Chapter XXV: Appendix: The Position of the Sacred Sites

There are very many difficulties in the way of a reconstruction of the City of Herod. The course of the second and third walls, the position of Antonia, and even that of the Temple itself, have been made the subject of very keen and bitter controversy; and, coming to later times, the site of Constantine’s buildings on and round the Holy Sepulchre has been assigned to two positions. Without attempting to go thoroughly into the question, which would not only take too much space, but would give this volume a character quite foreign to our purpose, let us only state the ground taken up as to the two chief sites only, that of the Temple and that of the Holy Sepulchre.

Everyone has seen plans of the modern city. The eastern side is mainly occupied by what is called the Haram Area, a four-sided space surrounded by vast walls, which are, in some places, buried a hundred feet deep in _débris_. One only of its angles is a perfect right angle, that at the south-west corner. In the middle is a platform constructed round a rough rock, projecting above the surface; in the rock is a cave. Above it is the Kubbet-es-Sakhrah—the Dome of the Rock—an octagonal building of very great beauty. Along the southern wall are various mosques and praying places, the most conspicuous being the Jámi‘-el-Aksa. Tradition has always assigned to the platform in the centre the site of Solomon’s and Herod’s Temples, but Mr. Fergusson, followed by Messrs. Lewin, Thrupp, and others, places the Temple in the south-west corner, measuring off six hundred feet from each angle to get its limits. We have thus, without considering minor points of difference, two sites for the Temple.

The so-called Church of the Holy Sepulchre is situated in the western part of the city, north of what is now called Mount Zion. There, according to the voice of tradition, were erected the buildings of Constantine, and there has existed, ever since, the cave which Christians have reverenced as the Sepulchre in which our Lord lay.

Mr. Fergusson maintains, on the other hand, that the Dome of the Rock is a building erected by Constantine to cover the Sepulchre of our Lord, and that the cave in the rock is the Sepulchre itself. To support this he endeavours to prove that the rock was not enclosed by the city walls at the time of the crucifixion; that the cave may very well have been a tomb: and that, independent of all argument from architecture, the description of historians and pilgrims accord with his position of the church, up to the end of the tenth century, over the rock in the Haram Area. And at some period, most probably after the demolition by Hakem in 969, the Christians abandoned the old site, and collected money to build a new church on the present site, which they pretended was the real site.

There are three ways of considering the question: by excavation, by history, and by arguments derived from a study of the architecture. For the first, Captain Warren is the only person who has excavated, on a scale of sufficient magnitude to produce results which bear upon the question at all. We subjoin a few of his results and opinions, with one or two brief explanatory remarks:

(1.) He has made a contour map of This makes the altar of
the whole hill on which the Haram Solomon’s Temple, provided
Area stands. From this, a most that was in the south-west
important contribution to the angle, some forty feet below
topographical question, it the present surface. But was
appears that the hill was, much not the altar on the
as Josephus describes it, steep threshing-floor of Araunah?
and almost precipitous. From the Further, the threshing-floors
top of the rock to the lowest of Syria are now about the
point in the south wall, a tops of high places, open to
distance of seven hundred feet, the four winds, and not on
there is a dip of one hundred and slopes, particularly steep
fifty feet, i.e., one in five. slopes.

(2.) He thinks that the east wall By Mr. Fergusson’s theory, the
is the most ancient, and the east wall is more modern than
south-west angle a later the west; but see, below, the
addition, probably of Herod. His evidence of Josephus, p. 5.
opinion is principally founded on
the masonry of the stones laid
bare at the foundations.

(3.) He has found what he thinks This wall, in Mr. Fergusson’s
was the old Ophel wall, running plan, springs from the Triple
from the south-east angle round Gate.
the ridge of the hill.

(4.) He has examined the Triple
Gate for remains of the eastern
wall _and finds none_.

(5.) He has found what have been Would Phœnician characters
pronounced by an eminent have been used by Herod’s
authority to be Phœnician workmen?
characters at the south-east and
north-east angles.

