be a member of the angelic host, lies buried in the Valley of Jehoshaphat on the right hand of the descent to the tombs of the blessed and undefiled mother of the Lord, the Virgin Mary, in a stone crypt guarded with iron gates, and near to an altar; whereon acceptable daily sacrifices are offered to the Creator, for the repose of her soul, and for the spirits of the faithful departed." This description is as plain as it can be, and does not say one word about the parents of the Virgin Mary. In this chapel the staples and hooks can still be seen by which the iron gratings were hung, until no doubt they were carried off by the Mohammedans. Descending still lower almost to the bottom of the steps, we find on the left hand a small doorway leading into a chamber quite dark, with walls of masonry, which is now used by the Armenians as a sacristy. It has a tesselated pavement, and was, I believe, formerly used as a mortuary chapel. Quitting it we enter the transverse arm of the cross, which lies east and west. In the eastern arm[578] the tomb of the Virgin stands by itself, as I have already described it. Near it on the south is a small niche, especially allotted to the Mohammedans, who visit the place for prayer, as I have often seen. This is the only Christian church in Jerusalem in which the Mohammedans abstain from smoking, or from using it, if needful, as a place for conversation; a mark of respect which they do not pay to the Sepulchre of Christ. Inside the north wall, near the tomb, is the grotto, from which water falls down in drops; this is carefully caught by the Greeks, and sold to visitors with the reputation of possessing many virtues. I tasted it in 1857, when I was making a plan of the building, and found it very good[579]. Opposite to the great staircase is the northern arm of the cross. This has been divided by the Greeks into two stories by means of a wooden floor; the lower serving for a sacristy, the upper for the chamber of the lay-brother who takes care of the place. Here also we find a window, closed with masonry, because it is blocked up on the outside with the accumulated earth. At the extremity of the western arm is the walled-up doorway, which I mentioned[580] in speaking of the subterranean passage, said to exist between the Church of S. Ann and this place. The description annexed to the Plan will shew the places where the different religious sects perform their services, and the other points of detail; therefore I pass on at once to the Grotto of the Agony[581], which came into the keeping of the Franciscans A.D. 1392, together with the Tomb of the Virgin, and is still held exclusively by them.

This is said to be the scene of the Agony of Christ on the night before He suffered[582]. It is true that the Evangelists make no mention of a grotto; but tradition and its situation are in favour of this place. Its situation, I say, because it is a stone's throw (according to S. Luke) from the place (also traditional) where the three Apostles awaited him. The tradition is very ancient, and I firmly believe that the Apostles themselves informed the first converts both of this spot and of that where our Lord was betrayed to those who came to take Him prisoner. It seems impossible that His followers would forget the incidents of that night. Gethsemane was outside the city on the slopes of the Mount of Olives, across the Kidron; and its position is clearly defined[583]. We must also remember that there have never been at Gethsemane the same materials for the enemy to lay waste and destroy as there were within the city; so that the spot would not here, as elsewhere, be concealed under ruins and earth.

There was a church at the Grotto of the Agony (perhaps built by S. Helena) which is mentioned by S. Jerome[584], as follows: "Gethsemane is the place where the Saviour prayed before His Passion; it is on the spurs of Mount Olivet; a church is now built over it." Not a vestige of this church now remains. In the seventh century Arculf[585] saw the Grotto, and thus describes it: "In the side of Mount Olivet is a certain cave, not far from the Church of S. Mary.... In it are four stone tables, one of which near the entrance of the cave in the interior is the Lord Jesu's. To which little table His seat is fixed, where He was sometimes wont to recline, together with the Apostles, who sat together at other tables." Epiphanius Hagiopolita, towards the middle of the eleventh century, states that "near the Tomb of the Virgin, is the holy grotto to which Christ retired with His disciples[586]." Now though these two authors do not mention that our Lord withdrew to this place to pray, still that does not contradict the fact, and we may naturally suppose that the Saviour selected a spot which was already well known, and where perhaps he had been wont to teach. Therefore I identify their grotto with that of S. Jerome, which I consider to be the Grotto of the Agony. SÆwulf tells us that it was known by this name before the arrival of the Crusaders; and during the Latin kingdom there was a church there dedicated to S. Saviour, as we find stated in the Citez de Jherusalem[587]: "In front of this church at the foot of the Mount of Olives is a church in a rock, which men call Gethsemane—there was Jesus Christ taken. On another part of the way, as one goes up towards the Mount of Olives as far as a stone's throw, is the church called S. Saviour. There did Jesus Christ pass the night in prayer before He was taken, and there did He let fall the blood-drops from His body as though it had been sweat." All these testimonies, then, go to prove that this is really the Grotto of the Agony. The Plan and Section will make clear its interior, which is excavated from a limestone rock. The AbbÉ Mariti, who visited it April 30, 1767, endeavoured to discover the inscription mentioned by Quaresmius[588], which Father Nau[589] asserts that he read above the larger altar on the north; but as he could only find some illegible traces of letters, he extracts the inscription from the works of Quaresmius; it ran as follows:

Quaresmius also states that the Crusaders adorned the vaulted roof with paintings, traces of which he saw. These were also seen by Mariti, but were then nearly obliterated by the action of time and damp. They have now been destroyed by the repairs effected by the Franciscans.

Let us now visit the Garden of Gethsemane[590], which is exactly a stone's throw distant from the Grotto towards the south-east. The entrance-gate is at the south end of the east wall. Gethsemane was a little village, with a garden close to it, to which Jesus was wont to retire[591]. The name is interpreted to mean 'rich earth,' from Get (earth) and sman (rich): by others it is rendered 'olive-mill.' Either of these explanations is appropriate; for the land is very good, and especially suited to olive-trees, which are planted all about the neighbourhood. I cannot say they are cultivated, because the Arabs take no trouble with them after the first planting. The garden belongs to the Franciscans, and a few years ago was enclosed with a wall, in order to preserve its eight old olive-trees from the injuries of ignorant vandalism or mistaken piety. These are highly valued, because their stumps, or at any rate their roots, are believed to have been there at the time of our Saviour's Passion. I do not think this can be said of their trunks, because I think that they could not have escaped at the time when all the wood for a considerable distance round Jerusalem was cut down by the Roman army during the siege, A.D. 70[592]. They are even respected by the Mohammedans, as is shewn by their exemption from the tax, which every fruit-tree pays to the Government[593]: their owners being charged only eight bushels for all the trees. The monks to whom they belong satisfy ordinary pilgrims with flowers grown in the garden, with a few leaves or little slips of the olive, but give to their benefactors and to persons of distinction rosaries made with the fruits, and oil extracted from them.

Outside the south-east corner of the garden-wall a rock is pointed out as the place where the Apostles, Peter, James, and John, fell asleep[594], and where Judas betrayed his Master. The tradition attached to this spot is very ancient; it is mentioned by the Pilgrim of Bordeaux[595], A.D. 333. SÆwulf also mentions it, A.D. 1103, but without alluding to any buildings in connexion with it. The Crusaders, however, certainly erected some memorial there, which is noticed by Brocardus[596], A.D. 1230, under the name of the Chapel of Gethsemane, "placed on a rock on the side of the Mount of Olives, under which the Apostles were overcome by sleep." At a later period Phocas calls it 'the sleep of the Apostles.' Some slight ruins are now seen there, consisting of dressed stones, shafts of columns, and jambs of a door; unmistakeable indications of a chapel. The original one indeed may have been destroyed in 1187, but it must have been rebuilt, because an old Bethlehemite (aged 86) assured me in 1856 that he remembered to have seen there the remains of a small building, inside of which was a stone stained with blood. This I have no doubt was a piece of yellow Palestine breccia with red veins, which abounds in the country. I do not, however, pretend to fix the exact spots in this locality at which the different circumstances of the Agony happened, but simply follow the tradition which in this instance is of great weight.

We will now proceed southward along the east bank of the Kidron, down the so-called Valley of Jehoshaphat. No other spot is better fitted than this to excite high and solemn thoughts in the hearts of even the most indifferent. It is in truth the valley of meditation, of tears, and of death. No living creature disturbs the visitor who comes to muse in its mournful solitude. A city buried under its own ruins, a torrent-bed without water, a few trees with bare branches or but a scanty foliage, naked rocks, barren mountains, mounds of rubbish formed by fallen buildings, graves all around, broken tombs, monuments of martyrs or of prophets, and lastly, the place of the Agony of the Son of God, make up a scene that overpowers the mind with emotion and compels it to solemn reflexion.

The eye, at its first glance towards the slope of the mountain, is arrested by a large space of ground full of graves, each of which is covered by a single stone. Here is the Jewish cemetery. To fill a little trench in this spot numbers of Jews leave their country, and, regardless alike of the toils and costs of the journey, and of the hardships they have to undergo, flock eagerly to Jerusalem to end their days within its walls, and sleep their last sleep in the land of their fathers. Each stone bears an inscription; and among them are some of considerable antiquity, dating from the year 1296. This field of the dead was enlarged in 1858 by the Jews, with the assistance of their European brethren: it therefore stretches away for some distance eastward, rising up the southern slopes of Olivet. Each year they do some work in order to prepare the ground for burials; and by this means, in 1859 and 1860, they found bases, shafts, and capitals of columns, and a considerable number of large dressed stones, on the eastern summit of the mountain. These are, undoubtedly, the remains of some Christian memorials, which were destroyed by the Mohammedans in their successful attacks. When AbbÉ Mariti visited the Holy City in 1767, the Jews paid a sequin per diem to the Governor as rent for the ground, and in addition each grave was purchased separately. The tax to the Pasha is now no longer exacted, but a payment is made to the Sheikh of the village of Siloam, who nominally takes care of the ground: the graves, however, are still bought, but the price is paid to the Jewish administration, who ask more or less according to the rank of the deceased and to the position chosen.

On the slope above the Kidron, to the west of the cemetery, are four ancient monuments, called the tombs of Jehoshaphat, Absalom, S. James (also called the Retreat of the Apostles), and Zacharias. We will visit these one by one.

First is the tomb of Jehoshaphat, standing at the north-east corner of the vestibule excavated in the rock, which surrounds the tomb of Absalom[597]. The Bible[598] tells us that King Jehoshaphat was buried with his fathers in the city of David, consequently his name has been wrongly given to this tomb. It is indeed possible that he may have caused it to be made, but there is no evidence to prove this. In 1858 only a very small portion of its frontispiece was visible, owing to the accumulation of earth brought down by the rains, and to the heaps of stones, placed there by the Jews to prevent any one from entering it; because they sometimes bury therein the corpses of those who have paid a high price for a place of such distinction, and left enough property to satisfy the greed of the Sheikh of Siloam, who otherwise would not allow them to fulfil the wishes of the deceased. Accordingly I gained over the Sheikh, and during the night, with the aid of some of his peasants, not only laid bare the whole frontispiece, but also opened a small passage to the interior, into which I made my way. However, I was soon driven out again by the insupportable stench from the corpses. Nevertheless, I was determined not to be conquered; I bought permission to enlarge the hole, and some hours later entered again; and though two corpses, in the last stage of decomposition, lay almost across the doorway, I made a sketch of its plan, which will be found sufficiently exact, measurements excepted. These I had not time to take; the reeking mud of bones, rotted by the infiltrated water, emitted an overpowering odour; besides the day was at hand, and before it came the passage must be closed again. The frontispiece, however, was left exposed. The tomb is entirely excavated in the rock, and its frontispiece, 10-1/2 feet long, is in the same style as that at the Sepulchre of the Judges[599]. I will reserve my opinion of its ornamentation till I have described the three other monuments. Dr Isambert[600], of Paris, states that a Roman Catholic missionary, who entered it in 1842, found there a very ancient copy of the Pentateuch. Surely he forgets that the Jews have been in the habit of burying in this place for some centuries, so that his 'very ancient Pentateuch' would not have escaped them! Besides, this book was probably only a Synagogue roll, imperfect copies of which are often buried near the corpses of the Rabbins[601]. Mr Finn, then Her Britannic Majesty's Consul at Jerusalem, informed me that he had learnt from some Jewish traditions that the true position of the tomb of Jehoshaphat was 20 feet to the west, and nearly in front of that of Absalom. Being desirous to verify this statement, I took some labourers, and explored all that part; but found everywhere nothing but solid rock, without the slightest trace of any work.

