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 ma.s.s 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 Wurtzburg[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 a.s.sumption, 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 pa.s.s 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 ma.s.s 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 mult.i.tude began to rejoice and praise G.o.d. 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.

G.o.dfrey 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 Galilaei; 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 pa.s.sages: "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 Galilaei 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 Galilaeans 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 a.s.serts 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 Pa.s.sover. 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 G.o.d 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 a.s.saulted the walls.

In the reign of Baldwin II. the Mohammedan chiefs with their bands a.s.sembled here with their troops in order to a.s.sault 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, cl.u.s.tered 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 t.i.tus, 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-Sherif_ 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 pa.s.s 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 Samwil_ (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 G.o.d." 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 G.o.d, 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 (_aerea 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 gla.s.s 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 gla.s.s 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 Saewulf 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 ma.s.s 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 Vogue 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 Vogue 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 Vogue 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 ma.s.s 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 Abbe 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 G.o.d 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 s.e.x 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 a.s.serts 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 G.o.d 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 Pa.s.sion. There a basilica has been built by order of Constantine[692]." Why does the Pilgrim pa.s.s 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 pa.s.sage 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 p.r.o.nounced, 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 ma.n.u.script 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 G.o.d, 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 a.s.sert 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 a.s.s tied, and a colt with her; loose them and bring them unto me.' Then the two departed and brought an a.s.s, on which the Guardian mounted, while the bystanders spread their garments and olive-branches in the way, and so the procession started for Jerusalem, chanting as they went, 'The sons of the Hebrews brought branches of olive,' and proceeded to the city." Even in the time of Quaresmius nothing remained of either the church or the village. I could wish that some of the ceremonies still performed in the Holy Sepulchre, had, like this, fallen into disuse.

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

We are told by S. John[710] that Bethany was about 15 stadia, or nearly 2 Roman miles, from Jerusalem, and the present village is that distance.

We may fairly suppose that the house of Lazarus must have been of considerable size from the allusions to it in the Gospels[711], and consequently it and the village could hardly have been destroyed without leaving some ruins to mark the spot; and therefore the tradition would be preserved until the fourth century, when monuments were erected by the Christians on the sites connected with the life of Christ. It is then only necessary to examine into the accuracy of the tradition during the first three centuries; but here the same arguments that we used in the case of the Sepulchre of Christ may be applied to Bethany, and especially to the Tomb of Lazarus. The present condition of the place may also persuade those who distrust tradition, for there are still very many ruins there, and consequently must have been more in the first ages of Christianity. If it be urged that they are the effects of the ravages of the Saracens on the work of the Crusaders, I admit the objection to be partly true, but reply that the eye can readily distinguish these from the more ancient Jewish remains. In a word, there is no other place on the eastern slope of Olivet, which so perfectly fulfils all the requisite conditions, as the present village of Bethany: and even its Arab name _El-Azirieh_ still retains that of Lazarus. The Mohammedans themselves so fully believe that this is the scene of the raising of Lazarus, that they come as pilgrims from distant countries to supplicate health for themselves and their sick children, in faith that if they touch the rock of the tomb their prayers will be granted by G.o.d. In 1859 some labourers discovered, at the distance of a few yards from the village, to the east, near the road going to the Jordan, a wall which had all the characteristics of ancient Jewish work of the age of the Herods. Its shape and position seem to indicate that it had formed part of an enclosure; the continuation of which was observed a little to the south, and also to the north-west of the Arab houses. Near it a great quant.i.ty of materials of the Herodian epoch were discovered, scattered about in the ground, with several deep cisterns entirely excavated and vaulted in the rock, full of fragments of ancient masonry. These also occur in other parts of the village. After carefully examining the boundary wall, wherever it could be found, I have arrived at the conclusion that the traditional House and Tomb of Lazarus are outside it. Thus the objection often brought against them, that they are inside the village, in opposition to the Jewish law, does not apply. For a long time past the peasants of Bethany have been accustomed to find dressed stones in their fields, which they have either broken up, in order to carry them away easily into the city, or have burnt for lime. If, then, we do not suppose the ancient village to have been there, I do not see how we can explain the presence of these remains. The eastern part of the present village occupies a portion of the old site, and the western was built when memorials were erected by the Christians over the Holy Places. Bethany is now a wretched spot, consisting of about forty cottages, built on ruins and heaps of rubbish. A short distance from the entrance to the village, on the west, is a splendid ruin, the remains of a building of considerable size, which is shewn as the House of Lazarus.