(6.) He has found on the If Mr. Fergusson is correct,
north-side of the platform of the these may be remains of the
Dome of the Rock certain Church of Justinian. But they
foundations, the remains of some may just as well prove to be
older building. But as yet no part of the foundations of the
further examination of the arches Temple.
then discovered has been
possible.

(7.) He discovered the actual The foundations of the wall
remains of the great bridge which were found to cross a
crossed the valley at the carefully constructed older
south-west corner. aqueduct. Now if the west wall
was Solomon’s, who built the
aqueduct? It must have been
either David or the Jebusites,
and one always imagines that
before Solomon’s time there
were few buildings or
constructions, if any, in
Jerusalem; certainly not
aqueducts.

(8.) Jar handles were found at Of course no direct inference
the south-east corner with can be drawn from the finding
inscriptions in Phœnician of anything small below the
character of the same period as surface. Tobacco pipes were
the Moabite stone. found thirty or forty feet
below the surface, but no one
has concluded therefrom that
the kings of Israel smoked
tobacco.

(9.) He thinks that “Solomon’s If this is so, no argument can
Stables” are “a reconstruction rest upon the manifest
from the floor upwards, and it is inability of the vaults as
probable from the remains of an they now are to support the
arch described by Captain Wilson Royal Cloister.
at the south-east angle, that the
original vaulting was of a much
more solid and massive
character.”

Most of these results and opinions, it will be found, weigh very heavily in favour of the traditional view. At the same time an opinion may always be wrong.

II. Let us pass on to the evidence given by history.

The only historical evidence we can rely on as to the actual site of the Temple, on which subject little information can be found in the Bible itself, is to be obtained from Josephus. We refer to three passages:

(1.) Antiq. viii., 3, § 9.

“When Solomon had filled up great Solomon, therefore, following
valleys with earth, and had the practice common to all
elevated the ground four hundred nations, built his temple in
cubits, he made it to be on a such a place, that it should
level with _the top of the occupy a commanding position,
mountain on which the Temple was and should be an object of
built_, and by this means the mark for the surrounding
outmost temple, which was exposed country.
to the air, _was even with the
Temple itself_.”

(2.) Bell. Jud., v., ch. 5, § 1.

“Now this temple was built upon a This is exactly confirmatory
strong hill. At first the _plain of the preceding. It proves
at the top was hardly sufficient that Josephus, and therefore
for the holy house and the the Jews, believed the altar,
altar_, for the ground about it _wherever it really was_, to
was very uneven, and like a be the top of the hill.
precipice; but when King Solomon, See, however, above, Capt.
who was the person that built the Warren’s results, No. 1.
Temple, had built a wall to it on
its east side, there was then
added one cloister, founded on a
bank cast up for it, and in the
other parts the holy house stood
naked; but in after ages, the
people added new banks, and the
hill became a larger plain. They
then broke down the wall on the
north side,and took in as much as
sufficed afterwards for the
compass of the entire Temple.”

(3.) Antiq. xx., ch. 9, § 7

“They persuaded Agrippa to This evidence proves that a
rebuild the eastern cloisters. wall was built _before_ the
These cloisters belonged to the time of Herod, and
outer court, _and were situated traditionally by Solomon, _in
in a deep valley_, and had walls a deep valley_ east of the
that reached four hundred cubits Temple. By reference to Capt.
[in length], and were built of Warren’s contour map, it will
square and very white stones, the be observed that by no
length of each of which stones possibility can this be stated
was twenty cubits, and their of a wall starting from the
height six cubits. This was the Temple gate.
work of King Solomon, who first
of all built the entire Temple.
But King Agrippa, who had the
care of the Temple committed to
him by Claudius Cæsar,
considering that it is easy to
demolish any building, but hard
to build it up again, and that it
was particularly hard to do it to
those cloisters, which would
require a considerable time, and
great sums of money, he denied
the petitioners their request
about that matter.”

Next, let us take the historical evidence from Eusebius downwards, as to the site of the Sepulchre. We adduce the principal passages which bear on the question.

