CHAPTER VI.

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 COENACULUM--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:

HIC REX (SAN)CTUS SUDAVIT SANGUINEM...

SEPE MORABATUR DU C...

MI PATER SI VIS TRANSFER

CALICEM ISTU A ME.

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.