To the east of this, among the houses, is the mosque[712], and near it the Tomb of Lazarus. The houses of Martha, Mary, and Simon the Leper, are also shewn by the natives; but as these exhibit no signs of antiquity, and the first two are obviously improbable, I pa.s.s them by without further notice, to consider the Tomb of Lazarus. This, like most of the Jewish sepulchres, consists of two underground chambers, namely, a vestibule and a tomb properly so called. The latter is entirely excavated in the rock, while the former is of masonry, together with the walls of the staircase leading down to it, which dates (according to Mariti[713]) from the beginning of the seventeenth century; that is, from 1612 to 1615, when Father Angelo of Messina was Guardian of the holy mountain of Sion, and built this approach to the tomb. Mariti adds, that it was made because the ancient one was in the adjoining mosque, formerly a Christian church. With this I cannot agree, because, after examining the interior of the mosque, I have been unable to find any trace of a communication with the inside of the tomb; and in the interior of the latter there are no signs of a walled-up door, to give access to this supposed pa.s.sage. The locality has undergone so many alterations, that it is now impossible to fix the relative positions of the church and the tomb; but the former must have been different in plan and in dimensions from the small mosque, which, as I believe, retains few, if any, remains of the ancient Christian church. The tradition indicating this spot as the scene of the miracle is as early as that of Bethany itself. The Pilgrim of Bordeaux, A.D. 333, writes, "There is a crypt there, where Lazarus, whom the Lord raised, was laid." He does not allude to any building erected there by S. Helena, therefore I doubt the truth of the following statement of Nicephorus Callistus[714]: "Thence having gone on to Bethany, she erected a n.o.ble temple to Lazarus the friend of Christ. That place is two miles from Jerusalem." S.

Jerome[715] (who died A.D. 420) speaks of this tomb and of a church there, but does not say that it was built by the Empress Helena[716].

At a later period the tomb and church were seen by Antoninus of Piacenza and Arculf; the latter of whom "visited at Bethany a certain small field surrounded by a great olive-grove, on which stands a large monastery, and a large church built over the cave, from which our Lord raised up Lazarus after he had lain dead four days[717]." Bernard, the Wise[718], writes thus: "Thence we proceeded to Bethany on the descent of Mount Olivet, where is a monastery whose church marks the Tomb of Lazarus."

This place is also mentioned by Saewulf, so that tradition and local evidence bring it down to the epoch of the Latin kingdom. The tomb must have been altered by the Crusaders, whose work we recognize in the vestibule leading into the sepulchre; but we have no record of the general appearance of the exterior of the church after their restoration. We see, therefore, that an unbroken tradition has been attached to this tomb from the beginning of the Christian era to the present day.

Let us now visit the ruins of the so-called House of Lazarus, which are a short distance to the west of the tomb. All that we can distinguish here with certainty is the ruin of a square tower, the masonry of which is of the time of the Crusades. The presence of a quant.i.ty of small white tesserae encouraged me to excavate inside its walls, when I found in its foundations stones with rude rustic-work; and in removing the rubbish, saw some other stones in which were holes, apparently made to receive lead or iron clamps, to bind them together. Hence I consider that the Crusaders' building partly rests upon ancient Jewish foundations; and that it is not by any means improbable that this is the actual site of the House of Lazarus. The walls and portion of the tower now remaining are the ruins of a hospice, which was rebuilt by Queen Milisendis[719] in the first half of the twelfth century; the original building (dating from the sixth century and visited by Antoninus of Piacenza) having been destroyed by the Saracens. Milisendis obtained for this purpose the church of Bethany, and all the land belonging to it, from the Canons of the Holy Sepulchre, giving them in exchange the town of Tekoa, near Bethlehem. The deed of exchange, dated on the nones of February 1138, is preserved in the Cartulary of the Holy Sepulchre[720], and also the bull of Celestine II., A.D. 1143, confirming it[721]. The queen considering that the convent, being in a lonely situation and a considerable distance from the city, would be in danger of attack in case of war, built there with squared and dressed stones a very strong tower, containing the necessary offices, as a refuge for the nuns, until succours arrived from Jerusalem[722]. This it is whose ruins we now see.