Let us now proceed to examine the Tomb of Absalom, the most elegant and magnificent of those in the neighbourhood of the city. It is a cubical monolith, each side being about 20-1/2 feet. The tapering columns of the lower part support a Doric entablature, consisting of an architrave, a fillet, and a frieze ornamented with triglyphs (with guttÆ) and paterÆ on the metopes, above is an Egyptian cornice. All this lower part is hewn out of the solid rock; the rest is masonry[602]. The total height of the monument is 52-1/4 feet, and that of the monolith about 20 feet. These measurements are only approximate, owing to the quantity of small stones, which have raised the general level of the ground, and are difficult to clear away. On the east side is the opening through which the corpses were introduced[603]. It is very small, and was in all probability formerly closed by a stone in the manner usual with the Jews; but I have not been able to determine this point, because the monument is almost buried on that side, and I was reluctant to encounter the expense of removing the earth, and the vexations to be undergone in obtaining the permission. There is a breach in each face of the cube. I entered by that on the north, and found myself in a small chamber, 8 feet square, containing many stones that have been thrown in from without. In the northern wall is a sepulchral niche, and another in the western. In the southern is the opening to a staircase, which would no doubt have led me, had I been able to enter it, to the Tomb of Jehoshaphat. The heaps of small stones, round about the outside of the monument, increase daily, because the Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans, who pass by, hurl a stone at it to mark their abhorrence of David's rebel son. This custom has prevailed for a long time; for Surius[604] relates that it was in force in his days, and that every one on throwing his stone cried out, "At the villain, at the barbarian, at the murderer, who made war against his father!" I believe that the origin of this was, as we are told in the Bible[605] and Josephus[606], that the servants of Joab took the body of Absalom down from the tree, and casting it into a deep dark crevice, covered it up with so great a heap of stones, that they formed a kind of sepulchral mound. This took place in the wood of Ephraim, on the other side of Jordan[607]; it is therefore evident that Absalom was not buried in the present monument. The monolithic portion may indeed date from his time, but the upper story is much later; for we read[608], "Now Absalom in his life-time had taken and reared up for himself a pillar, which is in the King's dale: for he said, I have no son to keep my name in remembrance: and he called the pillar after his own name: and it is called unto this day Absalom's place." There can be no doubt that this part of the Kidron valley was called the 'King's dale,' because we find the 'King's garden[609]' here, which establishes this point. With regard to the monument, Josephus[610] fixes its site by saying that "Absalom had erected for himself a white marble pillar in the King's dale, two stadia distant from Jerusalem, which he named Absalom's Hand, saying, that if his children were killed, his name would remain by that pillar." The white marble is the breccia of Palestine, which can be worked and polished like marble. The monolith supporting the pillar is left, but the rest is gone, perhaps having been destroyed by Joab, when he returned to Jerusalem with his victorious army. I therefore believe this to be the pillar of Absalom mentioned in the Bible, especially as it is two stadia distant from the city.

To the west, and almost opposite to the monument just described, is a little bridge over the Kidron. An uncertain tradition points out this as the place where Jesus crossed the stream on His way to the house of Caiaphas, and also shews on a rock close by the impression made by His knees as He fell. There is no mention of this in the Bible; it is named by Quaresmius[611]. This road, from the garden to the so-called house of Caiaphas (on Sion), is commonly called the 'road of the Capture.' The topography of the ancient city is unfavourable to the story. A few yards to the south of the Tomb of Absalom is the Retreat of the Apostles, or, according to some, the Tomb of S. James[612]. The Arabs call it Diwan Faroon (Divan of Pharaoh); but they cannot tell for what reason. The outer porch is supported by two columns and two pilasters, sculptured from the rock in which the whole monument is excavated. The porch is about 31 feet wide and 9 deep. In the northern wall is a door, leading by a staircase up into the rock above the sepulchral chamber. In the eastern wall is another door leading into the principal room, a square of 13 feet, into which three smaller chambers open, containing each a niche for a corpse. In the south wall of the vestibule is a square door, leading into a corridor connected with the monument on the south. Tradition relates that S. James and the ten other disciples concealed themselves here on the night when our Saviour was taken prisoner in the garden of Gethsemane, and that they remained here until the day of the Resurrection, when He appeared to S. James[613]. Hegesippus[614] says that S. James was buried near the Temple, and that a monument was raised to his memory, which remained until Hadrian rebuilt the city. The Roman martyrology tells the same story. M. Mislin observes, that this site is not opposed to the tradition, because it may be said to be near the Temple; since, at the time of the Saint's death, they did not bury within the walls of the city. On this point I leave the reader to form his own opinion. I myself do not vouch for the tradition; although the Saint may possibly have been interred here, even if the tomb was not originally constructed for him.

The Tomb of Zacharias is a monolith, hewn out of the mountain; so excavated that there is a passage five feet wide round all the sides, except of course the western. Each of its faces is 17-1/2 feet long, decorated with two columns in the middle, and two half-columns each attached to pilasters at the corners, all forming part of the same block[615]. Around it is a number of Jewish graves, which make it impossible to determine its true elevation; but the height of the portion visible above them is 19 feet. The decoration is not completed in every part. On the eastern side the columns are only rough-hewn, and not finished off as on the three other sides. Inside the monolith is a sepulchral chamber connected with the corridor from the Tomb of S. James. This Zacharias is thought to be the son of Jehoiada, who was slain by king Joash between the temple and the altar[616]; with whose death the Jews are reproached by Christ[617]. So the Jews at the present time believe, consequently they hold the place in great veneration, and pay very highly to be interred after death anywhere near it; which is the cause of the accumulation of stones round it. The Pilgrim of Bordeaux calls it the Tomb of Isaiah, and Benjamin of Tudela the Tomb of Hosea.

To the south of this is another tomb almost buried, on which however two columns can be distinguished. By partially uncovering it I ascertained that it was an ancient monument. It might be supposed to be that of Hosea, but I will not undertake to prove it. I am very much disposed to think that the piece of ground containing these four monuments may be the garden of Uzza, in which Manasseh and Amon were buried[618]; or, at any rate, that they were tombs intended to receive the remains of members of the royal family, or of men of distinction in the country. I refer my readers to the excellent description of the four monuments in M. de Saulcy's work[619]. I think that when they were first constructed they were without decorations, and that they were elaborated at a much later period; because on them we find the Greek and Egyptian styles of architecture; consequently I attribute this part to the time of Herod. Dr Robinson[620], struck with the similarity between these and the rock sepulchres of Petra, in the mixture of Grecian and Egyptian architecture, considered the decorations to be perhaps contemporaneous with the Herods, who were of IdumÆan origin, or possibly to belong even to the era of Hadrian.

Following the road southward along the Kidron we arrive at the Fountain of the Virgin, on the west bank of the torrent. This is highly esteemed by both Christians and Mohammedans, who believe (according to an ancient tradition) that the Virgin Mary used to frequent it to draw water and wash the clothes of her Divine Son. The latter have an oratory, where, after ablutions in the fountain, they offer up their prayers to the mother of Isa (Jesus). A small mosque stood here in the sixteenth and seventeenth century, but even its ruins have now disappeared. The Arabs call the place AÏn Sitti Mariam (Fountain of our Lady Mary), and also AÏn um-el-Deraj (Fountain of our Lady near the steps). It is at the extremity of an excavation in the rock, reached by 28 steps, which, as I have already said[621], have been constructed owing to the rise of the ground. These are divided into two flights by a chamber with a pointed vaulting (Crusaders' work), which is 9-1/2 feet wide and 10-1/4 high. The lower grotto is 26 feet deep, the water flows into a basin 16 feet long, 6 wide, and 7 deep; and from this to the upper pool of Siloam through a subterranean conduit. I shall consider this conduit and the intermittent flow of the fountain in the chapter on the waters. Popular superstition attributes the interruption of the stream to a dragon, that lives concealed at the source, and arrests its course in quenching his thirst. It is also commonly believed that the water is supplied by reservoirs under the Haram, which is not far from the truth, as we shall see. On our way from the fountain to the Pool of Siloam we follow the bed of the torrent for a little way, and then take the road skirting the western bank of the valley. This leads us to a small pond adjoining the western corner of the pool situated almost at the south extremity of Ophel, at the end of the Tyropoeon Valley. This pool is frequently mentioned in the Scriptures. Isaiah speaks of its 'waters that go softly[622];' Nehemiah[623], of the wall of the Pool of Siloam; S. John[624], of the man born blind, who was sent to 'wash in the Pool of Siloam.' Josephus frequently names it, especially in one of his addresses to the besieged Jews, when he tells them, as a sign of God's anger, that the Fountain of Siloam, which before the siege had ceased to supply them with water, now gave forth plenty to the Romans. He tells them also that the same thing took place during the siege by Nebuchadnezzar[625]. On the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles the people went with great solemnity to draw the water of Siloam, and brought it to the altar, where it was mingled with the wine of the sacrifices; in remembrance of the water which God had given them in the desert by the rod of Moses, and to entreat Him to send down rain on the new-sown seed. At this festival our Lord was present when he cried, "If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink[626]." The Talmud[627] asserts, "whoever has not seen the joy of that day has never seen joy." In the evening those who were the wisest and most highly cultivated of the nation assembled together in the vestibule of the Temple, and sang to the music of instruments before all the people; they danced, clapped their hands, and jumped about in a disorderly manner, and the applause was tremendous. This was done in remembrance of the dance of David[628]. From this we see in what esteem the waters of Siloam were always held; and it did not diminish after the prevalence of Christianity. The Bordeaux Pilgrim, A.D. 333, writes thus, "At the bottom of the valley on the left-hand, near the wall, is a pool, which is called Siloa. It has a portico of four bays, and there is another large pool without." S. Jerome[629] mentions the intermittent flow of the water: "But we, above all, who live in this province, cannot doubt that the Fountain of Siloam is by the lower slopes of Mount Sion, which flows not steadily, but bubbles forth at uncertain intervals, and comes with a loud roar through the hollow parts of the earth to the caves of very hard rock." This description appears at first sight to contradict the words of the Prophet Isaiah, who speaks of 'the waters of Siloah that go softly.' The two, however, may be easily reconciled; for the waters ordinarily flow quietly into the pool; but when the peasants dam up the outlet in order to retain the stream for irrigating their gardens, the current rolls along noisily. I made the experiment in 1861, when an Arab Effendi, Jusef Bachatip, requested me to examine whether there was a sufficient supply of water to work a corn-mill.

Nicephorus Callistus[630] states that "S. Helena constructed wonderful works at the pool which is called Siloe." I doubt this; the stones still remaining there, and the inner walls, indicate a higher antiquity than the time of her visit to the city; moreover, I think that if she had built anything, the Bordeaux Pilgrim would have mentioned it; and we know that the place was highly regarded by the Jews. It is also remarkable that he says nothing of a church, while, in A.D. 600, Antoninus of Piacenza[631] relates, "There is a basilica there, within which are latticed enclosures, in one of which men bathe in order to receive a blessing, in the other women; and in front of the door is a great pool, made by the hand of man, in which the people bathe at certain hours." S. Boniface[632] adds, that the basilica was dedicated to S. Saviour the Illuminator. In the beginning of the eleventh century Albert of Aix[633] writes, "At that place, where there is a square walled building like a cloister, in the middle of which a little stream is received." He, however, does not mention a church, nor does John Phocas, who confines himself to saying, that he saw the columns and the vaulted roofs which adorned and surrounded the source, without mentioning the basilica; and afterwards adds, "It would be easy to repair the ruins of the sacred fountain, but no one touches or puts his hand to them, and so they are going day by day to ruin, like the buildings at the other Holy Places[634]." Certain eminent authors of the present day assert that in the fourth or fifth century the pool was covered by a church. This I cannot admit, because I find no mention of it in S. Jerome and Phocas. Antoninus of Piacenza must have mistaken the porches for a basilica; and we know from his other descriptions that he is by no means to be trusted; while those who have followed him have been misled by his words, and by the shafts of columns and other ruins in the neighbourhood.

During the siege of Jerusalem, A.D. 1099, Raymond d'Agiles[635] gives the following account of what happened at the fountain of Siloam: "Whenever the fountain began to flow, the Christians flung themselves into it one on the other, and very often perished along with their cattle. It was thus choked with the bodies of men and animals who had fallen into it." This does not prove the goodness of the waters[636]; for we know from Tudebode[637], that water was so scarce during the siege, that the pilgrims went a distance of six miles to fetch some though bad and offensive, in little leathern vessels which they had made of the hides of oxen and other animals (after the custom of the country). This water, corrupted though it was, was sold at such a high price, that a crown would not buy enough to quench a single man's thirst. If, then, men were in such want as to drink this water, they would be very glad to get that of Siloam. Saladin compared this stream to the rivers of Paradise; but as it is the only naturally flowing stream to be seen in Jerusalem, and as it irrigates the luxuriant gardens of Siloam, and also in times of drought is valuable to the city for many purposes, we can understand the feeling that produced this Oriental exaggeration. In his time a small mosque was built near the pool.

Let me now describe its present appearance. It is an oblong pool, exhibiting everywhere signs of neglect. Earth and stones slip down into it from the higher ground all round, and partly fill it. The peasants of Siloam, whose gardens are irrigated by its waters, are sometimes obliged to clear it out, but the work is done carelessly. Its dimensions are 52 feet in length, 19-1/2 in breadth, and 20-1/4 in depth. The revÊtement is a modern restoration, and in it are incorporated shafts of grey granite columns, the fragments of the above-named portico. At the north-east corner of the reservoir is a small arch with a flight of steps, which are in a ruinous state. This leads down into a little basin, into which the conduit (3 feet wide and about 12 high) from the Fountain of the Virgin empties itself. This explains why the stream in the Pool of Siloam is intermittent, like that at the Fountain, and also the etymology of the word, which signifies 'sent[638].' There is an opening at the north-east corner, by which the water flows to the gardens of Siloam through a conduit excavated in the rock, opposite to the south end of Ophel. An examination of the interior of the pool disclosed to me the ancient passage by which the water ran down into the lower pool. The latter I have already stated to be, in my opinion, the Pool of Solomon, mentioned by Josephus[639] in his description of the first wall of the city. Here, according to the Pilgrim of Bordeaux and Antoninus of Piacenza, the Christians resorted to bathe at certain times. It is now a cultivated garden; for the earth brought down by the rains from the higher ground has completely filled it up. The Arabs now call it Birket el-Hamra. Coins are frequently found by the peasants among the earth in the interior; which have been brought down and deposited there by the conduits flowing from the city.

