GOSPEL HISTORY IN THE LIGHT OF PALESTINE EXPLORATION.
1. _Christ in the Provinces._
In New Testament times Palestine was a Roman province, and its
divisions were no longer tribal. East of Jordan were the districts of
Perea Batanæa, Trachonitis, Auranitis, Paneas, and Gaulonitis. In this
chapter, however, we have to do chiefly with Western Palestine. On this
side the central position was held by Samaria, with Galilee north of
it, Judea south, and in the extreme south Idumea.
The Samaritans were not pure Hebrews in blood, and not purely Jewish
in their worship. When the ten tribes of Israel had been crushed,
and their principal families carried into captivity, the Assyrian
conquerors brought men from Cuthah, Sepharvaim, and other places in
the far east, and set them down in Samaria. Of various nationalities
themselves, these people intermarried with the poorer Jews who had been
left behind, and so their descendants were of mixed blood. Naturally
also, there was at first some admixture of religious beliefs and
practices, and some confusion of dialects (2 Kings, xvii.).
But eventually the various elements of the population coalesced, and
the Samaritans settled down as a people, speaking a language allied to
that of the Jews, and accepting the Books of Moses as their guide. But
they rejected all the later books excepting Joshua, and claimed that
Mount Gerizim was the place where it had always been intended that the
Temple of Jehovah should be built. In the days of Ezra and Nehemiah the
co-operation of the Samaritans in rebuilding Jerusalem and the Temple
had been refused, and at no later period would the Jews consent to have
friendly dealings with the Samaritans.
Nehemiah had seen the evils resulting from mixed marriages, and the
contaminating influence of foreign merchants in Jerusalem. In later
days, when Greek literature and Greek manners were spreading over
Syria, the more zealous of the Jews contended earnestly against the
corrupting innovations. The day when the Seventy Elders translated the
Law into Greek for king Ptolemy was pronounced accursed--a day of evil,
as when Israel made for itself a golden calf. The patriotic struggle
of the Maccabees was all intended to get rid of foreign influence, and
keep God’s chosen people separate. The Pharisees were a party who by
their very name claimed to be “separated,” and made it their object
to resist the slightest departure from the requirements of the Jewish
Law. Their ideas and tenets came to be generally accepted by the Jews
of Judea; and hence in the days of Christ Jerusalem was a centre of
exclusiveness, bigotry, and ceremonialism.
The Jews of Galilee, cut off from their brethren of the south by the
interposition of Samaria, could seldom visit the Temple at Jerusalem;
they saw little of the sacrifice of bulls and goats, and learned to
worship in synagogues in a plainer way. They were in contact with the
northern nations, made alliance with Phœnicia, and did business with
men of many nationalities in the fishing towns of the Lake of Tiberias.
It is possible that through their intercourse with foreigners, a part
of their district was called “Galilee of the Gentiles;” and they seem
to have become so different in their dialect or pronunciation that
when a man from Galilee opened his mouth in Jerusalem, his speech
betrayed him. The Galileans derived at least one advantage from their
intercourse with foreigners; it made them less exclusive, and prepared
them in a degree for a religion which should be addressed to Jew and
Gentile alike. Jesus Christ, when he began his ministry, did not
address crowds in Jerusalem, nor seek disciples from among the Scribes
and Pharisees, but came into the towns of Galilee, and called fishermen
from their humble occupation.
The prophecy in Micah led the Jews to look to Bethlehem Ephrathah as
the destined birth-place of the Messiah; and it was made an objection
to the claims of Jesus of Nazareth that his home was in Galilee.
Bethlehem is a long white town on a ridge, with terraced olive groves,
at a distance of 6 miles from Jerusalem. Here, enclosed within the
walls of the Greek convent, is the venerable Church of the Nativity,
now parcelled out among the Greek, Latin, and Armenian monks, who
house together from necessity in different quarters of the convent.
The church, built by Helena, the mother of Constantine, is one of the
oldest in the world; and the cave beneath it under the choir is the
traditional Cave of the Nativity. It is mentioned by Justin Martyr
in the second century; and Origen, in the fourth, says that “there
is shown at Bethlehem the cave where He was born, and the manger
in the cave.” It is the only sacred place, as far as I know (says
Conder), which is mentioned before the establishment of Christianity
by Constantine; yet it is remarkable that Jerome found it no longer
in possession of the Christians. “Bethlehem,” he says, “is now
overshadowed by the grove of Tammuz, who is Adonis; and in the cave
where Christ wailed as a babe the paramour of Venus now is mourned.”
Mr Bartlett, in his “Walks about Jerusalem,” deems the identification
of the spot at variance with probability, since, although it may
occasionally happen that caverns are used as stables in Palestine, this
one is deeper underground than would be convenient for such a purpose.
When we consider, in addition, the tendency of the monks to fix the
scene of remarkable Scriptural events in grottoes, perhaps from the
impressiveness of such spots, the presumption against the site appears
almost conclusive.
Palestine exploration was hardly likely to throw any light on this
question, which is to be elucidated rather by a study of the causes
which led to a confusion between the traditions relating to Christ and
the legends told of Tammuz.
The people of Bethlehem are better fed, better dressed, better off in
most respects than the people of other small towns in Palestine. The
women are remarkable for their beauty, and they wear a peculiar kind
of head-dress, adorned with rows of silver coins. It is believed that
at the time of the Crusades a good deal of intermarriage took place
between Europeans and the women of Bethlehem. The population now is
chiefly Christian.
If we attempt to follow Joseph and Mary, returning from Egypt and
taking at first the road for Bethlehem, but changing their course when
they hear that Archelaus reigns, and withdrawing into the parts of
Galilee (Matt. ii. 23), we may suppose that they make their way to the
river Jordan, cross by the ford near Jericho, journey on the eastern
side and so avoid Samaria, and then, re-crossing by the ford near
Bethshan, make their way to Nazareth.
Nazareth, the town in which Jesus was brought up, is also without any
Jewish inhabitants at the present day; the population is about six
thousand, of whom one-third are Moslem, while two-thirds are Christians
of the Latin, Greek, and other churches. Unfortunately they bear an
evil character for their turbulence.
In Nazareth we are shown what purports to be the workshop of Joseph
the carpenter, but we know that this is a modern appropriation, a
Latin chapel, built only in 1859. We are asked to look at the _Mensa
Christi_, a block of rock, rudely oval, 10 feet across and 3 feet high,
in a church built in 1861, but we have no confidence that Jesus and
his disciples used it as a table. Making a stronger claim is the house
in which the Holy Family lived, or what remains of it, for the legend
says that the upper storey or the outer room was carried away by angels
through the air, and after lengthy travels was set down on the wooded
hill-top of Loretto in Italy. It is a rock-cut grotto under the high
altar of the Latin church. A wall of separation makes two chambers
of it, the outer being called the Grotto of the Annunciation, and
the inner the Grotto of St Joseph. The shaft of a red granite pillar
hanging through the roof is believed to be miraculously suspended over
the very place where the angel Gabriel stood to deliver his message.
From the inner chamber--that of St Joseph--a narrow passage, with
seventeen steps, leads up obliquely to the inmost part of the cave, a
chamber of irregular shape, traditionally supposed to be the Virgin’s
kitchen.
Escaping from these places we inquire for that synagogue in which
Jesus received instruction when a youth, and “stood up to read” on a
memorable occasion after he had become a public teacher. But there are
no Jews in Nazareth, and so there is no need of a synagogue now. The
Greek Catholics, indeed, tell us that their chapel, in the main street,
occupies the very site of the synagogue; but we find no remains of
synagogue architecture. It occurs to us that there is one site, at all
events, the features of which could hardly be destroyed or altered,
namely, the “brow of the hill on which the city stood,” and from which
the Nazarenes intended to precipitate the great Teacher after that
scene in the Synagogue. But when we have been guided to the “brow,”
although we see before us a fearful descent of about 1000 feet--which
old Maundeville calls “the Leap of the Lord”--we observe that it is 2
miles from the town; and we cannot understand how it can be the brow of
the hill on which the city stood.
