The Society of the Daughters of Sion bought (November, 1857) a plot of land a few yards to the north-west of the barrack[283], on which stands the north pier of the arch of the 'Ecce Homo[284];' and requested me to survey it. In December, after removing with considerable difficulty the accumulated rubbish of centuries, I came upon a small arch, close to the larger one, which from its style, masonry, and materials, evidently was part of the same building. I at once tried to examine the south side, belonging to the Kusbeck dervishes, but as in this place excavations were impossible, I was obliged to restrict myself to what appeared above ground; and found, in the line of the large arch, a fragment of an ancient wall, which from its form and position seemed to have belonged to a pier supporting an arch corresponding to the one I had discovered. Both the arches are semicircular, with a single archivolt composed of a narrow fillet, a wide ogee moulding, and a band of the same breadth, supported by a cornice, formed by two fillets, separated by an ogee moulding. In the west face of the north pier is a semicircular recessed niche, above a projecting cornice of the same width and pattern as the one just described. Early in the year 1860 I took charge of the already commenced buildings of the new convent of the Daughters of Sion, which abut upon the arch mentioned above; and consequently had an opportunity of examining the foundations of the piers, and convincing myself that both their materials and masonry are of the Roman period; because the blocks of stone, being neither rusticated nor clamped with iron or lead, are not earlier than the time of Hadrian, and are not sufficiently finished for so late an age as that of Constantine or Justinian. Some think that the large arch was built before the capture of Jerusalem by Titus; but how in that case could it have escaped the general destruction of the city, and especially of the adjoining tower Antonia, of which it was actually a part, in the opinion of those who believe that from it our Lord was shewn to the people? But would the Romans, who razed the tower and reduced the Temple and whole city to ruins, have spared this insignificant building; or would the fire have left its architectural features uninjured? The conformation of the ground itself shews us that the arch could not have been standing at that time; because, in its present position, there was then a valley or ditch, separating Moriah from Bezetha. I found the rock, supporting the piers, 18 feet below the surface (as I have before stated), and to the north and south are vaulted cisterns excavated in it, in the natural slopes of Bezetha on one side and Moriah on the other. It is therefore highly improbable that an arch would have been built in such a position with reference to the fortress.