At the south-east corner of Solomon's Pool are some ruins, consisting of shafts and broken capitals of columns, walls and dressed stones of Jewish workmanship. In the middle stands a very old forked mulberry-tree, said to mark the spot where the prophet Isaiah was sawn asunder. According to a tradition received by both the Jews and the Christians, Isaiah was put to death in the early part of Manasseh's reign, and his body was buried under an oak near to the Well Rogel[640]. I do not admit the identity of Siloam and Rogel, which AbbÉ Mariti[641] tries to establish; but consider it improbable that the mulberry should mark the place of the martyrdom, and the oak indicate the tomb. The position of the latter I do not attempt to fix, as there are many burial-places near Rogel, but none with the proper tree. The Mohammedans hold the site of the martyrdom in great veneration, and go there to pray. It also serves as a place of assembly for the villagers of Siloam, when they want to discuss any matter of interest.

From this point we see at one glance the gardens of Siloam, which I have already identified[642] with the King's gardens of former times[643]. The inhabitants are indebted to the little stream flowing from the upper pool for the rich crops of vegetables produced by the plots of land, once the favourite haunts of Solomon's wives. Then they must have been more abundantly irrigated than they now are; and very probably the King constructed the lower pool for this purpose. His humble successors still reap large profits from the ground, though with a diminished supply of water; all of which they bestow on the plants, reserving none for their own persons.

Following the course of the valley, we leave the mouth of the Valley of Hinnom, on the right, and before long arrive at the Well of Joab or Job, called by the Arabs Bir Eyub, and still known by the name of the Well of Nehemiah, or of the Sacred Fire[644]. No one knows what connexion this well has with Joab or Job; but a tradition relates that when Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem, the Priests concealed the sacred fire here in order to save it from profanation; and that, on their return from the Captivity, it miraculously blazed forth, at the prayer of Nehemiah, from the mud which had been found in the hiding-place[645]. When the truth of this story was proved to the satisfaction of the King of Persia, he enclosed the place, and made it holy. Nehemiah "called this thing Naphthar, which is as much as to say, a cleansing, but many men call it Nephi[646]." This I believe to be the ancient En-Rogel, which was on the frontier of Judah and Benjamin[647]. Here David's spies, Jonathan and Ahimaaz, stayed to watch the progress of Absalom's rebellion[648]; and here again the partisans of Adonijah assembled, under the pretext of a banquet[649]. Josephus, in his account of this conspiracy, tells us that the fountain was in the King's garden. At a distance Bir Eyub appears like a ruined house; but, on approaching it, we find a quadrangular basin and some ruins, with a frail structure over the well, and a Mohammedan oratory. In summer it contains little water, but during the winter-rains it is not only full, but even overflows into the Kidron. If this do not happen, it is considered by the inhabitants a bad omen for the coming season; but when it does, a fertile year is expected, and the whole country rejoices. The water escapes from the well by a conduit in its east wall, which disappears in the ground after a distance of 60 feet. The description of its interior, of the supposed phenomenon of intermittence, and of my investigation on this point, I leave to the Chapter on the Waters; contenting myself at present with stating, that I have examined the well to the bottom without finding any trace of a spring. On the first appearance of the desired prognostic of prosperity, the peasants of Siloam, who, as nearest to the spot, consider themselves its owners, fill earthen vessels from the overflowing stream, and bear them to the conventual bodies and persons of distinction in the city, receiving in return the omnipotent Bakshish. Then the townspeople flock together there; tents are pitched, and little refreshment booths improvised; parties of pleasure are made up; pipes and coffee circulate briskly, while Arab music and dances enliven the festive scene. Infirm men and women are carried thither, and dip the soles of their feet in the water; mothers bathe their babes in it, to restore them to health; horsemen exhibit their own skill in riding and the activity of their fine steeds, in the swollen waters of the Kidron: and when the rains are abundant, the merriment is kept up for 15 days. This is the only occasion on which the melancholy inhabitants of Jerusalem give way to rejoicing; and even that is in the midst of tombs and tokens of sorrow, in the supposed Valley of Jehoshaphat, because they see the waters of the Kidron flowing, which then, and then only, is in reality a torrent.

Here ends the Valley of Jehoshaphat, or, as it may be called, from the Fountain of the Virgin to this well, the Valley of Siloam. Let us then follow the path on the north of Bir Eyub, and ascend the Mount of Offence[650]. This is only the southernmost part of the Mount of Olives, separated from the main mass by the road from Jerusalem to Bethany. Its summit is supposed to have been the scene of the idolatrous rites of the concubines of Solomon, and of the King himself, and some of his successors. Here are a few fragments of ruins, possibly the remains of the heathen temples; but beyond these there is nothing worthy of notice, except the fine view.

On the western slope of this hill, near the Kidron, is the wretched village inhabited by the Mohammedan peasants of Siloam, called Kefr Silwan, probably from the waters of that name in its vicinity. It is a strange combination of cottages, built on a vertical rock, and of great sepulchral caves, now used as dwelling-places or granaries. These caverns formerly afforded shelter to monks and hermits. John of WÜrtzburg[651] writes thus: "The same valley has more caverns on all sides, in which holy men lead a solitary life." It has now a population of about 300, none of whom can strictly be termed poor, as they are employed in carrying into the city the water of Bir Eyub for domestic use, and that of the Fountain of the Virgin and of the Pool of Siloam for buildings. Some cultivate their gardens and plots of land on the eastern slopes of Sion, and many are hired as escorts for pilgrims to the plains of Jericho, when they are not otherwise engaged as thieves or robbers; professions in which the village has attained much celebrity. They also profit by the generosity or timidity of the Jews, extorting from them bakshish, when they come to bury a corpse, or visit the grave of a relation. At the north end of the village is a monolithic monument, whose architecture resembles the Egyptian[652]. It is a square in plan, and is entirely detached from the rock. Within are two chambers. M. de Saulcy considers it to be an Egyptian chapel, constructed by Solomon to receive the remains of his wife, Pharaoh's daughter. To this opinion I incline, as I cannot find any more satisfactory explanation of it. S. Luke mentions a tower in Siloam[653]; but whether this was near the pool or the village, we do not know; probably the latter, as it then would have served as a watch-tower and keep, or even as an ornament, seeing there were some other buildings on the Mount of Offence.

Leaving the village we will ascend the Mount of Olives, which we have already described[654]. In order to examine its chief points of interest more easily, we will return to the Garden of Gethsemane, whence two roads mount the western slope. The northern presents nothing worthy of remark, except that close to its outset is a rock, where the Virgin is said to have appeared from heaven to S. Thomas, who was sitting there lamenting that he had not been present at her assumption, and to have presented him with her girdle. We will therefore select the southern path, though it is more rugged and in worse repair than the other. As we ascend, we pass an Arab house in the form of a tower; but no traditions are attached to it. Beyond it, about half way up the mountain, is a mass of buildings wholly Arab, which are pointed out as marking the spot where Jesus wept over Jerusalem. I do not believe that the event occurred anywhere in this neighbourhood, because the Evangelist[655] tells us that our Lord was coming from Bethphage and Bethany; and therefore, in all probability, He had ascended the road leading from these places up the eastern slope of the mountain. Then, when first the city rose before them, I believe that the disciples and the multitude began to rejoice and praise God. It is said also that this happened when He was 'at the descent of the Mount of Olives[656],' and the place now shewn is a considerable distance below the summit. Some rely upon the words, 'when He was come near He beheld the city, and wept over it,' to authenticate this locality; but though these words may possibly shew that the place of the weeping was in advance of the first-named spot, still I cannot admit that this would have happened on the southern road (which then, in all probability, did not exist, as it is rather a goat-track than a foot-path), or that our Saviour would have departed from the ordinary road. Surius relates that a church stood on this place, under the name 'Dominus flevit,' which was built by the early Christians, and destroyed by the Turks. I do not deny that a church may have been there, but that does not prove the authenticity of the spot. Godfrey of Bouillon is said to have pitched his tent there. Certainly, if this be true, he did not select so convenient a situation for examining the city as the summit to which I now conduct my reader.

The mountain has three summits in a line lying north and south. The northernmost, which joins on to Mount Scopus, is known by the name of Viri GalilÆi; on it we find a large cistern and some ruins, apparently the remains of a watchtower. The guides call them the ruins of a convent, and not improbably one belonging to the Syrians stood here at the time of the Crusades, as is shewn by the following passages: "Near the Mount of Olives, on the left, is a monastery of the Syrians[657]," and "there is a place suited for a camp, and buildings seem to have been there. On the summit there is a cistern, and the whole place is delightsome[658]." The name of Viri GalilÆi is given by the inhabitants of the country, who believe that the two men clothed in white stood there and addressed the Apostles, "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven[659]?" The legend is obviously inadmissible, as the vision evidently occurred at the place of the Ascension[660]. The more probable reason, according to Quaresmius[661], is, that a house stood there bearing that name, which was so called because it was frequented by the GalilÆans when they visited the city on the occasion of any festival.

The second and highest summit is the one traditionally pointed out as the place of the Ascension[662]; in accordance with the words of the Acts of the Apostles[663], "Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey." Some consider the account in S. Luke's Gospel[664] opposed to this belief, where it is said, "He led them out as far as Bethany." But as the Mount of Olives is in the district of Bethany, the Evangelist may very well have put the whole for the part; so that there is no reason why we should not accept the site at present known as the scene of the Ascension.

The third summit is the Mount of Offence, of which we have already spoken. The name of Olivet is derived from the olive-trees, which are still cultivated upon its slopes, though now in very small numbers. Mariti[665] says, "it is still known by the name of the Celebrated and Holy Mountain[666]." Quaresmius and Ludolph[667] remark that in some ancient versions of the Acts of the Apostles, we find in ch. i. ver. 12, the 'Mount of the Three Lights' instead of the 'Mount of Olives.' Both of them explain the origin of this name to be that during the night these three summits were illuminated on the west by the light of the fire on the altar of the Lord, which was kept always burning, and in the morning on the east by the beams of the rising sun, before they fell upon Jerusalem. Reland asserts that from its three eminences it is called the Mount of the Three Summits.

By a chain of fire-signals from this mountain the Israelites used to communicate to their brethren in distant lands the appearance of the new moon before the Passover. On one occasion the Samaritans, in order to deceive the Jews, lighted similar fires at the wrong time, for which reason the Jews were afterwards obliged to send messengers. The Talmud relates the manner in which these fires were made. "How did they raise the flames on high? They took long wands of cedar and reeds and pitchy wood and tow, and bound them together with a thread. And one, after ascending the mountain, lights this, and tosses the flame hither and thither, and up and down, until he sees another doing the same on the next mountain; and so on to the third. But from what point did they first raise the fire on high? From the Mount of Olives to Sartaba; from Sartaba to Gryphena; from Gryphena to Hauran; from Hauran to Beth Baltin; and he who raised the flame on Beth Baltin did not retire from it, but tossed his torch hither and thither, and up and down, until he saw the whole Captivity blazing with fires[668]." "The Samaritans also once raised the fires at the wrong time, and so deceived Israel." (Gloss.)

Sozomen[669] relates that, on the seventh of May, A.D. 331, a remarkable prodigy manifested the glory of God to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. A luminous cross, far brighter than any comet, was seen above the Valley of Jehoshaphat, reaching from Golgotha to the Mount of Olives. This vision lasted for several hours, and was seen by all the people, who ran to the church to celebrate the praises of Him who had thus testified to the truth of the Christian faith.

Tancred, on the arrival of the Crusaders before Jerusalem, ascended this mountain alone to reconnoitre the place, and was attacked by five Mohammedans, whom he discomfited single-handed. Hither too the Crusaders came in procession to pray for victory from the Lord of Hosts, before they assaulted the walls.

In the reign of Baldwin II. the Mohammedan chiefs with their bands assembled here with their troops in order to assault the city; but the Christian warriors attacked and dispersed them, slaying a great number, and the rest were destroyed by a band who sallied forth from Nablous. During the reign of the Latin kings the mountain was covered with churches, chapels, and cells for monks and hermits. Hence remains of these are constantly found.