In this general uncertainty of things are our explorers able to do
anything for us? Yes, some little, for they are men who use their eyes,
and they point out that high up above the present town are numerous old
cisterns and tombs. The cisterns would certainly be in close proximity
to the dwellings of the people, the ancient Nazareth must therefore
have stood higher on the slope; and so the “brow of the hill” was
probably one of the cliffs now above the town.
Conder also points out that the Virgin’s Fountain of Nazareth--also
called the Fountain of the Annunciation--should be one of the most
surely identified places. There is but one spring in the town, and
Mary must necessarily have drawn water from it like other women. The
Greeks have built their church at the place, and declare it to be the
scene of the Annunciation. Their church is dedicated to St Gabriel, and
even the Latins admit that it stands on the site where the angel first
became visible. “As in the eighth century, so now, the spring is under
the floor of the church, which is itself half subterranean. The water
is led to the left of the high altar, past a well-mouth, by which it
is drawn up for pilgrims, and so by a channel to the masonry fountain,
where it comes out through metal spouts under an arched recess broad
enough for fifteen women to stand side by side. A pool is formed below
at the trough, and here the constant succession of the Nazareth women
may be seen all day filling their great earthenware jars, standing
ankle-deep in water, their pink or green-striped baggy trousers tucked
between their knees; their heads are covered, if Moslems with the
moon-shaped tire, if Christians with a gay handkerchief or the hair
plaited in long tails. A negress in blue here and there mingles with
the crowd, which is chattering, screaming, gossiping, and sometimes
fighting.
“The people of the town are remarkable for the gay colouring of their
dresses, and the Christian women for their beauty. Many a charming bit
of colour, many a shapely figure set off by picturesque costume, many a
dark eye and ruddy cheek have I seen in the streets or by the spring.
This beauty is peculiar to the Christians of Bethlehem and Nazareth.”
Jesus lived at Nazareth until the time arrived for entering upon his
public work. The immediate occasion which called him forth from the
carpenter’s shop was the news that John the Baptist had begun preaching
in the wilderness of Judea. The work of the Palestine explorers has
thrown important light on the movements and mission stations of John
the Baptist.
John appears to have begun his public work at the great ford of the
Jordan near Jericho; and there went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea
to be baptized. The Jordan at this part is a brown, rapid swirling
stream, about 20 yards across, fringed with a jungle of tamarisk and
cane and willow, in which the leopard and the wolf find a hiding place.
The tradition which says that Jesus was baptized here is at least as
old as the fourth century; the Greek and the Latin churches agree in
regard to it, and at the present day pilgrims from all churches resort
to this spot to bathe in the sacred waters.
Our explorers see no reason to doubt this tradition, and a difficulty
which did exist they have been enabled to remove. It is stated in the
fourth Gospel (John i. 28), that John was baptizing in Bethabara beyond
Jordan, when Jesus came to him; that the Baptist bare testimony to
Christ during two days, and on the third day Jesus was minded to go
into Galilee and was present at Cana at the marriage feast. Hostile
critics of the fourth Gospel, taking the traditional scene of John’s
baptizing near Jericho--where Bethabara has usually been placed on
the maps--asserted that Jesus would have a journey of 80 miles to
accomplish in a single day to reach Cana of Galilee, and that the feat
is of course impossible. But there is really no assertion that it
was done or attempted. It is only a tradition of the fourth century
which fixes Bethabara so far south, or says that Jesus was baptized
at Bethabara. A position near Upper Galilee would suit the narrative
better as the site of Bethabara. Now the surveyors in the course of
their work marked all the fords of the Jordan, and collected all the
names. The following winter, when Major Conder was looking through the
list in order to prepare an index, he was struck with the presence of
the word _Abara_. He saw at once that the house or station at this
place would be Beth-Abara, which had thus been discovered unwittingly.
He looked it out upon the map, and found it to be one of the principal
fords of the Jordan, just above the place where the Jalud river,
flowing down the Valley of Jezreel and by Beisan, debouches into
Jordan. The distance thence to Cana would only be 22 miles. The fourth
Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized at Bethabara, and so this
new discovery does not disturb that part of the tradition which fixes
the baptism near Jericho. Jesus, after being baptized, retired into the
wilderness, and when he returned to the world he found that John had
removed to the more northerly station, and thither he followed him. As
Jesus began to make disciples at Bethabara, the events of John i. must
have occurred after the Temptation, and so indeed they are placed in
the Gospel Harmonies (see Smith’s “Dictionary of Bible,” p. 721).
The Revised Version reads “Bethany beyond Jordan,” instead of
Bethabara, and this is the reading of the oldest manuscripts. It is
gratuitous to suppose any confusion with Bethany near Jerusalem.
“Bathania” was a well-known form (used in the time of Christ) of the
old name Bashan, a district in Peræa or the country beyond Jordan;
and perhaps, as Conder suggests, the original reading was “Bethabara
in Bethany beyond Jordan.” We must agree with him, too, that this
identification of Bethabara is one of the most valuable discoveries
resulting from the survey.
That John the Baptist did move from one station to another in pursuance
of his mission is shown again by the statement that after these things
John was baptizing in Ænon near to Salim, because there was much water
there (John iii. 23). Where was Ænon? It used to be assumed that it
was of course near the desert of Judea where John first preached. But
surely it would be unnecessary to tell us that there was enough water
to baptize with in the Jordan, whereas if abundance of water could be
found anywhere else in Palestine it would be somewhat remarkable. Now
such abundance is found almost in the heart of Samaria. The traveller
who rides across from the town of Samaria, passing behind Ebal, or
who follows the stony road in the magnificent gorge east of the same
mountain, finds himself gradually descending to the springs which lie
at the head of the great _Far’ah_ valley, the open highway from Shechem
to the _Damieh_ ford of the Jordan. It was up this valley that Jacob
drove his flocks and herds from Succoth to Shalem near Shechem. It
was along the banks of the stream that the “garments and vessels” of
the hosts of Benhadad were strewn as far as Jordan. It was here also
that Israel, returning from captivity (according to the Samaritans),
purified themselves before going up to Gerizim to build the temple.
But the place possesses a yet higher interest as the probable site
of “Ænon near Salem” where John was baptizing, and where a question
arose between John’s disciples and a Jew about purifying (John ii.
25). The phrase “much water” might fairly be translated many waters
or many springs, and in an open valley here the springs are found.
The waters gush out over a stony bed and flow down rapidly in a fine
stream. The supply is perennial, and a continual succession of little
springs occurs along the bed of the valley, so that the current becomes
the principal western affluent of Jordan south of the Vale of Jezreel.
About 4 miles north of the head springs is a village called ’_Ainun_,
and about 3 miles south another village called _Salem_. So here we
have “Ænon near Salem,” and in between the two villages the two great
requisites for the baptism of a multitude, namely, an open space in
which the crowd could stand, and abundance of water. There are indeed
other places called Salem scattered up and down the country, but none
of them has an Ænon near to it; and there is one other place called
Ænon, but it has no Salem near to it, besides which, it is away near
Hebron, in a district quite out of the question.
It would appear, then, that John began baptizing, in the first
instance, near Jericho, and made his appeal to Jerusalem and all Judea;
that next, remembering the other great section of the Jews in Galilee,
he removed to Bethabara in the north; and further, because the reformed
religion was not to be for the Jews alone, he entered Samaria itself
and baptized at Ænon.
