Tent Work in Palestine: A Record of Discovery and AdventureConder, C. R. (Claude Reignier)
History
Tent Work in Palestine: A Record of Discovery and Adventure
Conder, C. R. (Claude Reignier)
Palestine -- Description and travel
I may, perhaps, insist upon an indication of date connected with the
dressing of the stones, which I have never seen brought to bear on the
question. Drafted masonry, imitating that on these walls, was used by
Byzantine builders and by Crusading masons; but they never dressed their
stones in the manner in which those of the Temple are dressed. This is
distinctive and unique. It consists of a careful cross-chiselling, on
the draft, and for a depth of three inches round the margin of the
raised part of the stone--a regular “criss-cross” pattern, never found
in the later masonry. This dressing also occurs _on the stones of the
voussoirs of the great Tyropæon bridge_, an indication which I have
never seen noticed before. The bridge and the wall then are, to all
appearance, of one period; the lower courses of the wall are proved, by
excavation, to be _in situ_, and thus the existing line must, I
conclude, be referred to the time of the bridge. No one has disputed as
to when this bridge was built. Captain Warren has shown that an older
arch fell, and a pavement was made over it, before the present ruined
bridge was built; thus the present arch is generally thought to be not
earlier than Herod’s time; and hence the Haram wall is attributable,
according to the indications obtained from its masonry (as was long ago
pointed out by the Comte de Vogüé, arguing from different premises), to
the time when Herod rebuilt the work of Solomon, doubling the area
enclosed (Wars. i. 21, 1), and in part, if not altogether, “took away
the old foundations” (Ant. xv. 11, 3).
On the north other important indications exist which require careful
consideration. Josephus tells us that a tower called Baris (probably
meaning “the castle”) was built by Hyrcanus and repaired by Herod. It
was on a hill which originally joined that of Bezetha, but was severed
by an artificial trench. The fortress was re-named Antonia; it stood on
a rock fifty cubits high (B. J. v. 5, 8), and at the north-west corner
of the Temple, which it commanded, being on the “top of the hill” (B.
J. vi. 1, 5). Now there is just such a rock-fortress in the north-west
part of the Haram. It is a great scarp, with vertical faces on the south
and north, standing up forty feet above the interior court, and
separated from the north-eastern hill of Jerusalem by a ditch fifty
yards broad, in which are now the “Twin Pools”--the Bethesda of St.
Jerome. This block of rock is “the top of the hill,” and occupies a
length of 350 feet along the course of the north wall of the Haram. No
other such scarp exists in or near the enclosure of the High Sanctuary.
Can we, then, hesitate to place Antonia here?
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