First comes Eusebius. His evidence we have given in full (p. 57). It seems to us to amount to this:—

Constantine, taking down a temple to Venus which had been, according to tradition, built over the site of the Holy Sepulchre, and clearing away the earth, found a tomb, cut in the rock, still remaining. His workmen immediately concluded that this could be no other than the tomb of our Lord. He surrounded it with pillars and decorations. In front of it, or round about it, he made a level place. On the east side of the level place he built a magnificent church, the Basilica of the Martyrion, _the only church_ which he erected at all. In front of this church was an open market-place. Market-places, it may be remarked, are always in the middle of towns, not on the outside.

Eusebius is contemporary with the event, and writes as if he actually witnessed the building of the church and the decoration of the tomb. His evidence is therefore of the highest importance; and from him it would appear that Constantine _built no church over the Sepulchre at all_.

We come next to the accounts left behind by pilgrims and others. First in order comes the Bordeaux pilgrim, who was in Jerusalem while Constantine’s buildings were being erected. His account is as follows:—

“Also to you going out into Jerusalem, to ascend Sion, on the left hand and down below in valley by the wall in the pool which is called Siloam.... In the same way Sion is ascended, and then appears the place where was the house of Caiaphas the priest; and the column is still there at which they beat Christ with scourges. But within, inside the Sion wall, is seen the place where David had his palace, and [where were] seven synagogues, which once were there, [but] one only remains [standing], for the rest are ploughed up and sowed over, as Isaiah the prophet hath said. Thence, in order to go outside the wall, to those going to the Neapolitan gate, on the right hand, down in the valley, are walls where was the house or prætorium of Pontius Pilate. There our Lord was heard before He suffered. But on the left hand is the hill of Golgotha, where the Lord was crucified. Thence about a stone’s throw is the crypt where His body was placed, and (from which) He rose again on the third day. There, lately, by order of Constantine, a Basilica has been built, that is, a church of wonderful beauty,” &c., &c., &c.

(2.) St. Cyril. Fourth century.[82]

“The cleft (or entrance) which was at the door of the Salutary Sepulchre, was hewn out of the rock itself, as is customary here in the front of sepulchres. For now it appears not, the outer cave having been hewn away for the sake of the present adornment;[83] for before the sepulchre was decorated by royal seal, there was a cave in the face of the rock.”[84]

Footnote 82:

Taken from Williams’ ‘Holy City,’ vol. ii., p. 80, and p. 172.

Footnote 83:

Can this remark apply to the rock, rough and unshapen, in the Dome
of the Rock? See Williams’ ‘Holy City,’ vol. ii.

Footnote 84:

It may be observed on this passage that the so-called Tomb of
Absalom, as has been discovered by M. Clermont Ganneau, was
originally a cave, but the rock has been cut away on all sides
from it, so that it now stands out like a built monument.

(3.) Antoninus Martyrus gives the following facts:—

“From the monument to Golgotha is eighty paces,” _i.e._, about two hundred feet. But between Siloam and Golgotha is a distance of about a mile.

(4.) Antiochus the Monk. A.D. 630.

Modestus ... templa Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, quæ quidem barbarico igni conflagrarunt, in sublime erigit omni prorsus digna veneratione, puta ædes Calvariæ ac Sanctæ Resurrectionis; domum insuper dignam omni honore venerandæ crucis, quæ mater ecclesiarum est.[85]

Footnote 85:

See Williams’ ‘Holy City,’ ii., 263.

(5.) Arculf. A.D. 695.

Bishop Arculf, returning from pilgrimage to the Holy Land to his bishopric in France, was wrecked and cast away in the Hebrides, whither contrary winds had carried the vessel. He was hospitably received by Adamnanus, the Abbot of Iona, and beguiled the winter evenings by narrating his adventures in Palestine, and describing the sacred sites. The abbot wrote down his account, and sent copies of it to different parts of England. Bede gives an abridgment. Arculf also made a plan of the Church of the Sepulchre, which has come down to our times.