At the head-springs of Ænon we are only about 5 miles from Jacob’s
Well. Conder and others consider the identity of Jacob’s Well beyond
question, because Jewish and Samaritan tradition, Christian and
Mohammedan tradition all agree about it. The identity is further
supported by the proximity of Joseph’s Tomb, about 600 yards north of
it, a tomb venerated by the members of every religious community in
Palestine. A Christian church was built round Jacob’s Well before the
year 383 A.D., and destroyed before Crusading times, only the vault
or crypt remaining. The ruins covered up the well and hid it altogether
some few years ago; but Captain Anderson, of the Palestine Exploration
Fund, removed them and descended by a rope. The Arabs allowed the rope
to twirl and slip, so that Anderson went into a swoon, from which he
was awakened by the shock of striking the bottom. He measured the well
and found it 7½ feet in diameter and 75 feet deep. Anciently it must
have been deeper, for some of the ruins have fallen into it, and every
passing traveller throws in a stone to hear it fall. The question
arises, why there should be any well at this spot at all, seeing that
the valley (between Ebal and Gerizim) abounds in streams of water, and
there is one stream only 100 yards from the well itself? The answer
given is that the man who dug the well had no right to use the streams;
he was a stranger in the land, and felt the need of a supply of water
upon his own property.
Jacob’s Well is one of the few spots undoubtedly rendered sacred by the
feet of Christ. When the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was baptizing
more disciples than John, Jesus left Judea for Galilee, “and he must
needs pass through Samaria. So he cometh to a city of Samaria called
Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph,
and Jacob’s Well was there. Jesus, therefore, being wearied with his
journey, sat thus by the well. It was about the sixth hour. There
cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water,” &c. (John iv. 1-7). This
woman, we suppose, came from Sychar; but an unaccountable confusion
has grown up between Sychar and Shechem. If the woman had come from
Shechem she would have to carry her pitcher a mile and a half to the
well, passing abundant streams on the way--an apparently needless
trouble. But the early Christians used to place Sychar a mile east of
Shechem, and our explorers agree with Canon Williams and others in
identifying it with the village of ’Askar, which stands within sight
of the well, about half a mile distant, on the slope of Ebal. Yet the
Crusaders confounded Sychar with Shechem, misleading everybody who
came after; the error lasting to our own time, and reappearing even in
carefully-written books.
The question arises, why Jesus on this occasion must needs go through
Samaria? It has been customary to reply that it was because Samaria
lay right across his path in going from Judea to Galilee. But this
does not satisfy us when we know that it was a frequent thing to cross
the Jordan and travel by the eastern route, because the Jews had no
dealings with the Samaritans. I was one day reading the Gospel of St
John very carefully in order to compare notes with a friend, and I was
struck with the meaning implied in Christ’s expression, “One soweth
and another reapeth.” Jesus says to his disciples, “Say not ye, there
are yet four months and then cometh the harvest.” We judge that he
is pointing to the rich cornfield, where the valley opens out into
the Plain of _Mukhnah_; he remarks that the corn is not ripe yet, and
the harvest is not due. Yet he says, “Behold! Lift up your eyes and
look on the fields, that they are white already unto harvest. He that
reapeth receiveth wages and gathereth fruit unto life eternal.” He is
now referring to the spiritual harvest: the people are flocking out
of the town to listen to his teaching, they are favourably disposed
and ready to be converted. Now, why should they be so ready to listen,
seeing that the Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans? Christ
himself supplies the answer when he says, “Herein is the saying true,
‘One soweth and another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye
have not laboured; others have laboured, and ye are entered into their
labour.’” He cannot mean that he is sowing seed now, by his preaching,
for his disciples to reap a harvest of conversions by-and-bye, for he
says, “The fields are white already unto harvest. Lift up your eyes and
look!” He recognises the truth that sowing and reaping are separated by
an interval of time, though at the Harvest-home sower and reaper may
rejoice together, as those who have laboured at different seasons for
the same result. Some Teacher, therefore, has been sowing seed among
these Samaritans before Christ came to Jacob’s Well; and who is that
likely to have been but John the Forerunner, when he preached at Ænon,
and the people of Sychar went to be baptized at the “many waters”? In
the light of this reading we may understand how the woman of Samaria
so soon grasps the fact that the Jewish stranger at the well is the
Christ that John had said was to come after him. If we read the chapter
again we shall see how it was through John’s baptizing at Ænon that
circumstances arose which made Jesus decide to go through Samaria.
It was while John was yet at Bethabara that Jesus went to Cana of
Galilee to the wedding feast. There are two rival sites for Cana: one
is the ruin of _Kanah_, about 8 miles north of Nazareth, the supposed
site in Crusading times; the other is the village of _Kenna_, about 4
miles north-east, which was the accredited site before the Crusaders
arrived. The traveller is shown the water-pots at either place. It
is difficult in the present instance to decide between rival claims,
but the opinion of most writers is in favour of _Kefr Kenna_, and our
explorers lean to that, partly for the reason that it is on the high
road between Nazareth and Tiberias.
Travelling eastward to Tiberias we see a little way off the road on our
left hand a hill of rather peculiar form; it looks as though it might
be the crater of a volcano, with two stunted horns, one at either end.
This is called the _Horns of Hattin_, and is noted in history as being
the place where the Crusaders received their last crushing defeat at
the hands of Sal-a-din, the great Saracen general, in the year 1187.
But it is still more interesting to us as being the place where Christ
preached the Sermon on the Mount. The tradition which makes _Kurn
Hattin_ the Mount of Beatitudes is of Latin origin, and not older than
the twelfth or thirteenth century; but the place is so well adapted for
the delivery of a discourse to a large multitude, that in this case we
may well believe it was correctly chosen by those who first selected
it. When we are at the spot we have no difficulty in reconciling the
seemingly inconsistent statements of St Matthew, who says that the
sermon was preached on the mount, and St Mark, who says that Christ
came down from the mount, and preached in the plain. Sitting on one of
the peaks or “horns” aforesaid, Jesus might begin his discourse to his
disciples, and when a larger crowd began to gather, might descend to
the base of the peak, while still remaining on the mountain of Hattin.
From Hattin we are soon at Tiberias, a town once beautiful and famous,
but now notorious for the filth of its streets and the activity of
its vermin. The Arabs say that the king of the fleas holds his court
there. Josephus tells us that the city was built by Herod Antipas,
and named in honour of the Emperor Tiberius. It was therefore a new
city in Christ’s day, and probably at first inhabited only by Romans,
Antipas himself having a palace there, adorned with figures of animals,
“contrary to the Jewish law.” Moreover, as it was built on the site
of an ancient burial ground, it would be regarded by the Jews as a
polluted and forbidden locality. These circumstances, taken together,
may account for the fact that Jesus Christ does not appear ever to have
entered the city.
The former greatness of Tiberias is indicated by the extent of the
walls, 12 feet in thickness, which have been traced by Dr Selah
Merrill and by Herr Schumacher for a distance of 3 miles, on the south
side. In the course of the wall is an old castle on the summit of a
hill, 1000 feet above the town. An aqueduct, 9 miles long, brought pure
water from a distance, whereas the present inhabitants are content
to drink of the waters of the lake. Looking about in the town we
notice some traces of its former grandeur; here a magnificent block of
polished granite from Upper Egypt, there a hunting scene carved on the
surface of a hard black lintel of basalt, besides old buildings, and
broken shafts and columns half buried in rubbish.
From Tiberias we go north, and after a ride of 3 miles reach Medjel,
which represents the Magdala of Christ’s time, and is known wherever
the New Testament is read as the home of Mary Magdalene. The village
is insignificant, being only a collection of huts and hovels; the
people are poor and degraded, and their children half naked. Travellers
approaching the place are greeted by the howling of dogs, which rush
out as though they would devour them.
Tiberias and Medjel are the only places now inhabited about the lake,
and the visitor is impressed with a sense of deadness and desolation.
