I. THE PLACE ITSELF. The arguments if arguments they can be called for and against the identity of the "Salem" of Melchizedek (Gen. xiv. 18) with Jerusalem — the "Salem" of a late Psalmist (Ps. lxxvi. 2) are almost equally balanced. In favor of it are the unhesitating statement of Josephus (Ant. i. 10, 2; vii. 3, 2; B. J. vi. 10) and Eusebius (Onom. 'Iepovoaλnu), the recurrence of the name Salem in the Psalm just quoted, where it undoubtedly means Jerusalem, and the general consent in the bined, lest displeasure should be felt by either of localities of its various parts; the sites of the the two Saints at the exclusive use of one (Beresh." Holy Places" ancient and modern, etc. Rab. in Otho, Lex. Rab. s. v., also Lightfoot). Others, quoted by Reland (p. 833), would make it mean "fear of Salem," or "sight of peace." The suggestion of Reland himself, adopted by Simonis (Onom. p. 467), and Ewald (Gesch. iii. 155, note) is, “inheritance of peace," but this is questioned by Gesenius (Thes. p. 628 b) and Fürst (Handwh. p. 547 6), who prefer, the "foundation of peace." a Another derivation, proposed by the fertile Hitzig (Jesaja, p. 2), is named by the two last great scholars only to condemn it. Others again, looking to the name of the Canaanite tribe who possessed the place at the time of the conquest, would propose Jebus-salem (Reland, p. 834), or even Jebus-Solomon, as the name conferred on the city by that monarch when he began his reign of tranquillity. יְרוּ שָׁלֵם identification. On the other hand is the no less Another controversy relates to the termination of the name Jerushalaim the Hebrew dual; which, by Simonis and Ewald, is unhesitatingly referred to the double formation of the city, while reasons are shown against it by Reland and Gesenius. It is certain that on the two occasions where the latter portion of the name appears to be given for the whole (Gen. xiv. 18; Ps. lxxvi. 2) it is Shalem, and not Shalaim; also that the five places where the vowel points of the Masorets are supported by the letters of the original text are of a late date, when the idea of the double city, and its reflection in the name, would have become familiar to the Jews. In this conflict of authorities the suggestion will perhaps occur to a bystander that the original formation of the name may have been anterior to the entrance of the Israelites on Canaan, and that Jerushalaim may be the attempt to give an intelligible Hebrew form to the original archaic name, just as centuries afterwards, when Hebrews in their turn gave way to Greeks, attempts were made to twist Jerushalaim itself into a shape which should be intelligible to Greek ears, 'Iepo σoλvuà, "the holy Solyma" (Joseph. B. J. vi. 10), 'Iepòv Σαλομώνος, ο the holy place of Solomon " (Eupolemus, in Euseb. Pr. Ev. ix. 34), or, on the other hand, the curious fancy quoted by Josephus (4p. i. 34, 35) from Lysimachus - 'Iepóovλa, "spoilers of temples are perhaps not more violent adaptations, or more wide of the real mean-esting, and, if decided in the affirmative, so far ing of "Jerusalem," than that was of the original important as confirming the Scripture narrative; but does not in any way add to our knowledge of name of the city. the history of the city. The reader will find it fully examined in Rawlinson's Herod. ii. 246; Blakesley's Herod. Excursus on bk. iii. ch. 5 I. The place itself: its origin, position, and (both against the identification); and in Kenrick's physical characteristics. b The subject of Jerusalem naturally divides itself into three heads: II. The annals of the city. III. The topography of the town; the relative The question of the identity of Jerusalem with "Cadytis, a large city of Syria," "almost as large 159, iii. 5) as having been taken by Pharaoh-Necho, as Sardis," which is mentioned by Herodotus (ii. need not be investigated in this place. It is inter Egypt, ii. 406, and Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geogr. ii. 17 (both for it). a Such mystical interpretations as those of Origen, nias, viii. 16). тò пveûμa xápitos avtŵv (from and bw), or iepòv eipývns, where half the name is interpreted as Greek and half as Hebrew, curious as they are, cannot be examined here. (See the catalogues preserved by Jerome.) It is exactly the complement of πόλις Σολύμα (Pausad In this passage he even goes so far as to say that Melchizedek," the first priest of God," built there the first Temple, and changed the name of the city from Soluma to Hierosoluma. e A contraction analogous to others with which we are familiar in our own poetry; e. gr. Edin, or Edina, b Other instances of similar Greek forms given to for Edinburgh. Hebrew names are Ιεριχώ and Ἱερομάξ. c Philo carries this a step further, and, bearing in view only the sanctity of the place, he discards the Semitic member of the name, and calls it 'Iepóroλes. ƒ Winer is wrong in stating (Realwb. ii. 79) that Jerome bases this statement on a rabbinical tradition. The tradition that he quotes, in § 5 of the same Ep.. is as to the identity of Melchizedek with Shem. Nor need we do more than refer to the traditions | sible to desert the great