Let us now examine the summit bearing the name of the Ascension; and relate the history of those monuments, of which some traces still remain, or the sites of which are known. The mountain is crowned by a small village, clustered round a mosque and minaret, and extending a little eastward. Its cottages are miserable dens, but in their walls, ordinary as they are, fragments are seen, generally mutilated, which appear to have belonged to buildings of a higher architectural character. In front of the village (called Jebel Tor), on the west, the Greeks and the Armenians possess a plot of ground, in which they have found, while working there, some pieces of ornamental work, such as cornices, capitals, and the like; together with some large cisterns, which are also common in other parts. On the Greek property towards the north, an ancient wall was found in 1860, which from its masonry appears to me to have formed part of a Roman intrenchment. I refer it to the epoch of Titus, when the tenth legion was encamped here, and the soldiers were ordered to fortify themselves[670]. On the western slope is a small plateau, occupied by a Mohammedan cemetery, from which there is a beautiful view; but in order to enjoy this thoroughly it is necessary to ascend the minaret. This marks the spot from which the Lord ascended into heaven. It is now covered by a small mosque, in which the Mohammedans come to pray, shewing thus how greatly they also reverence the place. Before examining it, we will notice the surprising panorama visible from the minaret. To the west the Holy City is spread out before us[671]. We look down the Valley of Jehoshaphat from its head on the north, to where it joins the Tyropoeon and the Valley of Hinnom; we can distinguish the hills of Jerusalem itself, and so understand its ancient topography. What thoughts arise as the eye roams from the plateau of the Haram es-SherÎf to the Castle of David, from Golgotha to Sion, from Bezetha to Gareb! The scenes of the Old and New Testament, the histories of so many different nations, the punishment of the elect people, are brought home to mind and heart; while we feel moved to repeat the words of Jeremiah, "How doth the city sit solitary, that was full of people! how is she become as a widow! she that was great among the nations, and princess among the provinces, how is she become tributary[672]!" "Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by? behold, and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me, wherewith the Lord hath afflicted me in the day of His fierce anger[673]." To the north is mount Scopus, the village of Neby SamwÎl (Prophet Samuel), and the mountains of the ancient land of Ephraim, combined with those of Samaria. Towards the east, the eye, after traversing the desert hills and mountains of Judah down to the plains of Jericho and the deep basin of the Dead Sea, is arrested by the range of the Arabian mountains; the hills of the land of Gilead appear on the north, lower down those of Ammon, and still further to the south, Nebo rising above the other summits of Moab. Seen through the pure light their sides are tinged with colour too beautiful for description, and testing to the utmost the painter's skill. To the south rise the gloomy herbless slopes of the distant heights of Bethlehem. To the south-east is the Hill of Evil Counsel, the plain of Rephaim, and the Convent of S. Elias, across a nearly desert tract of country. The whole panorama is a picture of desolation.

Let us now visit one by one the spots connected with incidents in sacred history. First is the place occupied by the small mosque, called by the Mohammedans the Mosque of the Ascension[674]. Eusebius[675] relates that "the mother of Constantine, in order to do honour to the memory of our Lord's ascension, erected some magnificent edifices on the Mount of Olives. First she raised on the summit of the mountain a Sanctuary of the Church of God." Hence we see that the first basilica on this site was built by S. Helena; but of that no traces now remain, nor has any description of it come down to us. S. Jerome alone gives us to understand that it was circular in plan. "For the church, in the middle of which are the foot-marks, was built on a circular plan and most beautiful design[676]." He also, as well as many other fathers of the Church, relates that the upper part of the dome could not be closed, because our Lord rose from it, and that the marks of His footsteps on the ground could never be covered up with marble[677]. This basilica was no doubt destroyed, A.D. 614, during the invasion of Chosroes II., but was rebuilt during the first half of the seventh century by the Patriarch Modestus[678], and the original plan was retained. Arculf[679], who saw it in the same century, has left us a detailed notice of it. "On that Mount Olivet no place appears loftier than that from which the Saviour is said to have ascended into heaven, where stands a great circular church with three cloisters round it, with chambers above them. The interior chamber of this circular church is without a roof, and lies open to heaven under the air; in the eastern part of which is an altar protected by a narrow roof. Now the inner house has no chamber placed above it, in order that from the spot, where last He placed His sacred feet, before He was borne in a cloud to heaven, the way may be always open, and stretch away into heaven before the eyes of the worshippers.... Moreover, there is a continuing testimony that the dust was trodden by God, in that the traces of His steps may be seen ... and the earth retains the mark as though stamped with the impressions of feet. In the same place is a great brazen cylinder opening outward (Ærea grandis per circuitum rota desuper explanata), the height of it being up to a man's head; in the middle of which is a rather large hole, through which the prints of the Lord's feet may be plainly seen marked in the dust. In that cylinder also on the west side a kind of door is always open, and through it those who enter can easily approach the sacred dust, and, by stretching out their hands through the aperture of the covering, can take particles of the sacred dust. On the west side of the upper part of the aforesaid rotunda are eight windows with glass lights; and the same number of lamps is suspended by cords within over against them; each being hung neither above nor below, but as it were part and parcel of the window, directly behind which it is seen. The brightness of these lamps shining through the glass is so great, that not only is the western side of Olivet adjoining the church illuminated, but also the greater part of the city of Jerusalem from the bottom of the Valley of Jehoshaphat is lighted up in the same manner." Willibald's description confirms, in every respect, that of Arculf.

We do not know precisely what became of the building at the time of Hakem's persecution, A.D. 1010, but it seems probable that the Khalif destroyed a considerable part of it; because, when SÆwulf visited the place, A.D. 1103, he saw a small tower supported by columns, and surrounded by a court paved with marble. The altar was inside, placed on the rock; and there was another altar to the east in the choir a little distance from the columns, where the Patriarch celebrated mass on Ascension-Day. In the first half of the twelfth century the Crusaders rebuilt the church on this site, and added a convent occupied by Canons of the Augustinian order[680]. Their habit was white[681]. I only give the Plan of the present building, as there are not sufficient remains to enable me to reconstruct that of the Crusaders, and I but partially accept the conclusions which M. de VogÜÉ has drawn from the testimony of Quaresmius[682]: "The ancient church was a regular octagon in plan: all the bases of the corner pillars still remain; it is easy therefore to determine its perimeter. The octagon forming the base of the plan is inscribed in a circle 111-1/2 feet in diameter. The building has not been laid out with much accuracy, as the length of the sides of the octagon (measured on the outside) vary between 39-1/4 and 42-1/2 feet[683]. This fault proceeds from a want of exactness in the execution; since it was evidently the intention of the architects to construct a regular building, to recall by its polygonal form the ancient rotunda whose ruins it replaced. There is a similar want of regularity in the bases[684]; some are larger than others without any apparent motive.... The bases of the columns sustaining the inner rotunda have entirely disappeared; but they existed in the time of Quaresmius, who has placed them in his plan equidistant from the centre and the inside wall ... a wall of rubble-work, no doubt pierced with windows, connected the corner piers. Nothing remains of this except some shapeless fragments of its substructure. The examination of these fragments induces us to suppose that the original wall did not run in straight lines, but was rather circular in form[685]. In this uncertainty I prefer to follow the indication of Quaresmius[686], who doubtless was able to see quite enough of the original building to ascertain its general plan. He says distinctly that was octagonal. 'The lower parts of the walls are left, as well as some bases of columns and foundations, from which we can infer how magnificent it was. Externally it was an octagon in form, and inside was an ambulatory, supported by one row of columns.'" From an examination of the spot I am induced to believe that Quaresmius could not have seen much more than now remains; and therefore cannot say whether he imagined or really saw the octagon. In the latter case I suppose that its ruins have perished since his time; and therefore M. de VogÜÉ cannot have seen the fragments of the 'wall of rubble-work connecting the piers.' I do not deny that his restoration of the church deserves careful consideration, and probably conveys a true idea of the building: but I believe that it cannot be restricted to the present dimensions, and that we can place no reliance upon the bases of columns and walls now remaining, because they have been arranged according to the caprice of the Mohammedans, as was most convenient. This I will presently explain; however, the Plan itself will shew it. The church erected by the Crusaders was destroyed by the Saracens, A.D. 1187. "Others indeed devastated the most holy Mount of Olives, where the Lord, as we read in the Gospels, was often wont to pray ... on which a church is built, on the spot where our Lord Jesus Christ was taken up into heaven on the fortieth day after His resurrection. In the middle of this a structure of wonderful roundness and beauty is erected, where the Lord placed His feet[687]."

The Mohammedans appear to have built the present mosque from the materials of the ancient church: the dome is now closed[688]. Willibrand of Oldenburg[689], who visited Olivet A.D. 1211, states that an infidel Saracen had erected an oratory in honour of Mohammed over the ruins of the Church of the Ascension. M. de VogÜÉ thinks that the Chronicler is mistaken in saying that this was in honour of the Prophet, and not of the Ascension, and that the date of the building is from 1200 to 1240. No Christian community has ever had exclusive possession of the place. A Mohammedan Santon is in charge, who for a present will open the doors to any one wishing to visit it. Consequently, on Ascension-day the monks of all the Christian sects resort thither, each party celebrating mass on the spot marked on the Plan. The Greeks occupy the most distinguished position, after the site occupied by the mosque; for there, according to tradition, the Apostles stood as our Lord ascended.

Travellers have all spoken about the prints of our Saviour's feet (especially AbbÉ Mariti and Monsignor Mislin); with regard to these, as they are unsupported by the Bible and the decrees of the Church, I venture to declare that they are only representations of footsteps carved by some sculptor. The truth of miracles in the abstract I do not impugn, but for this there is no evidence. The Mohammedans preserve in the mosque el-Aksa one of the impressions, which also came from Olivet. I defy the keenest observer to say which is the mark of the right foot and which of the left. I do not believe in the instantaneous fusion of the rock; it is only an Oriental invention; and we find frequent instances of a similar kind among the different religious bodies in the East; such as the other foot-prints of the Saviour, those of the Virgin at Bethlehem, those of the Angel Gabriel, the impression of the body of the Prophet Elias, the turban of Mohammed and his foot-print, and a thousand similar stories. Therefore I say, with Mariti, 'Let him believe that wishes to believe;' and am sure that I offend not against God and religion in rejecting such old wives' tales.

Let us now glance at some other points of interest. At the south-west corner of the buildings surrounding the Church of the Ascension is the Grotto or Tomb of S. Pelagia; over which a church used to stand. She was a native of Alexandria, who went to Antioch in search of pleasure; and as she was graceful, fair, and frail, was soon noted among the gallants of that place, who called her 'the Pearl.' However, one day she listened to a sermon preached by Nonnus, Patriarch of Antioch, which so affected her, that, abandoning her former life, she went to inhabit the grotto on Mount Olivet, which still bears her name; and so completely disguised herself, that she was known to the hermits who lived in the other caves in the neighbourhood by the name of the monk Pelagius. Her sex was not discovered till she was laid out, before being buried beneath the spot where she had lived. The Jews call this place the Tomb of the Prophetess Huldah; for what reason they do not themselves know. The Plan[690] exhibits the interior, half of which is vaulted with masonry, the rest excavated in the rock. Tradition asserts that our Lord frequently retired to this grotto to instruct His disciples; accordingly a church, built by S. Helena in honour of this event, occupied this spot before that dedicated to S. Pelagia. So we are informed by Eusebius[691]. "And she also built a church lower down at that very cave, where (as the true and holy utterances of God testify) the Disciples and Apostles were initiated in all sacred mysteries." The Pilgrim of Bordeaux writes, A.D. 333, "Thence you ascend Mount Olivet, where the Lord taught His Apostles before His Passion. There a basilica has been built by order of Constantine[692]." Why does the Pilgrim pass unnoticed the Church of the Ascension, so plainly indicated by Eusebius? Possibly the church of the grotto, a kind of dependency of the place of the Ascension, may have been the only part of the works completed at the time.

Leaving the Grotto of S. Pelagia, and going towards the south-west, we find a cistern near to an olive-tree, which is shewn as the place where our Saviour taught the Apostles the Lord's Prayer. Formerly there was a church here, as the following passage tells us: "In which place (i.e. Olivet) the Lord was wont to instruct His disciples and all who flocked to Him out of the city. And there He is said to have taught His disciples the Lord's Prayer[693]." Not a trace of the church is now left; and I cannot accept the tradition, as it is contrary to S. Matthew's Gospel[694], which places the scene of this event in Galilee; S. Luke[695], indeed, says our Lord repeated the prayer 'in a certain place,' this may have been in Galilee or at Bethany, but not, I think, at Jerusalem.

A short distance from the above, to the east, is a cavern, wherein the Apostles are believed to have composed the Creed. Here formerly stood a church, dedicated to the twelve Apostles; as is shewn by the ruins still remaining, and those which are dug up there from time to time. The Rev. G. Williams[696], in 1842, saw twelve niches in the walls, six on each side: these I never found; for the barbarous peasants of Olivet have completely destroyed them, in order to use the stones in building their cottages, after first breaking them in pieces so as to remove them more easily. The tradition about the Creed is of no value. Adrichomius[697], indeed, says, "the most probable opinion is, that the Apostles met together in the Coenaculum in Sion to compose the Creed."

On the summit, not far from the place where the Lord's Prayer is said to have been pronounced, the spot is pointed out where our Lord stood when He predicted the Last Judgment[698]. This tradition is, like the others, worthless.

Descending towards the south in the direction of the Mount of Offence, we arrive, a few yards from a path leading to Bethany, at a field, in which is the so-called Tomb of the Prophets[699]. We enter this cave by a small aperture approached down a broken flight of steps. The Plan and Sections render it unnecessary for me to describe its internal arrangements. I will only mention that in certain parts, especially in the piers, we find masonry, which has been added in order to strengthen the piers of rock which had crumbled away, and so become incapable of supporting the vaulted roof. The place is called by the Arabs Kubur el-Umbia. Hither the Hebrew pilgrims come to lament and pray, believing, according to a tradition commonly received by them, that they are the burying-places of the Prophets. We will therefore see whether the Bible confirms this belief.