Yet the lake is beautiful, and upon its shores there were in Christ’s
time no less than nine cities, while numerous villages dotted the
plains and hills around. All the surrounding region was highly
cultivated, and the lake itself was covered with fishing boats. There
are no more than half a dozen boats now--made at Beyrout, or some other
seaport town, and brought hither on the backs of camels--but the lake
still swarms with fish. When a revolver was fired into the water at
random several fishes were killed and floated on the surface.
The lake is surrounded by hills, except at the south end, where it
touches the Jordan Valley. These hills are at such a distance from
the water as to leave a belt of land, generally level, all round it,
which at some points broadens out into large plains, such as those of
Gennesaret and Bathia. Medjel, already mentioned, is at the southern
end of the charming Plain of Gennesaret, about which Josephus goes into
ecstasies on account of its exceeding great fertility. He speaks of
the palms and figs, olives and grapes that flourished there, and the
fish for which its streams were far-famed. The plain is but 3 miles
long by 1 mile wide, and it now looks neglected; but it might be made
a little paradise again, for the soil is as fertile as ever. “As we
journey towards the northern end” (says Dr Merrill) “we observe on our
left a strange sight. The mountain appears to have parted asunder and
left a great chasm, the walls of which are perpendicular, and full of
caves, which, not long before the birth of Christ, were occupied by
robbers, whom Herod the Great had much difficulty in subduing. Along
the bottom of that chasm, ran, in Christ’s time, the main road from
Cana of Galilee, Nazareth, Tabor, and the region of the south-west, to
the north end of the lake, and thence to Damascus. Christ would pass
along this road in going down from Nazareth to Capernaum.”
It was probably in the Plain of Gennesaret that the multitude stood on
the land while Jesus put off in a boat to be free from the pressure of
the crowd while he addressed them (Mark iv. 1). In this neighbourhood,
also, no doubt, was spoken the parable of the net cast into the sea.
Of all the nine cities then about the lake we should like to recover
especially the sites of Capernaum and Bethsaida. Before the Exploration
we had to be content with the vague statement that Capernaum was
somewhere north of Tiberias. We are now able to point to two sites,
and say that Capernaum was one or other of these, while these two
places are but 2½ miles apart. One of these places is _Tell Hum_, at
the head of the lake, about 2 miles west of the point where the Jordan
enters the lake. Here we have ruins indicating the former existence of
a town hardly smaller than Tiberias; we find a regular cemetery, and
within an enclosure we have the remains of a synagogue. Besides the
synagogue ruins the argument in favour of this site is found in its
name: _Tell_ means a heap, such as the place has become, and _Hum_ is
the abraded form of the name Nahum. Tradition said that the prophet
Nahum lived and died here, and indeed his grave was pointed out as
late as the fourteenth century. The village of Nahum would be _Kefr
Nahum_ in Hebrew; Khafarnaum, as Josephus has it; Capernaum as we are
familiar with it. Sir Charles Wilson is in favour of this site. On
the other hand, Major Conder is in favour of _Khan Minyeh_, 2½ miles
from _Tell Hum_, along the shore southward, and right in the corner
of the Plain of Gennesaret. Here, again, we have evidences of the
former existence of a town, although we have no synagogue ruins. The
name of the place, in this case also, supplies a strong argument. It
appears that the Jews, who looked upon Capernaum as the home of Christ
and the headquarters of his followers, called the disciples “Sons of
Capernaum;” they also nicknamed them Diviners or Sorcerers--in their
language, _Minai_, a name often appearing in the Talmud. Khan Minyeh,
then, would seem to be the town of the Minai or Sorcerers, the early
Jewish converts to Christianity; and their mother town was Capernaum.
An objection might seem to lie against Khan Minyeh because of its
situation in the plain, while it is said of Capernaum, “And thou,
Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? thou shalt go down unto
Hades” (Matt. xi. 23). Such an expression might be interpreted morally;
but if it is to be understood literally, then there is the suggestion
that the town was not entirely in the plain, but spread over the rocky
promontory to the north-east. Rev. Henry Brass explored this promontory
in the spring of 1890, and on the highest part, about 242 feet above
the lake, found “the remains of a fortification--possibly the station
of the Roman Centurion (Matt. viii. 5)--and here and there traces
of buildings, but everywhere broken pottery, showing that there was
formerly a large population. The ruins of the Khan at the junction of
the roads from Cæsarea, Jerusalem, and Perea with the great Roman road
leading north to Damascus, probably mark the very spot where Matthew
sat at the receipt of custom; and the outlying rocks at the foot of
the cliff, to this day the favourite resort of fish, indicate the spot
where Peter would naturally go to cast his hook (Matt. xvii. 27).”[40]
Before quite dismissing Capernaum from our minds, let us inquire about
the site of Bethsaida. The name signifies House of Fisheries, and it is
recorded that Bethsaida was on the lake and had the Jordan running past
it. Before we go further let us recall what occurred after the feeding
of the five thousand.
Jesus constrained his disciples to enter into the boat, and to go
before him unto the other side to Bethsaida. This is St Mark’s account
(Mark vi. 45). St John, speaking of the same event, says that the
disciples entered into a boat, and were going over the sea unto
Capernaum (John vi. 17). It would appear, therefore, that Bethsaida
and Capernaum were in the same direction, looking across the lake
from the place where the disciples embarked. On the morrow, when the
multitude which had been fed found that Jesus and his disciples had
gone away, they engaged some small boats which had come from Tiberias,
and crossed over to Capernaum, seeking Jesus. They must have had some
ground for believing he had gone away in that direction: at any rate,
at Capernaum, “on the other side of the sea,” they found him, and so
we cannot doubt that the boat had landed him at Capernaum, or near it.
When, therefore, two Evangelists tell us that they came to the shore
at Gennesaret, and moored the boat there (Matt. xiv. 34; Mark vi. 53),
it seems plain that Capernaum itself was in the land of Gennesaret,
as it would be if situated at Khan Minyeh. And yet, considering that
the disciples had been instructed to go “unto the other side, to
Bethsaida,” and perhaps only deviated a little through the stress of
the storm, and landed at Capernaum, we can hardly doubt that Bethsaida
was close by. In fact the ruins at _Tell Hum_ may very well mark
the site of Bethsaida, especially as their position agrees with the
descriptions of early travellers who place Bethsaida north-east of
Capernaum. For example, Willibald (A.D. 722) says, “And thence
(from Tiberias) they went round the sea, and by the village of Magdalum
to the village of Capernaum, where our Lord raised the prince’s
daughter. Here was a house and a great wall, which the people of the
place told them was the residence of Zebedæus and his sons John and
James. And thence they went to Bethsaida, the residence of Peter and
Andrew, where there is now a church on the site of their house. They
remained there that night, and next morning went to Chorazin, where our
Lord healed the demoniac, and sent the devil into a herd of swine. Here
was a church of the Christians.” They afterwards went on to the sources
of the Jordan at Banias.[41]
Chorazin, 2 miles north-west of _Tell Hum_, is called _Kerazeh_, a name
easily confounded with _Khersa_, in the Gadarene country east of the
lake; and this mistake Willibald appears to make.
The question is much discussed whether there were not two Bethsaidas;
and those who believe there were, call the second one “Bethsaida
Julias,” and place it on the eastern side of the Jordan, not far from
the north end of the lake. Josephus says that Bethsaida was a village
raised to the dignity of a town by Philip the Tetrarch, who rebuilt
it and changed its name to Julias in honour of the daughter of the
Emperor. Philip built himself a tomb there, and was buried there.
The question between _Tell Hum_ and _Khan Minyeh_ as the site of
Capernaum has been made to turn partly on the presence of synagogue
ruins at the former place and their absence from the latter. But this
can have little or nothing to do with the decision, for the best
judges believe that the synagogues date only from the second century
A.D.