“The Church of the Holy Sepulchre ... is supported by twelve stone columns of extraordinary magnitude. In the middle space is a round grotto (tegurium) cut in the rock itself, about a foot and a half higher than a man of full stature, _in which nine men could stand and pray_.[86] The entrance of the grotto is on the east side; on the north side, within, is the tomb of our Lord, hewn out of the rock, seven feet in length, and raised three feet above the floor. Internally the stone of the rock remains in its original state, and still exhibits the mark of the workman’s tools. To this round church, which is called the Anastasis, that is, the Resurrection, adjoins on the right side the square church of the Virgin Mary, and to the east of this another church of great magnitude is built on the spot called in Hebrew Golgotha, from the roof of which there is hung by ropes a great brazen wheel with lamps....”

And in another place, “In that famous place where was formerly the splendidly-built temple, in the neighbourhood of the eastern wall, the Saracens have erected a quadrangular house of prayer, ... which house is able to contain about three thousand men at once.”

Footnote 86:

The cave of the Sakhra contains an area of five hundred square
feet; certainly one could hardly expect a writer having this area
in his mind to say that it could only contain nine men.

(6.) Willibald. A.D. 765.[87]

The Sepulchre had been cut out of the rock: and the rock itself stands out above the ground, and is square at the bottom and grows pointed at the top. On its summit is the Cross of the Sepulchre; and thereupon is built a beautiful house; and on the eastern side in that stone of the Sepulchre is a gate by which men enter within to pray; and there is within the couch on which lay the body of the Lord.

Footnote 87:

Given in Fergusson’s ‘Jerusalem,’ p. 160, and in Bonney’s ‘Holy
Places,’ p. 23.

(7.) Bernhard the Wise. A.D. 807. This account agrees with
Bernhard[88] describes the Arculf’s. It is difficult to
group, as of “four churches fit these churches into the
connected together by walls, that Haram Area. Building was
is to say, one in the east, which always going on, which
has Mount Calvary: and one in the accounts for the difference
place in which the Cross of the between this story and that of
Lord was found, which is called Willibald’s.
the Basilica of Constantine:
another to the south, and a
fourth to the west, in the middle
of which is the sepulchre of the
Lord.... Between these four
churches is a Paradise without a
roof, the walls of which shine
with gold, and the pavement with
precious marble. In the midst of
it is an inclosure of four
chains, which proceed from the
aforesaid four churches, and in
it said to be the centre of the
world.”

Footnote 88:

Williams’ ‘Holy City,’ ii., 264.

With a very few trifling exceptions, which may be found enumerated in the ‘Bible Atlas,’ p. 73, the whole voice of writers since the tenth century is clearly and unmistakably in favour of the present site.

We must not omit to notice the opinion of Mr. Lewin, that the Dome of the Rock was originally the Temple of Jupiter, which Dion Cassius tells us was built on the site of Herod’s Temple. But he goes on to suppose that Hadrian was deceived as to the real situation of the Temple, a thing which seems to us impossible. The foundations which the Mohammedans found when they began to build, may very well have been those of the Temple of Jupiter, and many of the old pillars may have been used for the new Dome. The destruction of the Temple was probably due to Chosroes, who clearly left nothing standing at all. It may, however, have been destroyed by the pious zeal of the Christians.

So far therefore, as the historical evidence goes, it appears to us that the following facts come out with great clearness.

(1.) Josephus, and therefore the Jews generally, believed that Solomon’s temple was built on the highest part of the hill, the ground being afterwards raised artificially.

(2.) Herod’s temple was built, with greater magnificence, in the same spot.

(3.) Hadrian built a temple to Jupiter on the Temple Hill.

(4.) Julian attempted to rebuild the temple itself from its old foundations. Did he, to effect this object, first destroy the Temple of Jupiter? If not, who did?

(5.) For four centuries after this the place remained a receptacle for filth of all kinds, but not forgotten.

(6.) Omar erected a small mosque in front of it (p. 76).

(7.) ‘Abd el Melik and his successors repaired the whole Masjid (the Haram Area), built the Mosque el Aksa, and the Dome of the Rock (p. 79).

(8.) The Crusaders called the Dome of the Rock, _Templum Domini_, the Temple of the Lord, to distinguish it from the Mosque el Aksa, which they called _Templum Solomonis_, the Palace of Solomon.