Though they are called the Tombs of the Prophets, the names of those who have been buried there are not known; for the greater number and more distinguished Prophets were not interred near Jerusalem. The difficulties attending on this tradition are well put by M. Nau[700]. "They point out the place where, as they say, the Prophets are buried. But what Prophets? Isaiah is buried elsewhere, under Mount Sion; Jeremiah at Alexandria, whither his remains were removed by Alexander the Great from Tahpanhes in Egypt; Baruch, his secretary, went to Babylon to console his countrymen in their captivity, and lies there. Ezekiel, after being cruelly martyred by being dashed against rocks over which he was dragged by the Jews, or (as others say) by horses, to which he had been fastened, was buried in the sepulchre of Shem and Arphaxad. Daniel ended his days at Babylon, either by a natural death (according to the common opinion), or (according to an ancient manuscript of the Emperor Basil, preserved in the Vatican) by decapitation, together with his three holy companions, at the hand of a certain Attalus. His remains were removed from Babylon to Alexandria, and thence to Venice. Hosea was buried at Behemot in the tribe of Issachar, Joel at Bethor, Amos at Tekoah, Obadiah and Elisha at Sebaste, Jonah at Geth, Micah and Habakkuk near Eleutheropolis, Nahum at Begabar. Thus the burial-places of the greater number of the prophets are elsewhere: but still we may suppose that some of the others may have been interred in these tombs; for example, Zephaniah, Haggai, Malachi, and many others of the Messengers of God, mentioned in Holy Scripture, who have not left any writings, as Gad, Nathan, Ahijah the Shilonite, and others. It is enough for some of these to be buried here, in order to give the place a claim to its name. It is also possible that the Jews may have collected the remains of their more distinguished Prophets, and placed them in these tombs on the Mount of Olives." No more need be said to shew how slight are the grounds for the traditional name. It is indeed possible that the words of our Lord may refer to these tombs: "Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the Prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous[701]." "Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the Prophets, and your fathers killed them[702]." Certainly I do not consider these tombs to be as ancient as many others in the Valley of Kidron and Hinnom and on the north of the city, which we shall presently examine.

Quitting the Mount of Olives, let us take the path running eastward, which will lead us to the ancient village of Bethphage, so well known in connexion with the Redeemer's entry into Jerusalem. It formerly belonged to the Levites employed in the Temple. Origen, in his treatise on S. Matthew[703], explains the word to mean House of the Jaws. S. Jerome[704] speaks of it as follows: "When He had come to Bethphage, to the House of the Jaws, which is a village belonging to the Priests, and a type of (Christian) confession, situated on the Mount of Olives." Again, in the account of S. Paula's journey[705], he says, "After she had entered the Tomb of Lazarus, Mary and Martha, she saw the hospice and Bethphage, the 'Village of the Jaws,' which were the priests' portion." Others interpret the word 'House of Figs,' and the Easterns assert that it means 'House of the Rock in the Valley.' The position of the place is certainly in favour of this last signification, as just there the valley is divided into two branches by a rocky hill.

At the present day there are no traces of the church, which is said to have stood there, or even of the village itself; nothing is seen but bare rock, broken here and there by patches of badly tilled ground. Quaresmius[706] gives an account of the long procession which used in his time to be made on Palm Sunday, "When the Guardian of the Holy Land, with his attendant monks, had reached the spot, he preached to the people: then a deacon chanted the Gospel for the day. At the words, 'Jesus sent two disciples, saying unto them,' two monks fell on their knees in front of the reader, who continued, 'Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her; loose them and bring them unto me.' Then the two departed and brought an ass, on which the Guardian mounted, while the bystanders spread their garments and olive-branches in the way, and so the procession started for Jerusalem, chanting as they went, 'The sons of the Hebrews brought branches of olive,' and proceeded to the city." Even in the time of Quaresmius nothing remained of either the church or the village. I could wish that some of the ceremonies still performed in the Holy Sepulchre, had, like this, fallen into disuse.

After descending from Bethphage for about half a mile by a very steep and stony path, we come to the village of Bethany. It may perhaps be asserted, that this way going from the Mount of Olives through Bethphage and Bethany was not in existence in former times, and is rather a cattle-track than a road, but it is mentioned by S. Epiphanius[707]: "Then he (Marcion) does not give any account of His journey from Jericho until He arrives at Bethany and Bethphage. But there was an ancient road which led from Jerusalem by Mount Olivet, which those who traverse these regions are acquainted with." Therefore it is evident that this road was more ancient than that which went from Jerusalem to Bethany by the Mount of Offence. The former is the one which we suppose our Lord to have traversed on His triumphal entry into Jerusalem, and on other occasions. Bethany was a Jewish fortress on the eastern slope of Olivet: it was the home of Lazarus and his sisters[708], and is frequently mentioned in the Gospels[709], being the favourite resort of Jesus and His disciples. The position of the village is incontestably fixed by history, tradition, and the locality itself.

We are told by S. John[710] that Bethany was about 15 stadia, or nearly 2 Roman miles, from Jerusalem, and the present village is that distance. We may fairly suppose that the house of Lazarus must have been of considerable size from the allusions to it in the Gospels[711], and consequently it and the village could hardly have been destroyed without leaving some ruins to mark the spot; and therefore the tradition would be preserved until the fourth century, when monuments were erected by the Christians on the sites connected with the life of Christ. It is then only necessary to examine into the accuracy of the tradition during the first three centuries; but here the same arguments that we used in the case of the Sepulchre of Christ may be applied to Bethany, and especially to the Tomb of Lazarus. The present condition of the place may also persuade those who distrust tradition, for there are still very many ruins there, and consequently must have been more in the first ages of Christianity. If it be urged that they are the effects of the ravages of the Saracens on the work of the Crusaders, I admit the objection to be partly true, but reply that the eye can readily distinguish these from the more ancient Jewish remains. In a word, there is no other place on the eastern slope of Olivet, which so perfectly fulfils all the requisite conditions, as the present village of Bethany: and even its Arab name El-Azirieh still retains that of Lazarus. The Mohammedans themselves so fully believe that this is the scene of the raising of Lazarus, that they come as pilgrims from distant countries to supplicate health for themselves and their sick children, in faith that if they touch the rock of the tomb their prayers will be granted by God. In 1859 some labourers discovered, at the distance of a few yards from the village, to the east, near the road going to the Jordan, a wall which had all the characteristics of ancient Jewish work of the age of the Herods. Its shape and position seem to indicate that it had formed part of an enclosure; the continuation of which was observed a little to the south, and also to the north-west of the Arab houses. Near it a great quantity of materials of the Herodian epoch were discovered, scattered about in the ground, with several deep cisterns entirely excavated and vaulted in the rock, full of fragments of ancient masonry. These also occur in other parts of the village. After carefully examining the boundary wall, wherever it could be found, I have arrived at the conclusion that the traditional House and Tomb of Lazarus are outside it. Thus the objection often brought against them, that they are inside the village, in opposition to the Jewish law, does not apply. For a long time past the peasants of Bethany have been accustomed to find dressed stones in their fields, which they have either broken up, in order to carry them away easily into the city, or have burnt for lime. If, then, we do not suppose the ancient village to have been there, I do not see how we can explain the presence of these remains. The eastern part of the present village occupies a portion of the old site, and the western was built when memorials were erected by the Christians over the Holy Places. Bethany is now a wretched spot, consisting of about forty cottages, built on ruins and heaps of rubbish. A short distance from the entrance to the village, on the west, is a splendid ruin, the remains of a building of considerable size, which is shewn as the House of Lazarus. To the east of this, among the houses, is the mosque[712], and near it the Tomb of Lazarus. The houses of Martha, Mary, and Simon the Leper, are also shewn by the natives; but as these exhibit no signs of antiquity, and the first two are obviously improbable, I pass them by without further notice, to consider the Tomb of Lazarus. This, like most of the Jewish sepulchres, consists of two underground chambers, namely, a vestibule and a tomb properly so called. The latter is entirely excavated in the rock, while the former is of masonry, together with the walls of the staircase leading down to it, which dates (according to Mariti[713]) from the beginning of the seventeenth century; that is, from 1612 to 1615, when Father Angelo of Messina was Guardian of the holy mountain of Sion, and built this approach to the tomb. Mariti adds, that it was made because the ancient one was in the adjoining mosque, formerly a Christian church. With this I cannot agree, because, after examining the interior of the mosque, I have been unable to find any trace of a communication with the inside of the tomb; and in the interior of the latter there are no signs of a walled-up door, to give access to this supposed passage. The locality has undergone so many alterations, that it is now impossible to fix the relative positions of the church and the tomb; but the former must have been different in plan and in dimensions from the small mosque, which, as I believe, retains few, if any, remains of the ancient Christian church. The tradition indicating this spot as the scene of the miracle is as early as that of Bethany itself. The Pilgrim of Bordeaux, A.D. 333, writes, "There is a crypt there, where Lazarus, whom the Lord raised, was laid." He does not allude to any building erected there by S. Helena, therefore I doubt the truth of the following statement of Nicephorus Callistus[714]: "Thence having gone on to Bethany, she erected a noble temple to Lazarus the friend of Christ. That place is two miles from Jerusalem." S. Jerome[715] (who died A.D. 420) speaks of this tomb and of a church there, but does not say that it was built by the Empress Helena[716]. At a later period the tomb and church were seen by Antoninus of Piacenza and Arculf; the latter of whom "visited at Bethany a certain small field surrounded by a great olive-grove, on which stands a large monastery, and a large church built over the cave, from which our Lord raised up Lazarus after he had lain dead four days[717]." Bernard, the Wise[718], writes thus: "Thence we proceeded to Bethany on the descent of Mount Olivet, where is a monastery whose church marks the Tomb of Lazarus." This place is also mentioned by SÆwulf, so that tradition and local evidence bring it down to the epoch of the Latin kingdom. The tomb must have been altered by the Crusaders, whose work we recognize in the vestibule leading into the sepulchre; but we have no record of the general appearance of the exterior of the church after their restoration. We see, therefore, that an unbroken tradition has been attached to this tomb from the beginning of the Christian era to the present day.

Let us now visit the ruins of the so-called House of Lazarus, which are a short distance to the west of the tomb. All that we can distinguish here with certainty is the ruin of a square tower, the masonry of which is of the time of the Crusades. The presence of a quantity of small white tesserÆ encouraged me to excavate inside its walls, when I found in its foundations stones with rude rustic-work; and in removing the rubbish, saw some other stones in which were holes, apparently made to receive lead or iron clamps, to bind them together. Hence I consider that the Crusaders' building partly rests upon ancient Jewish foundations; and that it is not by any means improbable that this is the actual site of the House of Lazarus. The walls and portion of the tower now remaining are the ruins of a hospice, which was rebuilt by Queen Milisendis[719] in the first half of the twelfth century; the original building (dating from the sixth century and visited by Antoninus of Piacenza) having been destroyed by the Saracens. Milisendis obtained for this purpose the church of Bethany, and all the land belonging to it, from the Canons of the Holy Sepulchre, giving them in exchange the town of Tekoa, near Bethlehem. The deed of exchange, dated on the nones of February 1138, is preserved in the Cartulary of the Holy Sepulchre[720], and also the bull of Celestine II., A.D. 1143, confirming it[721]. The queen considering that the convent, being in a lonely situation and a considerable distance from the city, would be in danger of attack in case of war, built there with squared and dressed stones a very strong tower, containing the necessary offices, as a refuge for the nuns, until succours arrived from Jerusalem[722]. This it is whose ruins we now see. She also amply endowed the convent, assigning to it the revenues of Jericho and its dependencies, with many other gifts, recorded by William of Tyre in the passage just cited. The same author goes on to inform us that when the work was finished, Milisendis established there a community of Benedictine nuns, presided over by an abbess, "an aged and venerable matron, of approved piety," after whose death, "returning to her (original) purpose, she placed her own sister, with the consent of the Lord Patriarch and assent of the sisterhood, at the head of the nunnery;" giving at the same time yet more gifts, such as chalices, books, and other ornaments used for ecclesiastical purposes; nor did she cease all her life according to the desire of her heart, and for the sake of her sister, whom she specially loved, to shew kindness to the place. The name of the first abbess was Matilda[723]. Juveta is mentioned as abbess of the nunnery of S. Lazarus at Bethany, in a contract for the exchange of some rents between her and the nuns of the Hospital of S. Lazarus at Jerusalem. It bears the date A.D. 1157, in the reign of Baldwin III. After the witnesses' signatures we find written, "All these things were confirmed in the presence of Queen Milisendis." To the document a seal is attached mentioned by Paoli[724]. In the middle of it is the figure of a lady, partially effaced, holding against her breast a book bearing a cross. The legend is JUDITTA ABBATISSH. On the reverse is our Saviour recalling Lazarus to life, with the legend RESUCTATIO LAZARI. On the invasion of Saladin the nuns retired to S. Jean d'Acre, and the convent was destroyed, since which period it has remained in ruins.

Thus, having completed our examination of Bethany, let us return by the road passing on the south of the Mount of Olives. This was the ancient military way from Jerusalem to Jericho and the left bank of the Jordan, and is still the usual route to the same places. Traces of the old paving are yet to be seen at certain points. Near the Mount of Offence the local guide stops the visitor to shew him the fig-tree which withered away at our Lord's command[725]; and, if he is well up to his work, will not forget to point out the tree on which Judas hanged himself. But let us enter the Valley of Hinnom.