Nevertheless, the existence of synagogue ruins in Galilee is a very
interesting fact; and it is probable that those erected in the second
century would be modelled after the pattern of those which preceded
them and in which Christ, in so many instances, read and taught. The
synagogue ruins at _Tell Hum_ are a shapeless heap, but the stones
have been carefully examined and measured, and it becomes possible
theoretically to reconstruct the building. Similar ruins are found at
seven or eight other places in Galilee, and some of them--especially
those at _Kefr Birim_--are in a better state of preservation. (_See_
Frontispiece.) Examination shows that the Jewish synagogues were not
the plain barn-like structures some people had imagined. The building
faced the south, looking towards Jerusalem, the holy city. Four rows
of columns ran from one end to the other, dividing the building into
five aisles. At Kefr Birim one synagogue was furnished with a porch.
A smaller building, at a little distance from the village, has two
lambs sculptured on the lintel of the door, and beneath them is an
inscription in Hebrew. The inscription has been thus read by Renan,
“Peace be to this place, and upon all the places of God. Joseph
the Levite, the son of Levi, put up this lintel. A blessing rest
upon his work.” At the synagogue ruins of _Nebartein_, north-east of
_Safed_, on the lintel of the main entrance, is a representation of
the seven-branched candlestick, similar to those in the catacombs at
Rome and on the rocks in the wilderness of Sinai. Here, again, is an
inscription in Hebrew. During the excavations at _Tell Hum_ synagogue
a lintel of one of the side entrances was found, and on its face a
vase--perhaps the pot of manna--and on either side a rod or reed. Along
the head is a scroll of vine leaves and grapes. The dimensions of this
synagogue were 74 feet 9 inches by 56 feet 9 inches. The material was
white limestone, brought from a distance, while the stone used at
Kerazeh was the hard black basalt of the neighbourhood.
As already remarked, _Kerazeh_ (Chorazin), north-west of _Tell Hum_,
has sometimes been confounded with _Khersa_, which was on the eastern
side of the lake. Khersa is Gergesa, where Christ was met by the two
demoniacs coming out of the tombs (Matt. ix. 1). It is situated on the
left bank of _Wady Semakh_, and at the point where the hills end and
the plain stretches out towards the lake. Sir C. Wilson is of opinion
that there is only one spot where the herd of swine could have run
down a steep place into the lake. It is a place about a mile south of
Khersa, where the hills, which everywhere else on the eastern side are
recessed from a half to three-quarters of a mile from the water’s edge,
approach within 40 feet of it, and _there_ do not end abruptly but
descend in a steep, even slope. Some time after Sir C. Wilson’s survey,
the eastern coast was carefully examined by Mr Macgregor in his canoe,
and he came to exactly the same conclusion.
A difficulty has arisen with regard to this locality in consequence
of the different readings in the three Gospels. In Matthew Christ is
said to have come into the country of the Gergesenes; in Luke and John
into that of the Gadarenes. The old MSS. do not give any assistance
here, but the similarity of the name Khersa to that of Gergesa is, as
Dr Thomson points out, in “the Land and the Book,” a strong reason for
believing that the reading of Matthew is correct; and we have also
the testimony of Eusebius and Origen that a village called Gergesa
once existed on the borders of the lake. Perhaps the discrepancy may
be explained by supposing that Gergesa was under the jurisdiction of
Gadara. Gadara itself, now _Umm Keis_, is a good two hours’ distance
from the lake, else here we find rock-hewn tombs which are actually
occupied by fellahin, while there do not appear to be any such at
Khersa. To meet the difficulty which might be felt from the absence
of tombs at Khersa, Sir C. Wilson has suggested that the demoniacs
may have lived in a tomb built above ground, like one still existing
at _Tell Hum_, a rectangular building, capable of holding a large
number of bodies, and which appears to have been whitewashed within
and without. It is possibly this description of tomb to which our Lord
refers in Matt. xxiii. 27, where he compares the Scribes and Pharisees
to “whited sepulchres,” beautiful in outward appearance, but within
“full of dead men’s bones.”
Dr Merrill, speaking of Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum, and other
places now desolate by the Lake of Galilee, remarks that the contrast
between the present and the former condition of this region is painful
to one who knows its history. Nevertheless, he says, “this region is to
me one of the most sacred and delightful on earth. No place that men
have consecrated brings me so near to Christ as a day spent in walking
and meditating on these lonely shores.”
“Christ also visited Perea, the country east of the Jordan. Doubtless
he followed the main road to the hot springs on the Yarmuk, and
thence to the beautiful city of Gadara, on the mountain above them.
He may have gone a little farther east, past _Capitolias_ and
_Dium_, cities belonging to the Decapolis, and turned south through a
densely populated region to Geraza, whence, by one of the two routes
before indicated, he would return to the valley after his mission
had been accomplished. It was in Perea that the ‘seventy disciples’
were commissioned to labour, and their welcome and success must have
been unusual, for it is reported of them that they ‘returned again
with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject to us through
thy name’ (Luke x.). The connection of our Saviour with this region
opens up an interesting field of inquiry. He may have foreseen that
in its rich cities, and among its throngs of human beings, his Gospel
was soon to triumph in a remarkable manner, for it is true that in
Bashan, a country which we are now accustomed to speak of as a desert,
Christianity, in the early centuries of our era, had one of its most
important strongholds.”
Jesus Christ at one time, either for quietness or for safety, went away
into the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and there entered into a house and
would have no man know it (Mark vii. 24). A similar reason may have led
him to visit Cæsarea Philippi (ancient Paneas and Dan) at the extreme
north-east corner of the Holy Land, where the Jordan springs forth a
full-grown stream, under the slopes of Hermon. It is generally accepted
now that Hermon, and not Tabor, was the Mount of the Transfiguration
(Luke ix. 29). Hermon was once _Shenir_, the “Shining,” a name made
appropriate by its cap of snow; and some writers imagine a connection
between this and the raiment that became white and dazzling.
There is one remarkable natural peculiarity of Hermon still to be
noticed (says Conder) namely, the extreme rapidity of the formation of
cloud on the summit. In a few minutes a thick cap forms over the top
of the mountain, and as quickly disperses and entirely disappears. In
the accounts of our Lord’s transfiguration, we read that whilst staying
at Cæsarea Philippi, he retired with his disciples to “a high mountain
apart,” and there can be but little doubt that some part of Hermon, and
very probably the summit, is intended. From the earliest period the
mountain has been a sacred place; in later times it was covered with
temples; to the present day it is a place of retreat for the Druzes.
This lofty solitary peak seems wonderfully appropriate for the scene of
so important an event; and in this connection the cloud formation is
most interesting, if we remember the cloud which suddenly cleared away,
when they found “no man any more, save Jesus only, with themselves”
(Mark ix. 8).
After these things it occurred, as Christ and his disciples “were on
the way to Jerusalem, that he was passing through the midst of Samaria
and Galilee” (Luke xvii. 11). Some critics have cited this text as a
proof that St Luke was ignorant of the country about which he wrote.
Seeing that Galilee is north of Samaria, they think that a journey from
north to south should rather be described as a passing through the
midst of Galilee and Samaria. Moreover, they point out that, according
to Matt. xix. 1 and Mark x. 1, Jesus did not pass through Samaria
at all, but crossed the Jordan, and travelled by the eastern route.
Notwithstanding the neatness of this indictment, it is easy to show
that St Luke’s statement may be perfectly correct. Jesus intended to
go up to Jerusalem to the feast, and as he did not share the Jewish
prejudice against the Samaritans, he contemplated going through
Samaria. He sent some of the disciples before him to prepare his way,
and they entered into a Samaritan village; but they could not succeed
in obtaining accommodation, because the object of the Master was to
go through to Jerusalem (Luke ix. 52). The chronic feeling of enmity
between Samaritans and Jews was naturally stirred into greater heat by
the sight of pilgrims going up to the festival; for then the question
was revived whether men ought to worship at Jerusalem or Mount Gerizim.
