The course of the first wall as thus described by Josephus does not
appear to differ much from its course in Nehemiah’s time; and in all
essentials it seems to be the wall of David’s day, preserved upon
the old foundations. Josephus indeed states as much in the following
passage:--“Now of these three walls, the old one was hard to be taken,
both by reason of the valleys and of that hill on which it was built,
and which was above them. But besides that great advantage as to the
place where they were situated, it was also built very strong; because
David and Solomon and the following kings were very zealous about this
work.”
[Illustration: SCHICK’S LINE OF SECOND WALL.]
_The Second Wall._--The description of the second wall, given by
Josephus, is short, and may be quoted entire: “It took its beginning
from that gate which they called Gennath, which belonged to the first
wall; it only encompassed the northern quarter of the city, and reached
as far as the tower Antonia.”
The necessity for this wall arose as follows. Through the increase of
the population a suburb had sprung up, not only in the upper reach of
the Tyropœon Valley, but on the hill beyond it. On the spur of this
hill, which projected toward the Temple, stood the Akra fortress,
but north-west of the fortress the ground was high and open, and
unprotected by any deep valley. To protect this suburb it was necessary
to carry a wall across the saddleback, sweeping round from the corner
of the High Town to the north-west corner of the eastern hill; and
this was probably done as early as David’s day.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account