She also amply endowed the convent, a.s.signing to it the revenues of Jericho and its dependencies, with many other gifts, recorded by William of Tyre in the pa.s.sage just cited. The same author goes on to inform us that when the work was finished, Milisendis established there a community of Benedictine nuns, presided over by an abbess, "an aged and venerable matron, of approved piety," after whose death, "returning to her (original) purpose, she placed her own sister, with the consent of the Lord Patriarch and a.s.sent of the sisterhood, at the head of the nunnery;" giving at the same time yet more gifts, such as chalices, books, and other ornaments used for ecclesiastical purposes; nor did she cease all her life according to the desire of her heart, and for the sake of her sister, whom she specially loved, to shew kindness to the place. The name of the first abbess was Matilda[723]. Juveta is mentioned as abbess of the nunnery of S. Lazarus at Bethany, in a contract for the exchange of some rents between her and the nuns of the Hospital of S. Lazarus at Jerusalem. It bears the date A.D. 1157, in the reign of Baldwin III. After the witnesses' signatures we find written, "All these things were confirmed in the presence of Queen Milisendis."

To the doc.u.ment a seal is attached mentioned by Paoli[724]. In the middle of it is the figure of a lady, partially effaced, holding against her breast a book bearing a cross. The legend is JUDITTA ABBATISSH. On the reverse is our Saviour recalling Lazarus to life, with the legend RESUCTATIO LAZARI. On the invasion of Saladin the nuns retired to S.

Jean d'Acre, and the convent was destroyed, since which period it has remained in ruins.

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

This was the boundary-line between Judah on the south and Benjamin on the north[726]. The Arabic name is _Wady er-Rabab_, the Hebrew, _Ge-Hinnom_ or _Ben-Hinnom_ (the valley of the son of Hinnom). The b.l.o.o.d.y rites of Moloch[727] and Baal gave it its evil fame, which were celebrated more especially in the place called Tophet[728]; this was, according to Jerome, the lower (eastern) part of Hinnom. S. Jerome[729]

a.s.serts that Christ was the first to use this word in the sense 'h.e.l.l;'

an application which the abominable idolatrous rites that had been enacted there rendered most appropriate. The Prophet Jeremiah frequently mentions Tophet, but one pa.s.sage is very remarkable from the manner in which its fulfilment is evident at the present day. "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that it shall be no more called Tophet, nor the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of slaughter: for they shall bury in Tophet till there be no place[730]." Now, whichever way we turn, our eyes rest on tombs, many broken as the nation that once profaned this spot: so that no one can tread these rocks heedless and unmoved.

To the south of the Valley of Hinnom is the hill, called by the Christians the Hill of Evil Counsel, because of a legend, that in a village on its western side, all trace of which has now disappeared, was a house belonging to Caiaphas; where the Priests and Pharisees a.s.sembled to compa.s.s the capture and death of Christ. Pompeius encamped upon its summit after he had taken Jerusalem[731]. The Arabs call it _Jebel el-Kubur_ (Mount of the Tombs); a most appropriate name, as it is in reality one great necropolis; now, however, inhabited by many peasants of Siloam, who have housed themselves and their crops in some of the sepulchral chambers, and converted others into cisterns. We will visit all the more interesting objects which we meet as we ascend from the Well of Job. At the bottom of a narrow trench, sloping steeply downwards, is a frontispiece[732], decorated with a triangular pediment, with a trefoil as finial, above a small doorway. On each side of this is a pilaster; these are still visible, though partly covered with soil.

The interior[733] has this peculiarity, that the arches forming the roofs of the sepulchral niches are not very nearly semicircular, but extremely depressed; and a trough-shaped cavity or sarcophagus takes the place of the shelf for the corpse; an arrangement which does not occur in the tombs on the north of the city, or in the Kidron Valley. While I was engaged in making my Plan, I found a great number of bones in the interior; and in the chamber furthest to the east four perfect skeletons, which I discovered must have been placed there a few months before. I consider these tombs, as well as the others so common in the vicinity, to be more recent than those which are found elsewhere in the neighbourhood of the city; certainly they did not exist in the time of the Jewish kings, when Tophet was considered an accursed place. I think that they were excavated during the Asmonaean period, as the prejudice against the site might by that time have diminished. The simple but careful ornamentation of these tombs, the whiteness of the surface, and the absence of certain marks on the stone, characteristic of the instruments of the earlier period, all lead me to the same conclusion.

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

On the west of this we find, after pa.s.sing Aceldama, a tomb[736], which gives us a good idea of what the Sepulchre of Jesus was formerly like.

When Constantine embraced Christianity, this hill, as well as the others, was occupied by anchorites, who lived in the tombs and caverns.