With regard to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, we have the following data furnished us.

(1.) Constantine decorated the cave, and erected a magnificent Basilica over the site of the Crucifixion.

(2.) All Constantine’s buildings were destroyed by Chosroes; and rebuilt, after a fashion, by Modestus, with the assistance of John Eleemon, Patriarch of Alexandria.

(3.) The Mohammedans at the taking of the city spared the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

(4.) Hakem ordered the destruction of the church. This was done, and collections were made in every part of the Christian world to rebuild it.

(5.) This church was burned down in 1808.

With regard to the discrepancies in the accounts given by pilgrims, and the impossibility of completely harmonizing their descriptions with any theory of sites, this may be remarked: Too much stress must not be laid upon the accuracy or inaccuracies of stories told by early travellers. Why should we look for accuracy in the narrative of a pilgrimage spent in a state of mental _exaltation_, of which we cold-blooded Christians can have no possible idea? When the pilgrim, arrived at the goal of his journey, was crawling on his knees from site to site, praying and praising, abandoning himself to all the emotions which the memories of the places evoked, was it a time to pull out the measuring tape and to count the paces?

To sum up, next, the historical evidence as regards the Dome of the Rock.

(1.) When Mohammedan writers speak of the Masjid el Aksa, they mean, not the Mosque el Aksa, but the whole Haram Area, including all the oratories, mosques, minarets, &c.

(2.) All these were built, as has been related, chap. IV., by ‘Abd el Melik.

(3.) The Dome of the Rock is only a supplementary building (see p. 83).

(4.) When the pulpit, the ‘kiblah,’ &c., of the Masjid el Aksa is spoken of, we must refer it to the Jami‘ el Aksa.

The Haram Area, when Omar visited it first, presented an aspect somewhat similar to what it has at present, so far as its outward walls, dimensions, and general level are concerned. In the centre was the rock, where, as everybody knew, had been the Temple. This was covered with rubbish and filth. And round the rock, and about it, were certain old foundations, most likely those of Hadrian’s Temple to Jupiter, possibly those of the Temple of Herod. Along the south wall were extensive ruins. At the south-east angle lay arches and substructures overthrown; and further west the ruins of a Christian church, most probably that of Justinian’s church, now the Jami‘ el Aksa. All these substructures were repaired by the Mohammedans, the position of the walls being, naturally, retained. Then, being desirous of building a dome over the Sacred Rock, ‘Abd el Melik issued letters and collected money. He first designed and built a small dome, the same which is now called the Cubbet es Silsilah, for a treasury. He was so pleased with the work that he ordered his great dome to be built on the same model. The Dome of the Rock must not be compared with other mosques, because it is not one, and was never meant for one, but it may advantageously be compared with other _welis_, or Mohammedan oratories. Therefore no argument can be drawn from what would be an exceptional shape for a mosque.

It must be distinctly understood that Arabic historians are as clear and explicit as to the building of this splendid dome as we should be over the building of St. Paul’s by Christopher Wren; and that in the account given by us (p. 79 _et seq._) no single sentence is inserted for which there is not full authority in the Arabic historians.

The third and last method of argument is from architecture. History may be misinterpreted. It may even purposely deceive. But architecture cannot lie. Within limits, superior and inferior, the date of a building can be assigned to it. These limits approach each other more nearly as we come to modern times. Architects find no difficulty, for instance, in distinguishing buildings of the fifteenth from those of the sixteenth century. But the limits recede from each other as we go back. Therefore it is that this is an argument, as concerns the Holy Sepulchre, which can only be used by hands of the greatest experience. Nor ought any conclusion to be generally accepted by the world until it has been acceded to by a majority of that small number of architects competent to judge. Mr. Fergusson has written on the architecture of the Dome of the Rock; his conclusions however have not met with the approval of authorities, such as Professor Willis, or the Count de Vogüé, of equal rank with himself. Until architects agree, then, surely we have nothing to rest on but the historical evidence.

INDEX.