This was the boundary-line between Judah on the south and Benjamin on the north[726]. The Arabic name is Wady er-Rabab, the Hebrew, Ge-Hinnom or Ben-Hinnom (the valley of the son of Hinnom). The bloody rites of Moloch[727] and Baal gave it its evil fame, which were celebrated more especially in the place called Tophet[728]; this was, according to Jerome, the lower (eastern) part of Hinnom. S. Jerome[729] asserts that Christ was the first to use this word in the sense 'hell;' an application which the abominable idolatrous rites that had been enacted there rendered most appropriate. The Prophet Jeremiah frequently mentions Tophet, but one passage is very remarkable from the manner in which its fulfilment is evident at the present day. "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that it shall be no more called Tophet, nor the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of slaughter: for they shall bury in Tophet till there be no place[730]." Now, whichever way we turn, our eyes rest on tombs, many broken as the nation that once profaned this spot: so that no one can tread these rocks heedless and unmoved.

To the south of the Valley of Hinnom is the hill, called by the Christians the Hill of Evil Counsel, because of a legend, that in a village on its western side, all trace of which has now disappeared, was a house belonging to Caiaphas; where the Priests and Pharisees assembled to compass the capture and death of Christ. Pompeius encamped upon its summit after he had taken Jerusalem[731]. The Arabs call it Jebel el-Kubur (Mount of the Tombs); a most appropriate name, as it is in reality one great necropolis; now, however, inhabited by many peasants of Siloam, who have housed themselves and their crops in some of the sepulchral chambers, and converted others into cisterns. We will visit all the more interesting objects which we meet as we ascend from the Well of Job. At the bottom of a narrow trench, sloping steeply downwards, is a frontispiece[732], decorated with a triangular pediment, with a trefoil as finial, above a small doorway. On each side of this is a pilaster; these are still visible, though partly covered with soil. The interior[733] has this peculiarity, that the arches forming the roofs of the sepulchral niches are not very nearly semicircular, but extremely depressed; and a trough-shaped cavity or sarcophagus takes the place of the shelf for the corpse; an arrangement which does not occur in the tombs on the north of the city, or in the Kidron Valley. While I was engaged in making my Plan, I found a great number of bones in the interior; and in the chamber furthest to the east four perfect skeletons, which I discovered must have been placed there a few months before. I consider these tombs, as well as the others so common in the vicinity, to be more recent than those which are found elsewhere in the neighbourhood of the city; certainly they did not exist in the time of the Jewish kings, when Tophet was considered an accursed place. I think that they were excavated during the AsmonÆan period, as the prejudice against the site might by that time have diminished. The simple but careful ornamentation of these tombs, the whiteness of the surface, and the absence of certain marks on the stone, characteristic of the instruments of the earlier period, all lead me to the same conclusion.

A few yards to the west of the last tomb is another remarkable for its elaborate faÇade[734]. This is of the Doric order. The frieze is divided by triglyphs, having eight metopes, each charged with a patera of a different pattern. Some traces of fresco painting are still seen on the soffit of the vestibule and in the inner chambers, which induce me to think that it has been used as a chapel. According to tradition the Apostles concealed themselves here also after our Saviour was taken prisoner; and at a later period S. Onuphrius lived and died here in retirement. For this cause it was converted into a chapel dedicated to this Saint, and it is still visited by the Greeks once a year to offer up prayers. Schultz considers it to be the monument of Ananus the High-priest; a point in the wall of circumvallation constructed by Titus[735]. As its decoration is probably of the Herodian age, I agree with him.

On the west of this we find, after passing Aceldama, a tomb[736], which gives us a good idea of what the Sepulchre of Jesus was formerly like. When Constantine embraced Christianity, this hill, as well as the others, was occupied by anchorites, who lived in the tombs and caverns. So we are told by Antoninus of Piacenza[737]. "Within the very sepulchres are the cells of the servants of God, wherein many virtues are displayed." So again we find in the Geography of Edrisi: "Near this are a number of houses excavated in the rock, inhabited by pious hermits[738]."

Almost half way up the hill is a building which has retained the name Aceldama (Price of Blood[739]). An uninterrupted tradition identifies this with the Potter's field, bought as the burial-place of strangers[740]. This place recalls to the mind one of the most sublime prophecies of Jeremiah[741], of which it may have been the scene; when he broke the potter's earthen vessel before the ancients of Israel, crying, "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Even so will I break this people and this city as one breaketh a potter's vessel that cannot be made whole again"—words which still are fulfilled by Jerusalem and the Jews.

In the field is a great subterranean chamber, excavated in the rock, enclosed by a wall supporting a vaulted roof, and pierced by holes, through which the corpses were let down. In the lower part of the west side is an aperture formed in the rock, perhaps to admit servants to gather together the ashes after the corpses were consumed; but of these no traces can now be found. In the interior on the south side is a great pier made out of the rock, and strengthened with masonry, which divides the chamber into two on that side. Nicephorus Callistus attributes this monument to S. Helena[742]. After examining the walls I have come to the conclusion that they are of two periods, the first that of S. Helena, to which I refer the inside wall, especially in the lower parts; and the second that of the Crusades, which is the date of the part above ground and the vaulting. At that time the Hospitalers interred here those who died in the Hospital, as we learn from the following passage: "On the left hand the valley had a charnel-house called Chaudemar. Therein they cast the pilgrims who died in the Hospital at Jerusalem. This piece of land, where the charnel-house lay, was bought with the money for which Judas sold the dear Jesus Christ, as saith the Evangelist[743]." A church also stood on this spot, as is shewn by a document entitled, "Archives of the Hospitalers in the year 1143," in which we find, "I William, by the Grace of God, Patriarch of Holy Jerusalem ... proclaim that I have granted for ever to the Hospital which is in Jerusalem, a certain church, situated in the field called Achel-demach, where the bodies of strangers are buried; together with all the land, divided by the ancient Syrians in our presence." No trace now remains of this church, but it was probably built over the vault, and was only a consecrated room to be used as a mortuary-chapel. Popular superstition attributes to the soil of Aceldama the property of consuming the corpses buried there in twenty-four hours; for which reason it was carried away to be used in Christian burial-places. S. Helena transported 270 ship-loads to Rome. The Pisan Crusaders on their return from Syria brought back a great quantity of it, which was deposited on their Campo Santo, A.D. 1218. I was anxious to test the truth of the belief, and so buried at a depth of four feet the body, not indeed of a human being, but of a lamb. After eight days I disinterred it, and unfortunately for my sense of smell, found that although I had carefully selected a piece of natural ground free from rubbish, the experiment was unsuccessful; I am therefore driven to conclude that the soil has lost its former virtue. I also filled a box with the soil, and placed therein birds, small quadrupeds, and reptiles; but in all cases the flesh was consumed slowly. I also planted flowers in some of it, at my own house, and found that they flourished perfectly.

Many persons have laid much stress on the fact that a great quantity of broken earthenware vases has been found about Aceldama, which they have considered to be of great age, and proofs of its former use; but in what part of the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, and indeed of all the towns and villages of Palestine are not similar remains found? Hewers of stone, labourers, shepherds and many others, pass whole days away from their houses, especially in places where there are tombs, and always bring with them vessels of water, many of which get broken from time to time; a circumstance which accounts for these fragments being found especially in the neighbourhood of the more populous cities.

From Aceldama we can ascend to the top of the hill to visit the ruins of Deir-Kaddis-Modistus. This appears to have been an ancient convent, at the time when the anchorites inhabited the caverns. Now we see a Mohammedan tomb, and two Arab cottages, erected by the Greek Archimandrite, Nicoforus, who has purchased a large estate there; and in a few years the mountain-side, after so many centuries of sterility, will be again fertile. When these were being built, I often visited the place, and noticed that, as the rubbish was cleared away, some remains of ancient Jewish and Roman walls were discovered; the occurrence of which, renders it not at all improbable that a fortress occupied the position in the time of the Maccabees.

We descend the Hill of Evil Counsel to the Bethlehem road, and follow this northward till we reach the valley of Gihon on the north-west. On our left is a new mulberry plantation, in the middle of which stand a small tower and the beginning of a house, all the work of Nicoforus, who intends to establish here a spinning-mill for silk. This spot is Kasr el-Asfur or el-Ghazal (House of the young sparrow, or of the gazelle)[744]. Here we find many cisterns entirely excavated in the rock, and a quantity of hewn rock, still bearing marks characteristic of the ancient tools. Dressed stones and fragments of walls of the Jewish period are not unfrequently found here by the labourers, when digging deep to bring the ground under cultivation; but unfortunately the Archimandrite is not as fond of archÆology as of farming; and these remains are blown up with gunpowder to gain two or three inches more soil for the roots of a tree, so that the traces of ancient works, of the highest importance in determining the former topography of the neighbourhood of the city, are thus obliterated.

A little to the north of Kasr el-Asfur is a large plot of land enclosed by a new Arab wall, on which stands a long building, certainly not remarkable for its good architecture and internal arrangement. It is a hospice for Jews, founded in 1858 by Sir Moses Montefiore of London, with the assistance of others professing the same creed. It has been erected to supply lodgings for the poor, where they may enjoy a purer air than they do in their own quarter of the city. Behind the principal building, to the west, Sir Moses Montefiore erected a wind-mill, which would be of the highest value to the whole country if only its advantages were understood; but the Arabs still prefer using their own miserable hand or horse-mills, which spoil their flour, to the trouble of carrying the grain this short distance from the city. In time, no doubt, they will perceive the obligation they are under to this philanthropic Israelite.

In the lower part of the valley, to the east of the above-named establishment, is a very large pool excavated in the rock, except on the north and south side, where its waters are retained by walls. It is the largest in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, and bears the name Birket es-Sultan (Prince's Pool). It is so called because the popular belief is that it was originally constructed by David or Solomon, and afterwards repaired by various sultans. An Arabic inscription on the frontispiece of a fountain (now dry) to the south, called AÏn el-Melik, informs us that it was restored by the Mamaluke Sultan el-Melik en-Naser-Mohammed, between the years 693 and 741 of the Hejra (from 1294 to 1340 A.D.). It was also repaired by Sultan Solyman I. in the sixteenth century. Owing to a mistake made by Bonifacius[745] it has been wrongly supposed to be the Pool of BersabeË (Bathsheba), where the wife of Uriah the Hittite was bathing, when she was seen by David. This is however obviously contrary to the words in the Bible[746], that "David walked upon the roof of the King's house, and from the roof he saw a woman washing herself, &c." Besides, it is in the last degree improbable that a woman of good reputation would bathe in a pool by the side of a public road. It is more likely that it bears the name of BethsabeË or BersabeË, because it is at the beginning of the road leading to the city of BersabeË[747]. I have no doubt that this is the 'lower pool' mentioned by the Prophet Isaiah[748]; but I shall discuss this question in the Chapter on the Waters, and give an account of the aqueduct, which runs along its western side, and then after turning eastward goes to Sion. In the middle ages it was repaired by one Germanus, as the following passage shews: "When they had descended the mount," it is told in our account of the thirteenth century, "they found a pool in the valley, called Germanus' Pool, because Germanus constructed it to catch the water that descended from the hills when it rained; there the horses of the city used to drink[749]." It is true that the above quotation asserts that Germanus made the pool, but I understand this only to mean repaired; because it is far too great a work to have been undertaken in the time of the Crusades, simply to form a watering-place for horses, when other ponds in the neighbourhood of the city would have served for this purpose. It is also mentioned in the Cartulary of the Holy Sepulchre in the year 1177. The pool is now dry, and even after rain the water does not remain in it, although it could be restored for a small sum. During the harvest the farmers dry and thresh out their crops in it.

