Jerusalem Explored, Volume 1—Text: Being a Description of the Ancient and Modern City, with Numerous Illustrations Consisting of Views, Ground Plans and SectionsPierotti, Ermete
History
Jerusalem Explored, Volume 1—Text: Being a Description of the Ancient and Modern City, with Numerous Illustrations Consisting of Views, Ground Plans and Sections
Pierotti, Ermete
Jerusalem -- Antiquities; Jerusalem -- Description and travel
Starting from the Aksa the city wall goes to the south, and then turns
again to the west down to the Dung Gate. Throughout the whole of this
angle the lower part of the wall is Roman work, the upper Saracenic, of
the time of Solyman. Although this gate is evidently only a few hundred
years old, it is usually pointed out by the guides as that entered by
our Saviour, when he was brought from the garden of Gethsemane to the
house of Caiaphas. Ignorance of architecture and of the plan of the
ancient city has allowed this tradition to exist[310]. Entering, and
forcing our way through a thicket of cactus, we regain the south wall of
the Temple enclosure, whose lower parts date from the reign of Solomon.
An excavation made at the south-west angle gave, first the masonry of
Solomon, secondly that of the Crusaders, and above these that of
Solyman[311].
The ruins south of the Aksa belong to the choir of Justinian's basilica,
which was thrown down by an earthquake between the years A.D. 775 and
785. They now await the last stroke of the hand of Time to bring them to
the ground, when they evidently must injure in their fall the south wall
of the mosque; but the Mohammedan fatalists never think of averting this
by timely repairs.
The whole of the space between the walls of the city and the _Haram_ was
probably, at the time of Herod the Great, covered by the amphitheatre
erected by that king[312].
Near the south-west angle is a very remarkable fragment of an arch and
its pier, built into the _Haram_ wall. Nearly all the learned writers
who have noticed it, with the exception of the Rev. G. Williams, have
considered these remains to belong to the age either of Solomon or
Herod; I however venture to differ from them, and attribute it to
Justinian; who, when building the neighbouring basilica, may have
contemplated throwing a bridge over the valley between Moriah and Sion
to facilitate the communication between the two sanctuaries on these
hills. The work may have been left unfinished, because the plan was
either changed or found impracticable. The blocks shew none of the
characteristics of the work of Solomon or Herod, nor have they the same
marked appearance of antiquity; nor does the masonry in any respect
resemble the Jewish; the stones being laid with mortar. I cannot but
think that if either of these kings had executed a work of such
importance, the Bible and Josephus would not have passed it over in
silence. We can scarcely imagine that so vast an arch, 375 feet in span,
could have been built in those times; and if we suppose that the bridge
crossed the valley with a series of arches, then traces of the piers, or
at least of the stones that composed them, ought to be found among the
rubbish below; also there should be some remains of it on the eastern
slope of Sion; where nothing of the kind occurs. On this point I can
speak with confidence, because when the Pasha requested me to inspect
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