Abu Bekr, 66 Abu ’l Casím, 431 Abu ’l Faraj, 430 Abu ’l Fath Nasr, 431 Abu Ishak, 428 Abu Obeidah, 70, 423 Abu Saíd Barkúk, 435 Abu Táher, 95 Abúdat ibn es Sámit, 424 Abyssinians, 475 Acre, 367, 391, 406, 464 Adana, 166 Adhémar, 144, 145, 171, 173, 175 Ælia Capitolina, 54 Afdhal, 196, 330 Agrippa, chap. i. Akiba (Rabbi), 51 Albinus, 8 Alexandria surrenders to Shirkoh, 307; taken by Amaury, 308 Alexis Comnenus, chap. vi. Alice of Antioch, 253, 261 Alimi, El, 438 Al Imám es Shafi, 429 Amaury, King, chap. xiv. Amaury de Lusignan, 444 Andrew’s Crusade, 451 Anselm, vision of, 178 Antioch, siege of, 170 Antoninus, 118 Arabs, their character and arts, 91 Armenians, 475 Arm of Ambrose, loss of, 207 Arnold, 176, 185, 216 Arnulphus, 118 Ascalon, 107, 287, 408 Ashraf Barsebai, Sultan, 435 —— Catibai, Sultan El, 439 —— Einál, Sultan El, 438 —— Shaban, Es Sultan, 434 Assassins, murder of messenger, 319; sect of, 322 Assises de Jerusalem, 202

Babain, battle of, 307 Baghi Seyan, 170 Baldwin I., chap. viii., 166, 201 —— II., chap. ix. —— III., chap. xi., 269 —— IV., chap. xiii. —— V., 343 Baldwin du Bourg, 225, 231, and chap. ix. Balian of Ibelin, 352 Barcochebas, 52 Battle of Lake Huleh, 292 Bedawín in Jerusalem, 441 Beirût, attempt on, 413 Bellál ibn Rubáh, 424 Benjamin of Tudela, 328 Berenice, 14 Bernard, 277 Bertram of Tripoli, 227 Bertrand de Blanqueford, 310 Bether, 53 ——, identification of, 54 Beyrout, 10 ——, taking of, 228 Bir el Warakah (Well of the Leaf), 421 Bishop’s Pilgrimage, 136 Blanchegarde, 267 Bohemond, 156, 224 Bordeaux Pilgrim, 116 Burham-ed-dín, Sheik, 437 Burzíyeh, castle of, 395

Cadam es Sheríf, 419 Cadhi of Jerusalem, 437 Cæsarea, 7, 16, 179, 219 Calaun, Es Sultan, 434 Caliph of Cairo, 305 Carmathians, the, 95 Carrier pigeons, 401 Cestius Gallus, 10; defeat of, 17 Chain, ordeal of the, 420 Charlemagne, 123 Chiefs of First Crusade, 135 Children’s Crusade, 448 Chosroes takes Jerusalem and destroys Church of Holy Sepulchre, 63 Christians of city imprisoned, 441 Claudius Felix, 6 Clermont, Council of, 144 Cœnaculum, 436 Coloman, King, chap. vi. Completion of Temple, 9 Conrad of Tyre, 367 Constance of Antioch, 288 Constantine builds Basilica, 59; decrees against Jews, 60 Copts, 475 Cruelty of Christians, 404, 406 Crusades, time ripe for, 169 Crusaders, return of, 199 Cubbet el Míráj, 420 Cuspius Fadus, 3

Dagobert, 201, 214, 216, 217, 222 Damascus, siege of, 283 Damietta, 452 ——, Greek fleet at, 315 Darúm, capture of, 411 Dhaher Chakmak, El Melik, 435 ——, El Melik el, 433 Dhia-ed-Dín, 432 Dome of the Rock, erection of, 79; repair of, 83, 93; inscription in, 86; not a mosque, 85 Druzes, their teaching, 106