tribe to which he belonged, if traditions they are, and not mere individual and over whom he had been reigning for seven speculations of Tacitus (Hist. v. 2) and Plutarch years. Out of this difficulty Jerusalem was the (Is. et Osir. c. 31) of the foundation of the city natural escape, and accordingly at Jerusalem David by a certain Hierosolymus, a son of the Typhon fixed the seat of his throne and the future sanctuary (see Winer's note, i. 545). All the certain infor- of his nation. mation to be gathered as to the early history of Jerusalem, must be gathered from the books of the Jewish historians alone. It is during the conquest of the country that Jerusalem first appears in definite form on the scene in which it was destined to occupy so prominent a position. The earliest notice is probably that in Josh. xv. 8 and xviii. 16, 28, describing the landmarks of the boundaries of Judah and Benja min. Here it is styled ha-Jebusi, i. e. "the Jebusite" (A. V. Jebusi), after the name of its occupiers, just as is the case with other places in these lists. [JEBUSI.] Next, we find the form JEBUS (Judg. xix. 10, 11) - "Jebus, which is Jerusalem the city of the Jebusites;" and lastly, in documents which profess to be of the same age as the foregoing we have Jerusalem (Josh. x. 1, &c., xii. 10; Judg. i. 7, &c.). To this we have a parallel in Hebron, the other great city of Southern Palestine, which bears the alternative title of Kirjath-Arba in these very same documents. It is one of the obvious peculiarities of Jerusalem but to which Professor Stanley appears to have been the first to call attention that it did not become the capital till a comparatively late date in the career of the nation. Bethel, Shechem, Hebron, had their beginnings in the earliest periods of national life but Jerusalem was not only not a chief city, it was not even possessed by the Israelites till they had gone through one complete stage of their life in Palestine, and the second the monarchy — had been fairly entered on. (See Stanley, S. & P. p. 169.) | The boundary between Judah and Benjamin, the north boundary of the former and the south of the latter, ran at the foot of the hill on which the city stands, so that the city itself was actually in Benjamin, while by crossing the narrow ravine of Hinnom you set foot on the territory of Judah.a That it was not far enough to the north to command the continued allegiance of the tribe of Ephraim, and the others which lay above him, is obvious from the fact of the separation which at last took place. It is enough for the vindication of David in having chosen it to remember that that separation did not take place during the reigns of himself or his son, and was at last precipitated by misgovernment combined with feeble shortsightedness. And if not actually in the centre of Palestine, it was yet virtually so. the ridge, the broadest and most strongly marked ridge, of the back-bone of the complicated hills which extend through the whole country from the Plain of Esdraelon to the Desert. Every wanderer, every conqueror, every traveller who has trod the central route of Palestine from N. to S. must have passed through the table-land of Jerusalem. was the water-shed between the streams, or rather the torrent-beds, which find their way eastward to the Jordan, and those which pass westward to the Mediterranean (Stanley, S. & P. p. 176)." "It was on It This central position, as expressed in the words of Ezekiel (ver. 5), "I have set Jerusalem in the midst of the nations and countries round about her," led in later ages to a definite belief that the city was actually in the centre of the earth in The explanation of this is no doubt in some the words of Jerome, "umbilicus terræ," the cenmeasure to be found in the fact that the seats of tral boss or navel of the world. (See the quotathe government and the religion of the nation were tions in Reland, Palæstina, pp. 52 and 838; Joseph. originally fixed farther north first at Shechem B. J. iii. 3, § 5; also Stanley, S. & P. p. 116.) and Shiloh; then at Gibeah, Nob, and Gibeon; At the same time it should not be overlooked but it is also no doubt partly due to the natural that, while thus central to the people of the counstrength of Jerusalem. The heroes of Joshua's try, it had the advantage of being remote from the army who traced the boundary-line which was to great high road of the nations which so frequently separate the possessions of Judah and Benjamin, passed by Palestine, and therefore enjoyed a certain when, after passing the spring of En-rogel, they immunity from disturbance. The only practicable went along the "ravine of the son of Hinnom," route for a great army, with baggage, siege-trains, and looked up to the "southern shoulder of the etc., moving between Egypt and Assyria was by Jebusite (Josh. xv. 7, 8), must have felt that to the low plain which bordered the sea-coast from scale heights so great and so steep would have fully Tyre to Pelusium. From that plain, the central tasked even their tried prowess. We shall see, when table-land on which Jerusalem stood was approached we glance through the annals of