Being refused a passage through Samaria, and yet still intent upon
going up to Jerusalem, Jesus Christ would turn eastward, and journey
along the border, which led straight to the Bethabara ford of the
Jordan. Travelling thus, with Samaria on his right hand and Galilee on
his left, it is surely not incorrect to say that he was passing through
the midst of Samaria and Galilee; or, as we have it in the margin of
the Revised Version, he passed _between_. It seems to have been at one
of the border villages that he was met by ten lepers, one of whom was
a Samaritan (Luke xvii. 12); and where would he be more likely to find
Jewish and Samaritan lepers in one group than on the border line of the
two provinces? He is following this line eastward, and accordingly,
when Matthew and Mark say that he crossed the Jordan and came into the
borders of Judea, by the eastern route, it is in perfect accordance
with the statement in Luke. In further confirmation, we read in Luke
xviii. 35, as well as in the other Evangelists, that the route taken
brought Jesus through Jericho. To approach Jerusalem from Jericho was
a matter of course with the pilgrims from Galilee who had travelled by
the eastern route.
The Jericho road was the scene of the parable of the Good Samaritan. “A
certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho.” The actual descent
would be about 3000 feet; and every expression of that kind in the
Scriptures, as of “going down” or “going up,” is always true to the
features of the ground. The man “fell among thieves.” So likely a
district is it, that in the days of the Crusaders nine knights banded
themselves together to defend pilgrims going down this dangerous pass:
and hence arose the Order of Knights Templars. “There came by a priest
and a Levite.” Jericho was a sacerdotal city, and priests and Levites
were continually passing and repassing between Jericho and Jerusalem.
In going down the Jericho road the traveller has often a wide prospect
on either side; but it is, for all that, a mountain pass, with no way
of escape if one were attacked; and the Bedawin, whose black tents may
be seen in the distance, are the very fellows to attack the traveller
now, if they dared.
The road up from Jericho brings us past Bethany--a village now of about
forty small dwellings--and over the Mount of Olives, to Jerusalem.
[_Authorities and Sources_:--“Tent Work in Palestine.”
Major Conder. “The Sea of Galilee.” Sir Charles Wilson. (In
vol., “Recovery of Jerusalem.”) “East of Jordan.” Dr Selah
Merrill. “Survey Memoirs.” Vol. of Special Papers. “Quarterly
Statements of P. E. Fund.” “Galilee in the time of Christ.” Dr
Selah Merrill. “Twenty-One Years’ Work in the Holy Land.” P.
E. Fund.]
2. _Christ in the Capital._
The Jerusalem of Christ’s day was the city as it existed in the days
of Herod the Great. East and west it was no wider than at present;
southward it covered the high south-western hill and a good part of the
slope of Ophel; northward the third wall was not yet built, but there
were suburban buildings outside the second. The Temple area had been so
enlarged by Herod as to include all, or nearly all, the present Noble
Sanctuary; and there were approaches from the west, one of which led
over Robinson’s Arch. A main street from the Valley Gate led eastward
to the Temple, passing over Wilson’s Arch. Another main street, running
north and south, passed under Wilson’s Arch and Robinson’s Arch, and
led to a gate in the south wall. In the north-western part of the High
Town was Herod’s palace, with the three strong towers near the Valley
Gate which defended it. The Tower of Antonia occupied the site of the
present Turkish barracks, north-west of the Temple; and when Pontius
Pilate was governor he occupied it. Westward of the city the _Birket
Mamilla_ existed as a reservoir of water, and supplied the palace and
towers: but the _Birket es Sultan_, or so-called Lower Pool of Gihon,
had not been made. The Pool of Siloam was well known, and of course the
spring-head which supplied it. The traditional Pool of Bethesda did not
exist, but the true Bethesda--now buried under ruins--exhibited its
five porches, and was in favour as a healing fountain. For the rest we
may say that although all the valleys were deeper than they are now,
the streets and bazaars probably followed in most instances the lines
which they still preserve, and were just as narrow as they are at
present.
In the High Town, called in Josephus’ day the Upper Market Place, there
would be an open space somewhere, actually used for a market; and here,
we may conjecture, Jesus would sometimes teach. The very circumstances
of the spot would suggest the parable of the Labourers, some of whom
stood idle till the eleventh hour. Christ also taught in the ample
spaces of the Temple courts (John vii. 14); and in the last days of his
ministry, at any rate, used to retire from the city before the gates
were closed at sunset (Luke xxi. 37). Whether he ever lodged within the
city we cannot tell, but that he had no home there and no friend in
whose house he was sure of a welcome, may perhaps be inferred from the
fact that a guest-chamber had to be engaged when he desired to eat the
Passover (Mark xiv. 12).
_The Pool of Bethesda._--It is not doubted that when Christ told the
blind man to “Go, wash in the Pool of Siloam,” he was sending him to
the very pool which still bears that name. About the Pool of Bethesda,
“by the sheep _gate_” (John v.), there has not been the same assurance
and unanimity. The traditional pool occupies what was once a valley
north of the Temple; but as the valley itself was there when Titus
sought to attack the Temple from the north, we judge the pool to be a
later construction. The two arches at the western end of it, with their
staircases now buried in rubbish, are not the same as “five porches.”
Again, several writers have supposed that the so-called Virgin’s
Fountain might be the true Bethesda, because it is an intermittent
spring, and because the modern Jews believe the water of this pool to
be a sure cure for rheumatic complaints. They often go in numbers, men
and women together, and stand in their clothes in the pool, waiting for
the water to rise. But the Virgin’s Fountain is too far away from the
Sheep-gate to be the pool which the Evangelist refers to.
It was pointed out some years ago by M. Clermont Ganneau that the Pool
of Bethesda should be sought near the Church of St Anne, where an
old tradition has placed the house of the mother of Mary, calling it
_Beit hanna_, “House of Anne.” This expression is exactly identical
with _Bethesda_, both expressions signifying _House of Mercy_, or
_Compassion_.[42] This anticipation has been verified; for in the
year 1888 the ancient pool of Bethesda was found a short distance
north-west of the present Church of St Anne. Certain works carried on
by the Algerian monks laid bare a large tank or cistern cut in the
rock, to a depth of 30 feet, and Herr Schick recognised this as the
Pool of Bethesda. It is 55 feet long from east to west, and measures
12½ feet in breadth. A flight of twenty-four steps leads down into the
pool from the eastern scarp of rock. Herr Schick, who at once saw the
great interest of this discovery, soon found a sister-pool, lying end
to end, 60 feet long, and of the same breadth as the first. The first
pool was arched in by five arches, while five corresponding porches ran
along the side of the pool. At a later period a church was built over
the pool by the Crusaders, and they seem to have been so far impressed
by the fact of five arches below, that they shaped their crypt into
five arches in imitation. They left an opening for getting down to
the water; and further, as the crowning proof that they regarded the
pool as Bethesda, they painted on the wall of the crypt a fresco
representing the angel troubling the water of the pool.
All this appears to agree very well with what Eusebius says in his
“Onomasticon,” concerning a pool which he calls Bezatha--“a pool at
Jerusalem, which is the _Piscina Probatica_, and had formerly five
porches, and now is pointed out at the twin pools there, of which one
is filled by the rains of the year, but the other exhibits its water
tinged in an extraordinary manner with red, retaining a trace, they
say, of the victims that were formerly cleansed in it.” Here we have
a sheep pool, in which the sacrificial victims used to be washed, and
close by it (so that they constituted twin pools) a second, which must
have been intermittent, the very character attributed to those waters
which, at a certain season, were troubled.[43] Eusebius gives no clue
to the situation of the twin pools, but the Bordeaux pilgrim, who
visited Jerusalem in A.D. 333, after speaking of two great
pools at the side of the Temple, one on either hand as he entered
Jerusalem from the east side (apparently at St Stephen’s Gate), refers
to the twin pools as being more within the city. They “have five
porches” (he says), “and are called Bethsaida. Here the sick of many
years were wont to be healed. But these pools have water which, when
agitated, is of a kind of red colour.”