Earthquake in Palestine, 316 Eastern Cloisters, 9 Edessa, fall of, 272 Edgar Atheling, 155 Edrei, 273 Effects of Christian occupation, 245 El Adhed, 332 El Arish, 233 El Emád, 387 El Ghazálí, 432 Eleanor, Queen, 281 Emico, 151 End of the world expected, 133 Es Sirát, Bridge of, 422 Eusebius, 57, _et seq._ Eustace de Bouillon, 237 —— Garnier, 239 Ezz-ed-dín, 438

Fair of September, 127 Fakhr-ed-dín, 456 Fálek-ed-dín, 411 Famine in Egypt, 445 —— in city, 439 Fatemite Caliphs, 300 Festus, 8 Florus, Gessius, 10, 11, 12, 13 Foulcher de Chartres, 213 Fragrant herb, consecration of the, 427 Francis of Assisi, 458 Frederic D. of Swabia, 367 Frederick II., 453 —— Redbeard, 365 Freisingen, Bishop of, 280 Frotmond, story of, 124 Fulke, chap. x., 254 —— the Black, 133 —— de Neuilly, 445

Garnier de Grey, 211 Georgians, 476 Gessius Florus, 10 Ghars-ed-dín, 439 Godfrey, chap. vii., 154, 181 Gorgona, disaster in Valley of, 164 Gotschalk, 151 Gregory IX., 454 Guy de Lusignan, chap. xiv., 339 Guymer, 167

Hadrian, 51; builds Temple of Jupiter on site of Temple, 54 Hajj, the, 417 Hakem, el, 99, 129 Haram repaired, 442 Harûn Er Raschíd, 123 Helena, Life of, 55; Invention of the Cross, 56 Henry of Champagne, 367, 369, 443 Heraclius, 64, 67, 68 —— the Patriarch, 341 Hisam-ed-dín, 438 Holy Fire, miracle of, 216 Holy Grail, the, 219 Holy Lance, vision of the, 173; discovery of, 174 Holy Sepulchre, discovery of, 57; adornment of, 58 Hugh of Cæsarea, 304 —— of Jaffa, 263 —— Vermandois, 157, 205, 209 Humphrey de Toron, 346, 394

Ida of Austria, 209 Ilgazi, 238 Imposture of Easter fire, 474 Innocent III., 445 Interdicts in Palestine, 290

Jamí-en-Nisá, 421 Jerome, 114 Jerusalem, Repair of the walls, 410 —— Siege of, by Titus, chap. ii. —— Siege and fall of, 354 —— Taking of, by Saladin, 385 Jesus, son of Ananus, 25 Jews, heroism of, 44 Jocelyn, 239, 241, 260 —— II., 271 John de Brienne, 446, 452 —— Comnenus, 265 —— of Gischala, chap. ii. Josephus, chap. ii Judas the Galilæan, 3 Julian, attempts to rebuild the Temple, 61

Ka‘abeh, the, desertion of, 96 Khalit ibn el Walíd, 424 Kharezmians, 459 Khotbah of Muhiy-ed-dín, 388 King, choice of, 191 Knights Hospitallers, foundation of, 247 —— Templars, foundation of, 249 Kokeb, capture of, 397

Lietbert, 135 Longsword, William, 337 Louis VII., chap. x. —— IX., 461

Macám en nebé, 421 Macarias, 135 Maghárah, the, 419 Manahem, 15 Manners of the Syrian Christians, 295 Maria of Constantinople, 309 Masjid el Aksa, 75, 381 Mejír-ed-dín, 439 Milan, Bishop of, 206; his army entirely destroyed, 207 Milicent, 263, 270, 293 Milo de Plancy, 336 Moazzem, El Melik el, 433 Modern city, chap. xix. —— native Christians, 473 —— Jews of Jerusalem, 476 Mohammedan beliefs, 422 —— pilgrims, chap. xvii. Mohammed ibn Karrám, 430 ——, Sultan, 434 Montferrat, assassination of Marquis of, 369, 410 Montreal, capture of, 302 Mount Tarsus, passes of, 169