the city, that it by valleys and passes generally too intricate and did effectually resist the tribes of Judah and Simeon precipitous for the passage of large bodies. One not many years later. But when, after the death road there was less rugged than the rest that of Ishbosheth, David became king of a united and from Jaffa and Lydda up the pass of the Bethpowerful people, it was necessary for him to leave horons to Gibeon, and thence, over the hills, to the the remote Hebron and approach nearer to the bulk north side of Jerusalem; and by this route, with of his dominions. At the same time it was impos- few if any exceptions, armies seem to have apdences" (Pt. ii. 17), and is also favored by Stanley (S. & P. p. 176), is derived from a Jewish tradition, quoted by Lightfoot (Prospect of the Temple, ch. 1), to the effect that the altars and sanctuary were in Benjamin, the courts of the Temple were in Judah. a This appears from an examination of the two corresponding documents, Josh. xv. 7, 8, and xviii. 16, 17. The line was drawn from En-shemesh - probably 'Ain Haud, below Bethany to En-rogel either 'Ain Ayub, or the Fountain of the Virgin; thence it went by the ravine of Hinnom and the southern shoulder of the Jebusite the steep slope of the modern Zion; climbed the heights on the west of the ravine, and struck off to the spring at Nephtoah, probably Lifta. The other view, which is made the most of by Blunt in one of his ingenious "coinci b This is prettily expressed in a rabbinical figure quoted by Otho (Lex. p. 266): "The world is like to an eye; the white of the eye is the ocean surrounding the world; the black is the world itself ; the pupil is Jerusalem, and the image in the pupil, the Temple." years, without apparently affecting Jerusalem in and longitude 35° 18′ 30′′ East of Greenwich.a the least. It is 32 miles distant from the sea, and 18 from the Jerusalem stands in latitude 31° 46′ 35′′ North, Jordan; 20 from Hebron, and 36 from Samaria. a Such is the result of the latest observations possessed by the Lords of the Admiralty, and officially communicated to the Consul of Jerusalem in 1852 (Rob. iii. 183). To what part of the town the obser vations apply is not stated. Other results, only slightly differing, will be found in Van de Velde's Memoir, p. 64, and in Rob. i. 259. The situation of the city in reference to the rest of Palestine, has been described by Dr. Robinson in a well-known passage, which is so complete and graphic a statement of the case, that we take the liberty of giving it entire. "In several respects," says Professor Stanley, "its situation is singular among the cities of Palestine. Its elevation is remarkable; occasioned not from its being on the summit of one of the numerous hills of Judæa, like most of the towns and villages, but because it is on the edge of one of the highest "Jerusalem lies near the summit of a broad table-lands of the country. Hebron indeed is mountain ridge. This ridge or mountainous tract higher still by some hundred feet, and from the extends, without interruption, from the plain of south, accordingly (even from Bethlehem), the ap-Esdraelon to a line drawn between the south end proach to Jerusalem is by a slight descent. But of the Dead Sea and the S. E. corner of the Medifrom any other side the ascent is perpetual; and to terranean: or more properly, perhaps, it may be the traveller approaching the city from the E. or W. it must always have presented the appearance beyond any other capital of the then known world — we may say beyond any important city that has ever existed on the earth of a mountain city; breathing, as compared with the sultry plains of Jordan, a mountain air; enthroned, as compared with Jericho or Damascus, Gaza or Tyre, on a mountain fastness" (S. & P. p. 170, 171). regarded as extending as far south as to Jebel |'Arâif in the desert; where it sinks down at once to the level of the great western plateau. This tract, which is everywhere not less than from twenty to twenty-five geographical miles in breadth, is in fact high uneven table-land. It everywhere forms the precipitous western wall of the great valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; while towards the west it sinks down by an offset into a The elevation of Jerusalem is a subject of con- range of lower hills, which lie between it and the stant reference and exultation by the Jewish writers. great plain along the coast of the Mediterranean. Their fervid poetry abounds with allusions to its The surface of this upper region is everywhere height," to the ascent thither of the tribes from all rocky, uneven, and mountainous; and is moreover parts of the country. It was the habitation of cut up by deep valleys which run east or west on Jehovah, from which "he looked upon all the in- either side towards the Jordan or the Mediterrahabitants of the world " (Ps. xxxiii. 14); its kings nean. The line of division, or water-shed, between were higher than the kings of the earth" (Ps. the waters of these valleys, a term which here lxxxix. 