There had been a disposition in recent years to identify these twin
pools with two souterrains or tunnels existing under the Convent of
the Sisters of Sion at the north-west corner of the Haram area, but
that fancy is now dissipated. The manner in which most of the previous
speculations have been set aside by the actual discovery of the Pool of
Bethesda is an instructive testimony to the value of excavation work in
Jerusalem.
_A Tablet from Herod’s Temple._--Josephus, in his “Antiquities of the
Jews,”[44] after describing the cloisters of the Temple and the Court
of the Gentiles, goes on to describe the inner court, and the middle
wall of partition which divided Jews from Gentiles. He says, “Thus was
the first enclosure; in the midst of which, and not far from it, was
the second, to be gone up to by a few steps. This was encompassed by
a stone wall for a partition, with an inscription which forbade any
foreigner to go in under pain of death.” Again, in his work on the
“Wars of the Jews,”[45]--“When you go through these first cloisters,
unto the second court of the Temple, there was a partition made of
stone all round, whose height was three cubits. Its construction was
very elegant; upon it stood pillars, at equal distances from one
another, declaring the law of purity, some in Greek, and some in Roman
letters, that no foreigner should go within the sanctuary,--for that
second court of the Temple was called the Sanctuary, and was ascended
to by fourteen steps from the first court.”
In the year 1871, M. Clermont Ganneau had the good fortune to discover
one of these pillars or tablets, partly buried in the foundations
of a building not far from the Haram area. It bears the following
inscription in Greek, in seven lines:--
ΜΗΘΕΝΑΑΛΛΟΓΕΝΗΕΙΣΠΟ
ΡΕΥΕΣΘΑΙΕΝΤΟΣΤΟΥΠΕ
ΡΙΤΟΙΕΡΟΝΤΡΥΦΑΚΤΟΥΚΑΙ
ΠΕΡΙΒΟΛΟΥΟΣΔΑΝΛΗ
ΦΘΗΕΑΥΤΩΙΑΙΤΙΟΣΕΣ
ΤΑΙΔΙΑΤΟΕΞΑΚΟΛΟΥ
ΘΕΙΝΘΑΝAΤΟΝ
The translation is:--“No stranger is to enter within the balustrade
round the Temple and enclosure. Whoever is caught will be responsible
to himself for his death, which will ensue.”
M. Clermont Ganneau remarks that the episode in the Acts of the
Apostles (xxi. 26, _et seq._) throws great light on this precious
inscription and receives light from it. Paul, after purification,
presents himself in the Temple; the people immediately rise against
him, because certain Jews of Asia believed that Paul had introduced a
Gentile--Trophimus of Ephesus--and had thus polluted the sacred place.
They are about to put him to death when the Tribune commanding at Fort
Antonia intervenes and rescues him. The people demand of the Tribune
the execution of the culprit, _i.e._, the application of the law.
This inscription, and probably this very stone, was almost certainly
seen and read by Christ; and it would be likely to impress him
painfully with the exclusive spirit of the Jews. It certainly could not
meet with the approval of the Teacher who preached to Samaritans at
Jacob’s Well, and laboured more in the half-Gentile town of Capernaum
than in Nazareth, defending his course by quoting the example of Elijah
who went to Sarepta a city of Zidon. Christ declared himself the Light
of all the World, and the Shepherd who had other sheep not of the
Jewish fold. It was the work of Christ, before it became the work
of Paul, to break down the middle wall of partition between Jew and
Gentile. There can hardly be a question, then, that the sight of this
inscription would intensify his desire to see this Temple destroyed
and the Jewish ritual abolished, that he might rear upon its ruins a
spiritual temple for all nations.
At the beginning of the week of his passion, Jesus Christ came up the
steep ascent from Jericho, the road bringing him at last to Bethany.
One night he halted in the village, as of old; the village and the
desert were then all alive, as they still are once every year at the
Greek Easter, with the crowd of Paschal pilgrims moving to and fro
between Bethany and Jerusalem. In the morning he set forth on his
journey. Three pathways lead, and probably always led, from Bethany
to Jerusalem; one, a long circuit over the northern shoulder of Mount
Olivet, down the valley which parts it from Scopus; another, a steep
foot-path over the summit; the third, the natural continuation of the
road by which mounted travellers always approach the city from Jericho,
over the southern shoulder, between the summit which contains the Tombs
of the Prophets and that called the Mount of Offence. “There can be no
doubt” (says Dean Stanley) “that this last is the road of the entry of
Christ, not only because, as just stated, it is, and must always have
been, the usual approach for horsemen and for large caravans, such as
then were concerned, but also because this is the only one of the three
approaches which meets the requirements of the narrative which follows.
“Two vast streams of people met on that day. The one poured out from
the city, and as they came through the gardens whose clusters of palm
rose on the south-eastern corner of Olivet, they cut down the long
branches, as was their wont at the Feast of Tabernacles, and moved
upwards towards Bethany, with shouts of welcome. From Bethany streamed
forth the crowds who had assembled there on the previous night, and
who came testifying to the great event at the sepulchre of Lazarus.
The road soon loses sight of Bethany.... Gradually the long procession
swept up and over the ridge, where first begins ‘the descent of the
Mount of Olives towards Jerusalem.’ At this point the first view is
caught of the south-eastern corner of the city.... It was at this
precise point that the shout of triumph burst forth from the multitude,
Hosanna to the Son of David!... Again the procession advanced. The
road descends a slight declivity, and the glimpse of the city is again
withdrawn behind the intervening ridge of Olivet. A few moments,
and the path mounts again, it climbs a rugged ascent, it reaches a
ledge of smooth rock, and in an instant the whole city bursts into
view.... Immediately below is the valley of the Kedron, here seen in
its greatest depth as it joins the valley of Hinnom, and thus giving
full effect to the great peculiarity of Jerusalem, seen only on its
eastern side--its situation as of a city rising out of a deep abyss. It
is hardly possible to doubt that this rise and turn of the road, this
rocky ledge, was the exact point where the multitude paused again, and
‘He, when he beheld the city, wept over it.’ Nowhere else on the Mount
of Olives is there a view like this.”[46]
On one of those last days the Great Teacher, leaving the city a little
before sunset, sat on one of the rocky banks of Olivet, over against
the Temple. The mountain rises 150 feet above the level of the city;
the city has the appearance of being tilted up on its western side, so
that from the mountain you can look down into its streets. The Temple
courts would be in the foreground, with Solomon’s Porch on the eastern
side. Perhaps the 80 feet of rubbish which now rests against the wall
had not yet half accumulated; and in that case the stones which Solomon
laid down would be still visible--blocks 20 cubits long by 6 cubits
thick, and extending a length of 400 cubits. The disciples had been
calling their Master’s attention to the goodly stones and buildings of
the Temple, as they came along, and he had declared that they would one
day be thrown down; and now, sitting on Olivet he prophesies the end of
the age.
From the Mount of Olives it was but a short way to Bethany, to spend
the night. A wild mountain-hamlet, perched on its broken plateau of
rocks, Bethany is screened by a ridge from the view of the top of
Olivet. The modern name of the village--El-Azarieh--connects it with
Lazarus, whose traditional house and grave are still exhibited, as well
as the traditional house of Simon the leper. The welcome which awaited
Christ in the home of Mary and Martha and Lazarus must have been very
grateful after the day’s teaching and turmoil in the noisy city.