Hence we return to the city by ascending the rough road leading up to that part of the wall enclosing Mount Sion, which bears the name of Abraj Ghazzah (towers of Gaza), and after passing the south-west corner of this, we arrive on the plateau of the hill, which is occupied by a cemetery, divided among the different Christian communities in Jerusalem. At the south-east corner of this stands a group of buildings, known by the names of the Tomb of David and the Coenaculum. A small dome, surmounted by a crescent, marks the position of the former[750]. That this is the site of the tomb of the Royal Psalmist and his successors, I trust to shew by the aid of the Bible, of history, of tradition, and of local evidence at the present time. We find the following passages in the Bible: "David took the stronghold of Sion, the same is the city of David.... So David dwelt in the fort, and called it the city of David[751]. So David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David[752]." Again, after the death of the Psalmist, several of his successors are mentioned as being buried "with their fathers in the city of David[753]." But this is not all; in the Book of Nehemiah[754] we find "the gate of the fountain repaired Shallum ... and the wall of the pool of Siloah by the King's garden, and unto the stairs that go down from the city of David. After him repaired Nehemiah ... unto the place over against the sepulchres of David, and to the pool that was made, and unto the house of the mighty." From this it is clear that the wall, in coming from the direction of the King's garden and the pool of Siloam, mounted the eastern slope of Sion as far as the Tomb of David, and that the 'pool that was made' is Birket es-Sultan, and possibly the 'house of the mighty' may be the citadel. Hence the Tomb of David must have been well known to the Jews of later ages. Again, Josephus[755] states that Solomon buried great treasures in his father's tomb, and that Hyrcanus the High-priest broke open the tomb and took therefrom three thousand talents. This happened about 129 B.C. In another place[756] we find, "As for Herod, he had spent vast sums about the cities, both without and within his own kingdom, and as he had before heard that Hyrcanus, who had been king before him, had opened David's sepulchre, and had taken out of it three thousand talents of silver, and that there was a much greater number left behind, and indeed enough to suffice all his wants, he had a great while an intention to make the attempt; and at this time he opened the sepulchre by night and went into it, and endeavoured that it should not be at all known in the city, but took only his most faithful friends with him. As for money he found none, as Hyrcanus had done, but that furniture of gold and those precious stones that were laid up there, all which he took away. However, he had a great desire to make a more diligent search, and to go further in, even as far as the very bodies of David and Solomon; where two of his guards were slain by a flame that burst out upon those that went in, as the report was. So he was terribly affrighted, and went out, and built a propitiatory monument of that fright he had been in, and this of white stone, at the mouth of the sepulchre, and at a great expense also." This took place about the year 12 B.C. Had the tomb been outside the walls, it is less likely that it would have escaped destruction in the various sieges of Jerusalem; and the account just cited produces the impression that it was within the city. S. Peter[757], addressing the Jews, says, "Let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day." This brings us down to the year 34 A.D. Dio Cassius[758] states that part of the Tomb of David fell down of itself in the time of Hadrian, which was considered by the Jews to be an evil omen. S. Jerome[759] also informs us that it was visited by the Christians, when he says to S. Paula and S. Eustochium her daughter, "When shall we be allowed to enter the Sepulchre of the Redeemer, and to pray in the Tomb of David?" He does not indeed expressly say that it was within the city, but we may infer it from his mentioning it together with the Sepulchre of Christ, and not alluding to it when he describes the visits to the Sanctuaries in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. This evidence brings us down to the fifth century. The Jewish tradition also on this point is of real weight, because it has never placed the tomb otherwise than on Sion, outside the present city-walls, though without fixing its exact position. Benjamin of Tudela[760], who wrote A.D. 1173, relates that about fifteen years before his arrival at Jerusalem one of the walls of the oratory on Mount Sion fell down, and that while it was being repaired two of the workmen went on with their labour while the rest were absent, and broke away a stone that formed the mouth of a cavern; into this they agreed to enter in search of treasure, "and they proceeded until they reached a large hall, supported by pillars of marble incrusted with gold and silver, before which stood a table with a golden sceptre and crown. This was the Sepulchre of David, King of Israel.... They further saw chests locked up, the contents of which nobody knew, and were on the point of entering the hall when a blast of wind like a storm issued forth from the mouth of the cavern, so strong that it threw them down almost lifeless on the ground. There they lay until evening, when another wind rushed forth, from which they heard a voice like that of a man calling aloud, Get up and go forth from this place." Now I do not attempt to deny that this story may be false or greatly exaggerated, but at any rate it proves that the Tomb of David was clearly pointed out by tradition at that time as being on Sion. A Florentine lady, Sophia degli Arcangeli, erected a hospice containing 200 beds near the Coenaculum, in the year 1354, to entertain pilgrims to the Holy City, and then began to excavate on Sion a subterranean chamber to bury the Latins who died during their visit. When the work was commenced in the Latin cemetery, near to the boundary of that belonging to the Armenians, the ground gave way, and a great underground cavern appeared. For this reason the attempt was abandoned lest it should lead to disputes with the neighbours. Now this fact does not give us any indication of the place of the Tomb of David, but it proves the existence of a cavern, such as is now seen, with its opening on the west side of Sion. This then especially occupied my attention, as I thought it would afford the means of determining the Tomb of David, which all the Jews now in Jerusalem unanimously assert to be on Sion. They do not indeed generally assign any exact position to it, not I believe from ignorance, but from religious scruple; some however less anxiously cautious, say that it is on the site usually pointed out, namely at Neby DaÛd, which is the Arab name for the eastern part of the building attached to the Coenaculum. Quaresmius[761], who was Guardian of the Holy Land in 1630, and visited the tomb with the interpreter of the Latin convent, assures us that nothing remains under the present place. I allude to this to shew that the tradition of the tomb being near the Coenaculum was also current among the Franciscan monks.

Before bringing forward my own investigations, and the conclusions derived from them, I quote the words of M. Mislin[762]: "I visited the Tomb of David, April 1, 1855. It was three o'clock in the afternoon; Kiamil Pasha and the chief personages awaited us in a small court, the entrance to which is on the left-hand side of the great doorway. We at once descended by a staircase of only six or eight steps into a low vaulted chamber, which, so far as I can judge, is situated exactly under the Church of the Institution of the Eucharist, of which it is only the crypt. No doubt it was one of the three churches, placed one on the other, mentioned by Fabri[763]. 'It had consecrated places on three different levels, namely a crypt underground, a church above ground, and over that another decorated tabernacle.' After passing through the vestibule we arrived at the part corresponding with the single nave of the church above. Here however the nave is divided into two by a row of massive piers of rock in the middle, supporting the vaulted roof. The latter half, or rather part of this crypt, for it is smaller than the other, is separated by a transverse railing, and is itself divided by another railing at right angles to the former, so as to form two spaces at the southern end of the chamber. The entrance is by that on the right hand, and the tomb occupies almost the whole of that on the left. When we had entered the former chamber, which I will call the Mihrab, because in it is the niche for prayers, ... the place in which we were was very dark, and the neighbouring chamber was worse; so that all that we could see on the other side of the railing separating us from it, was a carpet, which was not enough to satisfy our curiosity. Kiamil Pasha remarked to the Sheikh that we were come to see the tomb; he then opened the door with a very good grace. The Pasha kneeled down and pressed the fringe of the carpet covering the tomb to his mouth and forehead for a moment, and then allowed us to examine it at our pleasure. Before us was a sarcophagus about seven feet high, and twelve long. It was covered with seven very rich carpets. The upper was blue silk with large deeper coloured stripes; it was worked over with texts from the Koran. In the middle of the sarcophagus there is also a square piece of stuff richly embroidered, with a gold fringe; on it also are texts from the Koran, worked in gold thread. It was the gift of the Sultan Abdul-Medjid. The second carpet is bright blue with flowers worked in silver thread. The others are well worn and less rich than these. From the roof a canopy of silk is suspended, striped white and blue. The Sheikh who accompanied us raised a corner of the carpet, so that I was able to touch the sarcophagus; but owing to the many folds of the cloth, I had great difficulty in forming an opinion of its shape and material. Observing that I was not yet satisfied, he then took courage and raised the whole of the carpet from the part where there was the best light. By this means I saw the entire front of the sarcophagus, which appeared to me to be made of unpolished grey marble. In the middle was a medallion of darker colour, and I asked its meaning. The Sheikh informed me that it marked the position of the Prophet's navel. I examined the walls; they are covered with earthenware tiles with a blue pattern on a white ground. Bronze lamps are placed here and there around the tomb. Near the door, on the left hand on going out, is a chain suspended from the wall, with oblong links. The Sheikh told me it was a model of one made by David himself.... The Mohammedans act wisely in keeping this tomb concealed, in order to invest it with some importance." The last is an unfortunate remark; the Mohammedans, and especially the Sheikhs who are in charge of the place, know very well what they are about, as I will presently shew.

I visited the chamber described by M. Mislin in February 1859; having obtained admission from the same Santon in return for certain services I had rendered him, also by bribes and presents at various times, by the recommendation of Surraya Pasha, and by having won the good will of the Mohammedan families who occupy the houses about Neby DaÛd; most of whom let out horses and beasts of burden for hire, and were under obligations to me for recommending them to travellers. For all these reasons, and after much expenditure of money and patience, I gained entrance into the Sepulchre of David, visited his pretended tomb, and made the observations I am about to describe. The description of M. Mislin is very accurate, but I am able to make the following additions to it: (1) Under the earthenware tiles in the chamber of the sarcophagus, I discovered, by means of an examination made from the outside, the walls of an ancient Jewish building, combined, in the parts above the floor, with masonry of a later date, which has been introduced during repairs. This is to be found especially on the east and north sides. (2) The sarcophagus is not of unpolished grey marble, but of whitish Palestine breccia, called marble by the ancients, from its resemblance in working and polish. The greyish colour is due to its age, and perhaps also to the bad light or to the shade cast by the upraised carpets on the small part of it that was examined. (3) The medallion does not mark the position of the Prophet's navel, as the Sheikh said, but is a simple decoration attached to the sarcophagus; it is repeated on each of the other sides. Neither is it of darker marble, but as it is continually kissed by devotees its colour has been altered. (4) The form of the sarcophagus is a rectangular parallelepiped, formed of different blocks of breccia well fitted together without mortar. The lid is À dos d'Âne[764], of several pieces of stone; at least so it appears at each end, but in the middle and on the top I have been unable to detect the divisions. All this shews that it is not a real sarcophagus, but only an imitation or cenotaph erected on the spot to conceal something below. (5) On lifting up the mats at the corners of the chamber and near the tomb, I found that the pavement is laid upon the rock, which corresponds in its nature with that exposed all about the upper part of Sion. I carefully examined the north side and the base of the monument, in the hope of discerning signs of an opening, but in vain. When I asked the Sheikh for information on the point, he appeared surprised at my question, and from that moment endeavoured to get me out of the place as quickly as possible; and under the circumstances I had no choice but to comply.

I did not, however, believe that I had visited the Tomb of David, but was convinced that there was below or on the north side of the chamber containing the sarcophagus, a communication with the true tomb, which must be excavated in the solid rock; and, like all the other very ancient sepulchres, consist of many chambers, in which were sarcophagi, differing in their arrangement from those at the Tombs of the Kings and Judges, on the north of Jerusalem[765]. I accordingly determined to descend into the vault, which I have already mentioned as having an opening on the western side of the hill[766]. After I had descended a steep sloping plot of land, I found some steps forming the commencement of a staircase cut in the rock; which, however, is now almost covered with soil, ashes, and bones. Below was a huge vault, which I perceived to run under a large portion of the cemetery above; and so understood how it was that they came upon it in excavating a burial-place in 1354. It is now almost full of bones, which are thrown in whenever they are found in digging graves. As I unfortunately made the examination in the rainy season, it was not very successful; the water had soaked through and run down into the interior, so that I was impeded by mud composed of wet soil, ashes, and bones; and I do not know whether I should have been able to extricate myself from the fetid quagmire, if I had not had two men with me, and taken my usual precaution, when visiting an unexplored place, of fastening a rope round my body. Consequently I was obliged to wait for a better opportunity. At the same time I examined the ground in the neighbourhood of the opening, and not only found the rock all round it at a slight depth, but also ascertained that it had once been larger, and had been reduced in size by masonry, so that it could be closed with a stone. The rock, when uncovered, shewed traces of the iron tools with which it had been wrought, and also exhibited the small holes made to admit clamps of iron or lead to fasten down the stones that were laid upon it. These marks have brought me to the conclusion, that this must have been the entrance into the Tomb of the Jewish Kings, and that here Herod erected his monument in order to render the place secure. Hence the sarcophagus, which is called David's Tomb, is only a representation of it, after the usual custom of the Mohammedans, who indeed have another repetition of it in wood on the upper floor; which is placed there to content the believers who come to pray, and saves the Sheikh the trouble of conducting them down into the lower chamber. It may not be out of place to observe here, that I made a report to Surraya Pasha, that the principal causes of the constant fevers in Jerusalem were the shallowness of the graves on Sion, which were so dug to avoid coming upon this vault by going too deep; and the presence of this charnel-house. At the same time I proposed a plan by which, at a small expense, the sepulchres of Aceldama might be restored, and the remains of the corpses removed to them; a change which would have produced the best possible effect on the sanitary state of the city. The Pasha understood this, but unfortunately, owing to the number of previous formalities which were requisite, the execution of the design was almost impossible. I must confess that the public good was not my only motive on this occasion, as the opportunity it would have afforded me for making researches, and excavating inside the cavern, would probably have furnished me with most valuable information to aid in identifying this place with the Tombs of the Jewish Kings.

In the month of May in the same year I was able with much difficulty to examine, to some extent, the above-named cavern: not indeed as thoroughly as I could have wished, but as far as circumstances would allow. I was obliged to remove a quantity of skulls, masses of bones, and other materials, and this with the help of only one European servant; as I was unable to find any other assistant, owing to the disgusting nature of the labour. It was further impossible to get help from the Arabs, who would not have aided me for any price that I could have offered, and who would very likely have embroiled me with the inhabitants of Neby DaÛd. By little and little, on many days, I was able to make a Plan of the place[767]; I do not claim for this very strict accuracy as regards the measurements, but its shape and bearings are to be trusted, up to the part where it narrows on the east. Although I saw the beginning of the corridor on the east, I was unable to enter it, as it was quite filled with rubbish, and I have only inferred its junction with the chamber containing the sarcophagus which passes for David's Tomb. I found over a large part of the cavern the marks of the tools used in excavating it. At some places there appeared to be the upper parts of doorways; these perhaps might be entrances into other vaults; the mass of rubbish however made it impossible to determine this. I also thought that the vaulting was supported by piers; but was unable to satisfy myself on this point, as what I saw might have been caused by a settlement of the ground above that had brought the roof into contact with the rubbish accumulated inside, which was in such quantities, that I could not without great labour have distinguished the one from the other. As then I cannot conceive this great work undertaken for any other than an important purpose, I believe that it is the vestibule of the Tombs of the Jewish Kings; but of course to establish this we must wait until the rubbish is cleared out of it. It is in the fortress of Sion, the city wherein David dwelt, and no other place in Jerusalem agrees so well with the data of the Bible and Josephus, and with tradition, as this position, which has in its favour every argument derived from the configuration of the ground. I hope to be able to renew my investigations here; but if unhappily I am prevented from carrying my intention into effect, I recommend archÆologists to devote themselves to the subject; trusting that in that case they will find that I have directed them to the real tombs of the Jewish Kings on Sion.