27). In the later Jewish literature of nar- applies almost exclusively to the waters of the rainy rative and description, this poetry is reduced to season, follows for the most part the height of prose, and in the most exaggerated form. Jeru- | land along the ridge; yet not so but that the heads salem was so high that the flames of Jamnia were of the valleys, which run off in different directions, visible from it (2 Macc. xii. 9). From the tower often interlap for a considerable distance. Thus, of Psephinus outside the walls, could be discerned on the one hand the Mediterranean Sea, on the other the country of Arabia (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 3). Hebron could be seen from the roofs of the Temple (Lightfoot, Chor. Cent. xlix.). The same thing can be traced in Josephus's account of the environs of the city, in which he has exaggerated what is in truth a remarkable ravine, to a depth so enormous that the head swam and the eyes failed in gazing into its recesses (Ant. xv. 111, § 5).? In exemplification of these remarks it may be said that the general elevation of the western ridge of the city, which forms its highest point, is about 2,600 feet above the level of the sea. The Mount of Olives rises slightly above this 2,724 feet. Beyond the Mount of Olives, however, the descent is remarkable; Jericho 13 miles off-being no less than 3,624 feet below, namely, 900 feet under the Mediterranean. On the north, Bethel, at a distance of 11 miles, is 419 feet below Jerusalem. On the west Ramleh 25 miles is 2,274 feet below. Only to the south, as already remarked, are the heights slightly superior, Bethlehem, 2,704; Hebron, 3,029. A table of the heights of the various parts of the city and environs is given further on. for example, a valley which descends to the Jordan often has its head a mile or two westward of the commencement of other valleys which run to the western sea. "From the great plain of Esdraelon onwards towards the south, the mountainous country rises gradually, forming the tract anciently known as the mountains of Ephraim and Judah; until in the vicinity of Hebron it attains an elevation of nearly 3,000 Paris feet above the level of the Mediterranean Sea. Further north, on a line drawn from the north end of the Dead Sea towards the true west, the ridge has an elevation of only about 2,500 Paris feet; and here, close upon the water-shed, lies the city of Jerusalem. “Six or seven miles N. and N. W. of the city is spread out the open plain or basin round about el-Jib (Gibeon), extending also towards el-Birch (Beeroth); the waters of which flow off at its S. E. part through the deep valley here called by the Arabs Wady Beit Hanîna ; but to which the monks and travellers have usually given the name of the Valley of Turpentine, or of the Terebinth, on the mistaken supposition that it is the ancient Valley of Elah. This great valley passes along in a S. W. direction an hour or more west of Jerusalem; and a See the passages quoted by Stanley (S. & P. p. that, if bored to its foundation, the wall would pre171). b* Recent excavations at Jerusalem show that Josephus, so far from being extravagant, was almost literally exact in what he says of the height of the ancient walls. The labors of Lieut. Warren in the service of the Palestine Exploration Fund (as reported by Mr. Grove in the London Times, Nov. 11, 1867), "have established, by actual demonstration, that the south wall of the sacred enclosure which contained the Temple, is buried for more than half its depth beneath an accumulation of rubbish — probably the ruins of the successive buildings which once covered it, and sent an unbroken face of solid masonry of nearly 1,000 feet long, and for a large portion of the distance more than 150 feet in height; in other words, the length of the Crystal Palace, and the height of the transept. The wall, as it stands, with less than half that height emerging from the ground, has always been regarded as a marvel. What must it have been when entirely exposed to view? No wonder that prophets and psalmists have rejoiced in the walls' and bulwarks' of the Temple, and that Tacitus should have described it as modo arcis constructum.' See also Journal of Sa red Literature, p. 494 (January, 1868). H. some distance on his left the shallow northern part of the Valley of Jehoshaphat: and close at hand on his right the basin which forms the beginning of the Valley of Hinnom. Upon the broad and elevated promontory within the fork of these two valleys, lies the Holy City. All around are higher hills; on the east, the Mount of Olives; on the south, the Hill of Evil Counsel, so called, rising directly from the Vale of Hinnom; on the west, the ground rises gently, as above described, to the borders of the great Wady; while on the north, a bend of the ridge connected with the Mount of Olives bounds the prospect at the distance of more than a mile. Towards the S. W. the view is somewhat more open; for here lies the plain of Rephaim, finally opens out from the mountains into the PLAN OF JERUSALEM. 1. Mount Zion. 2. Moriah. 3. The Temple. 4. Antonia. 5. Probable site of Golgotha. 6. Ophel. 7. Bezetha. 8. Church of the Holy Sepulchre. 9, 10. The Upper and |