It is hopeless to try and identify in Jerusalem the house or the street
in which the disciples made ready the Passover for their Master. The
Garden of Gethsemane, which was visited afterwards, may probably have
been at or near the place which is now pointed out on the slope of
Olivet.
When Christ was brought before Pilate it would be at the Tower of
Antonia, north-west of the Temple, on the site now occupied by the
Turkish barracks.
Outside the barracks, on the north side, is the street now called the
_Via Dolorosa_, because tradition says that Christ passed along it in
going from the Judgment Hall to the place of crucifixion, marked now by
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
[Illustration: OUTLINE PLAN OF JERUSALEM.
1 North wall of Upper City, probable course.
2 Second wall, so drawn as to exclude the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre.
3 Second wall, including the Church.
4 Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
5 Pool of Hezekiah.
6 Citadel.
7 Dome of the Rock (Site of the Temple).
8 Haram-area or Noble Sanctuary.
9 Tower of Antonia, now Turkish Barracks.
10 Birket-Israel (Traditional Bethesda.).
11 Jaffa Gate.
12 Via Dolorosa.]
_The True Site of Calvary._--The question has been much debated whether
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre occupies the true site of Calvary or
not. We know that Jesus suffered and was buried at some spot outside
the city, for it was “as they came out” that they found Simon of
Cyrene, and compelled him to go with them to bear the cross. The Church
of the Holy Sepulchre is almost in the heart of the present city; but
we have to remember that at the date of the crucifixion the third wall
was not yet built. The first question to be settled is the course of
the second wall, and the point whether it included the site of the
church or not. In this connection the discovery of a portion of the
second wall, running north-west, along by the Greek Bazaar, was very
important: only it was not followed far enough to remove all doubt.
If we adopt Herr Schick’s line for the second wall, the Church of the
Sepulchre would be outside: but this is not enough. If the site were
within the second wall it could not be Calvary; if it was outside the
wall it may be Calvary or may not. The Church is closer to the wall
than we should expect the place of execution to be; and unless Calvary
were further away there would hardly seem to be reason enough for
pressing Simon of Cyrene into service to carry the cross.
But another discovery must be mentioned which has some bearing on
the question. A little way east of the church, on a piece of ground
belonging to the Russians, the excavators passed through the remains
of some bazaars which were known to have existed there in the middle
ages, and below these they came upon a Byzantine pavement, which
appears to be the one laid down by Constantine around the buildings
which he erected. Thus it becomes morally certain that the Church of
the Holy Sepulchre stands on the spot where Constantine built his
church, believing it to be Calvary. But between the days of Christ and
the days of Constantine there was time and room for mistake to arise.
Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70, the Christians did not return
to it until eighty years after, and by that time it might be difficult
to identify the sacred sites. When Constantine came to build his
church he found the site occupied by a temple of Venus, a circumstance
which may argue the traditional sacredness of the site, but scarcely
the tradition that it had been the Jewish place of execution. Major
Conder says he could devoutly wish that the site may turn out not to be
genuine, because it is disgraced by the scenes that occur there.
Passing through the doorway we enter the vestibule, in which is
the Stone of Unction, a slab of marble which is devoutly kissed by
pilgrims. Passing round it to the left, the rotunda of the church is
reached; to the right a narrow passage with small chapels runs behind
the apses of the Greek church, and here a flight of steps leads down
to the subterranean Chapel of Helena with its picturesque lighting and
heavy eighth century basketwork capitals. Beneath this, again, is the
dark cave so suggestively named the Chapel of the Invention of the
Cross. The rotunda is well lighted with a dome light blue in colour,
and covered with golden lilies and arabesques. In the centre rises the
old Chapel of the Sepulchre, dark and gloomy, of marble discoloured by
age, surmounted by a queer cupola of Italian taste, and ornamented all
along the top with gilt nosegays and modern-framed pictures. Stooping
to enter, we pass into the vestibule or Chapel of the Angel, walled
with marble slabs, and thence into the inner Chapel of the Sepulchre
itself, where the darkness is only relieved by the glowing lamps over
the altar on the tomb. The most impressive portion of the church is,
however, the nave east of the rotunda, belonging to the Greeks, with
its great screen in front of the three eastern apses. The floor is
unoccupied, save by the short column marking the “centre of the world.”
The dome above is poor, rudely whitewashed, and painted in fresco; but
the glory of the place consists in the large screen and the panelling
of the side walls.[47]
On Sundays the Christians of various churches--Greek, Latin, Armenian,
Coptic--hold their services simultaneously, under the dome and in the
side chapels which open off it. On one occasion when I was present
the Greek patriarch was preaching under the dome of the rotunda, at
the east end of the Chapel of the Sepulchre, when suddenly the Latins
struck up their instrumental music and singing, drowning the preacher’s
voice. I was prepared to sympathise with the Greeks, when presently
they formed a procession and marched round the rotunda, passing right
through a little band of Copts who were engaged in their own way of
worship at the west end of the Chapel of the Sepulchre. This want of
consideration for the members of other churches seemed so calculated
to lead to quarrels that I was not surprised to find a hundred Turkish
soldiers drawn up in front of the church to keep the peace. This was
a fortnight before Easter. At Easter time itself, when the so-called
miracle of the “holy fire” is enacted, and Christians of all churches
struggle with one another to be the first to light their tapers at
the sacred flame, quarrels do actually arise, and the place is a
pandemonium. Woe to the owner of the taper first lit; it is snatched
from him, and extinguished by having a dozen others thrust into it.
Strong men struggle with one another, and even delicate women and old
men fight like furies. We may well join with Conder in wishing that the
evidence may finally prove Calvary to have been somewhere else.
For some years past a site has been coming into favour, outside the
present north wall, not far from the Damascus Gate. Here is a rounded
knoll with a precipice on the south side of it, containing a cave
known to Christians as Jeremiah’s Grotto, from the tradition that
Jeremiah lived in it and composed his Lamentations there. When this
knoll is looked at from the south-east, especially from the southern
shoulder of the Mount of Olives, it appears to many observers to bear
a striking resemblance to a huge skull. As long ago as 1871, Mr Fisher
Howe of Brooklyn proposed the identification, in a little book called
“The True Site of Calvary,” published in New York.[48] Dr Chaplin and
Major Conder have given additional probability to it by bringing into
prominence the Jewish tradition which regards this knoll as the place
of public execution. When the death was by stoning, the condemned
person was hurled from the top of the cliff, which is about 50 feet
high, and if he was not killed by the fall, stones were cast at him
till he died. The place was called the House of Stoning, and Christian
tradition has regarded it as the place of the martyrdom of Stephen.
The circumstance that Jesus Christ was put to death in the Roman
manner, being crucified and not stoned, makes little difference to the
argument for the site of Calvary, since there is no reason to suppose
that Jerusalem possessed two places of execution. It may be added that
the surface of the knoll is now used as a Mohammedan burial ground;
and this may also have been its character in Jewish times. About 200
yards west of the Grotto, Conder made the interesting discovery of an
indisputably Jewish tomb judged to belong to the centuries immediately
preceding the Christian era. It would be bold to hazard the suggestion
that this is the very tomb in which the body of Christ was laid--the
new tomb in the garden belonging to Joseph of Arimathea--yet its
position so near the old place of execution is certainly remarkable.
“Thus,” says Conder, “to ‘a green hill far away, beside a city wall,’
we turn from the artificial rocks and marble slabs of the monkish
chapel of Calvary.”
[_Authorities and Sources_:--“Tent Work.” Major Conder. “The
Recovery of Jerusalem.” Colonels Warren and Wilson. “Sinai
and Palestine.” Dean Stanley. “Walks about Jerusalem.” W.
H. Bartlett. “Quarterly Statements of Palestine Exploration
Fund.”]