Let us now consider the 'Coenaculum;' the name of which is derived from the belief that it is the place where our Saviour ate the last Paschal supper with His Apostles. The Bible[768] tells us no more than that it was a large upper-room, but the tradition is of very great antiquity. It asserts that here the Apostles met after the Resurrection, when the Saviour shewed them His wounds; that here He ate before them, and breathed on them that they might receive the Holy Ghost[769]; that here Thomas was convinced[770], and Matthias elected an Apostle[771]; that here the Holy Ghost descended on the day of Pentecost[772], and the first converts were added to the Church by S. Peter[773]. A church must have been erected on this spot at a very early period, for S. Epiphanius[774] says, with reference to Hadrian's journey in Palestine: "He found Jerusalem levelled with the ground, the Temple itself destroyed and trodden under foot, save only a few houses, and a certain small Christian church which had been built upon that spot on which the disciples, after that the Saviour had ascended into heaven, assembled together in the Coenaculum." We read in the Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril[775]: "The Holy Ghost, who spake in the Prophets, and who on the day of Pentecost descended on the Apostles in the form of fiery tongues, here in Jerusalem in the Upper Church of the Apostles." This shews that the church was divided then, as it now is, into two floors. It is not known who built it. Nicephorus Callistus[776], an author of the fourteenth century, attributes it to S. Helena; but Eusebius does not mention it, and the Bordeaux Pilgrim only says: "Continuing along the same road up Mount Sion, you may see the place where was the house of Caiaphas the priest; and to this time the column still remains where they scourged Jesus." S. Jerome[777], in his Itinerary of Paula, writes thus: "The column was shewn there, supporting the portico of a church, stained with the Lord's blood, to which He is said to have been bound and scourged. The place is pointed out where the Holy Ghost descended upon one hundred and twenty believers." In the year 415, on Dec. 26th, the remains of the Proto-martyr S. Stephen were transported to the Apostles' Church, during the patriarchate of John[778]. Antoninus of Piacenza, Arculf, Willibald, and Bernard the Wise, in the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries respectively, mention the basilica on Sion[779]. Arculf describes its plan without details as a regular parallelogram of considerable length. We do not know whether the church, described by these authors, was the same as that spoken of by S. Cyril; but it is very probable that, owing to the persecutions suffered by the Christians, the fabric was destroyed and rebuilt more than once. At any rate, by the end of the eleventh century it had entirely fallen to ruin, as we find from the Gesta Francorum[780]. The Crusaders rebuilt it, and though their church no longer exists, we possess an accurate description of it by the authors of the twelfth century. I abbreviate this from the work of M. de VogÜÉ[781], who has derived it from the anonymous writers of the manuscripts of Vienna and of Paris, and from John of WÜrtzburg and John Phocas. "The church was composed of two parts: the lower, consisting of a nave and two aisles, with barrel-vaults, was terminated, like most of the buildings of the period of the Crusades, by three apses at the east. In the apse most to the north was an altar, supposed to mark the place where the Virgin died.... That on the south was supposed to indicate where Christ appeared to His disciples after His Resurrection. In this lower church, sometimes called the crypt in the middle ages, they say that Our Saviour washed the Apostles' feet. The upper church had a groined roof, with a central dome. This was the Coenaculum, properly so called, where tradition placed the scene of the Last Supper in the nave, and of the descent of the Holy Ghost in the principal apse. The two floors communicated one with another by means of an inner staircase of 61 steps (this number, given by Phocas, is evidently exaggerated), which opened from the ground-floor in the southern apse. The interior of these two churches, in the time of the Latin Kings, was covered with wall-paintings, representing the subjects of the traditions attached to the spot." After giving a list of these, M. de VogÜÉ goes on to say, that "on the left of the principal church was a small one dedicated to S. Stephen, in remembrance of a very ancient tradition, according to which the martyr's body was removed from its first resting-place at Caphar Gamala to this place. A convent had been built in the neighbourhood, occupied by a chapter of Augustinian Canons, who had the care of the Sanctuaries under the direction of an Abbot. The society bore the twofold name of S. Mary of Mount Sion and of the Holy Ghost." M. de VogÜÉ then describes the seal of the convent, and gives a list of the Abbots.

The buildings around the Coenaculum were not destroyed at the entrance of Saladin, A.D. 1187. Willibrand of Oldenburg, A.D. 1219, found them inhabited by Syrians, who paid tribute to the conquerors; but in the thirteenth century they were in ruins. In 1336, in consequence of the treaty (A.D. 1333) concerning the restoration of the Holy Places to the Friars Minor, between the Sultan of Egypt on one side, and Robert King of Sicily and his wife Sancia on the other, it was agreed to re-establish the church and monastery on Sion. After a heavy expenditure this was done, and the Franciscans took up their quarters there; as is proved by a bull of Clement V., dated at Avignon, November 21, 1342. Queen Sancia erected a convent enclosing the Coenaculum on Sion, and richly endowed it for the support of twelve monks and some lay brothers. An idea of it may be obtained from the present buildings, allowing for some modifications. Besides the church and the monks' cells, it included a large hospital, founded A.D. 1354, by a Florentine lady, Sophia degli Arcangeli. This was placed under the care of the Fathers by Pope Innocent in the following year[782]. They were unable to enjoy the advantages bestowed upon them, owing to the persecution of the Mohammedans, who not only plundered them by their heavy exactions, but also put them to death. Indeed, in 1368 all of them were massacred; in 1391, four out of the nine who had succeeded these martyrs; in 1432, one, John of Calabria; in 1537, all of them were seized, and part imprisoned in the Tower of the Pisans, while the rest were sent to Damascus[783]. I have already observed, that, at this time, the Latins being anxious to preserve certain articles, valuable both from their sacred nature and intrinsic worth, entrusted them to the Armenians, who afterwards refused to restore them. The possession of the Sanctuaries on Sion was confirmed to the Franciscans by several Sultans of Egypt and Constantinople; this, however, did not prevent their being driven from the place in 1561; under the twofold pretext, that Sion was fortified, and so might at any time aid the Christians in making themselves masters of Jerusalem, and also that it was unbecoming that infidels should possess the Tomb of David. The monks thereupon retired into a small house, until they purchased from the Georgians the Convent of the Column, as I have already mentioned[784]. The Mohammedan Santons occupied their place; and those who live there at the present time, according to an order of the Pasha, Governor of the city, countersigned by the Effendis of his Council, allow the Fathers, or certain pilgrim priests, to celebrate mass in the building; they also, for a small sum, permit pilgrims to see the Franciscan Church[785], with the upper part of the Tomb of David. This, however, probably only occupies a portion of the earlier church. Like its predecessors, it is divided into two floors; the lower of which is formed by the substructure of the ancient building, and consists of two chambers, one of which has a vaulted roof supported by two piers, and is called the Hall of the Washing the Feet; the other (and smaller) is also vaulted, and bears the name of the Tomb of David. The upper story is given on my Plan. The chamber on the east above the Tomb of David is not always opened to the Christians; this is shewn as the place of the Descent of the Holy Ghost: the other, on the west, is the Coenaculum, a Gothic building in the style of the fourteenth century, erected by the Franciscans. It is divided down the middle by two granite columns, and half-columns project from the side walls to correspond with them. I conclude this subject by observing, that in the buildings on the south and on the west large pieces of masonry of the time of the Crusades still remain; and that the stables on the west are the work of Ibrahim Pasha, who, with his attendants, occupied the whole of the Coenaculum.

Outside the building of Neby DaÛd, and a little to the north, is the site of a house, where the Virgin Mary is said to have passed the last years of her life. Some large stones, on one of which a cross is carved, mark the spot, in which I have no great belief. Sanutus[786] thus speaks of it: "Near this spot, a stone's throw to the south, is the place where the blessed Virgin dwelt after her Son's Ascension into heaven, and the cell wherein she departed this life." In the neighbourhood was a chapel dedicated to S. John the Evangelist, which was seen by Sanutus, who goes on to say, "There also is the Church of the Blessed John the Evangelist, which was, as it is said, the first of all the churches; in it this Apostle was wont to offer mass to that most blessed Queen while he lived in this world."

We have now only to visit the walled enclosure to the south of the Sion Gate. This is a small Armenian convent, which is said to occupy the site of the house of Caiaphas: the tradition dates from the fourth century. I have already said that the Pilgrim of Bordeaux mentions it, without however stating that a church stood there. We find in the writings of Nicephorus Callistus[787], that S. Helena built a church there, and dedicated it to S. Peter; but this is not confirmed by any one besides. None of the authors, contemporary with or posterior to S. Helena, allude to it; and we cannot suppose that this Sanctuary would be omitted in the Itinerary of S. Paula, which names all the others that were then in existence. It was unknown at the time of the Crusades, as it is not recorded by Edrisi, who wrote A.D. 1151, nor by Phocas, in his journey in Palestine, A.D. 1185. Marinus Sanutus, in the fourteenth century, is the first writer who mentions it. He calls it the Church of S. Saviour; the name it still bears[788]. Hence I infer that the church and the convent adjoining were erected at the end of the thirteenth century, or at the beginning of the fourteenth. Although the tradition concerning the House of Caiaphas goes back as far as the fourth century, I believe it would be difficult to maintain its correctness, as we have no data whatever from the Bible to assist us in fixing the position of the High-priest's dwelling. The entrance is by a small door on the north, near the north-west corner. The church is oblong in plan (50 feet long by 25 wide), without any architectural features worthy of notice. The pictures on the walls are ugly and grotesque. In the central altar at the east end two large pieces of stone are exhibited, which are said to have formed part of the mass that closed the door of the Sepulchre of Christ. Their genuineness would be difficult to establish; but, be that as it may, the Armenians ought to be ashamed of shewing them, as they were entrusted to them by the Franciscans in 1570, at the time of the war with Cyprus, and afterwards dishonourably appropriated. There is neither history nor tradition to support the claims of these stones, and the Latin Fathers suffer their loss with patience, since their thickness would not correspond with the size mentioned by the Evangelist[789], and the little that can be seen of them is enough to shew that they cannot have belonged to a stone of the right shape. On the south of the altar is a very small square-headed door leading into a narrow chamber, in which two persons can scarcely stand. This is said to be the prison where Jesus was kept during the remainder of the night after he was brought to Caiaphas. The walls shew no signs of antiquity; the pavement rests upon a mass of rubbish; the tradition is unfounded, and the place perhaps was formerly only a closet. In the courts before the church they point out the spot on which S. Peter stood when he denied his Master, and where the cock crew! In the interior of the convent the Armenian Patriarchs and Bishops are buried. I must not forget to observe that a great number of stones are to be seen in the outer wall and on the ground, which have been used in monuments; on them are some ancient Armenian inscriptions. This is an easy way of employing tombstones, when they lie too close on the ground of a cemetery.

Before entering the city we descend the eastern slope of Sion by a foot-path leading to Siloam, and arrive at a small cave, surrounded by some ruins, which are the remains of the Church of S. Peter at the Cock-crow, destroyed since the thirteenth century. Tradition reports that S. Peter retired to this spot to lament his sin after denying his Redeemer. The church was standing in the ninth century; for Bernard the Wise writes: "Towards the east is a church in honour of S. Peter, on the spot where he denied his Lord[790]." John of WÜrtzburg informs us that it belonged to the Greeks in the twelfth century. We read in La Citez de Jherusalem[791]: "There was a church called S. Peter at the Cock-crow. In this church was a deep ditch, wherein S. Peter hid himself when he had denied Jesus Christ, and there he heard the cock crow, and bewailed his sin." We read also in Edrisi[792]: "From the Sion Gate the road descends into a ravine called the Valley of Hell, at the end of which is a church in honour of S. Peter." A few yards to the east of this is a small Jewish cemetery, now abandoned. Turning back northward from this, we reach the road which, passing along under the city-wall, leads to the Sion Gate.

On entering this we see by the side of the wall to the east some poor dwellings, built on a level plot of ground, composed of stones and clay. These are the abodes of the lepers of Jerusalem, where these unhappy beings live until released by death from their misery. They are called by the Arabs BeiÛt el-MasakÎm (Houses of the Unfortunate), and are occupied by men, women, and children. Most of them are Mohammedans, but there are some Christians among them. This leprosy is not white, like that described in the Bible[793], but is the kind called Elephantiasis. The skin of the afflicted persons assumes a violet or reddish-grey tint, and tumours are formed in it, which turn into ulcers of the most horrible appearance; little by little the extremities of the limbs drop off, leaving only shapeless stumps behind; the roof of the palate becomes inflamed and then ulcerates, so that the voice grows harsh, and at last guttural; and the face and limbs are swollen. This terrible calamity, which refuses to yield to the efforts of science, is not contagious, but hereditary. The lepers are not, however, so poor as they are usually supposed to be. We will not dwell further upon this miserable sight, but will continue our observations in another chapter.

[532] Plate XVII.