Nahr el Casb, battle of, 407 Nasir-ed-dín, 438 Nasír Farj, Sultan, 435 Naval defeat of Mohammedans, 392 Nero, 8 Nevers, Duke of, 208; defeat of, 209 —— Count of, 309 Nicæa, battle of, 153; siege of, 162 Nicephorus Phocas, 97, 128 Nicolas, preacher, 447 Nûr-ed-dín, 284, 292, 294, 301, 303, 309, 319, 327 Nuseiríyeh, doctrines of the, 425

Odolric, 132 Omar, Caliph, 68, _et seq._ Ordeal by fire, 177 Order of St. Lazarus, 247

Pancrates, 168 Paula and Eudoxia, 114 Penances, 446 Peregrinationes, majores et minores, 121 Peter the Hermit, 141, and throughout chap. vi. Philip Augustus, 365 —— of Flanders, 337 Pilgrim’s Progress, The, 118 —— service, the, 120 Pilgrimage, passion for, 113 Plague in Jerusalem, 441 Pons of Tripoli, 265 Population of Jerusalem, 23 Porphyry, 114 Position of sacred sites, _Appendix_ Pyrrhus, 171

Rabbinical Law, 48 Rains at Jerusalem, 440 Ramleh, 179, 220 Raymond, grand master of Hospitallers, 289 —— of Plaisance, 134 —— Poitiers, 262 —— Toulouse, 155, 198, 200, 206, 225 Relics, finding of, 126, _et passim_ Renaud de Chatillon, 288, 289, 291, 339, 371, 380 —— of Sidon, 398 Renegades, story of, at Cyprus, 403 Richard Cœur de Lion, chap. xv., and 404 —— of St. Vitou, 135 —— of Cornwall, 459 Robert of Flanders, 158, 172, 190 —— Normandy, 155, 171 —— Orleans, 130 Roger of Antioch, 230 Russian pilgrims, 475 Rutebeuf, 462

Safiyah bint Hai, 429 Sakhrah, Mohammedan belief concerning, 419 —— purification of, by Saladin, 388 Saladin, 319, 338, 347, 350, 365, chap. xvi. Saladin’s holy war, 377 Samaritans, 5, 62 Second Crusade, 277 Seif-ed-dín, 358, 404 Selman el Farsí, 427 Sepulchre, Church of the, destroyed by Chosroes, 64; rebuilt by Modestus, 64; by Thomas, 93; destroyed by Hakem, 103 Shakíf, fortress of, 397 Sharafál, 437 Shawer, 301, 311, 313 —— and Dhargam, 301 Sheddád ibn Aus, 427 Shehab-ed-dín, 439 Sherf-ed-dín, 439 Shírkoh, 312 Sicarii, 6 Sigard of Norway, 228 Simon Ben Gioras, chap. ii. Sophronius, 72 Stephanus, 5 Stephen of Blois, 155, 172, 205 ——, Count of Perche, 292 Sufyan eth Thori, 429 Súkel Marifah, 421 Sybille, 337, 339, 367, chap. xiv. Sylvester converts the Jews, 60

Tancred, 157, 179, 225 Tell es Siyásíyeh, 399 Templars, defeat of, 348 Theodora of Constantinople, 293 Theudas, 4 Thierry of Flanders, 266 Thomas (patriarch) rebuilds Church of Sepulchre, 93 Tiberias, battle of, 350, 378 Tiberius, Alexander, 4 Tithe of Saladin, 363 Titus: his army, 19; number of, 20, 21; besieges Jerusalem, chap. ii. Toghrul Beg, 109 Tomb of David, 436 Tours, Council of, 458 Trajan, revolt under, 49 Tripoli, 226 Truce between Saladin and Richard, 414 True Cross, Invention of, 56; discovery of piece of, 195 —— loss of, 381 Tutush, 111 Tyre, 243 —— siege of, 393

Umm el Kheir, 429

Ventidius Cumanus, 4, 5 Vespasian in Galilee, 17; taxes the Jews, 49

Walter the Penniless, 148 Walter of Cæsarea, 263 William of Cerdagne, 226 Willibald, 123

Yaghmúri, El, 435 Yarmúk, battle of, 69

Zanghi, 253, 262, 265, 270, 272, 330 Zidugdi, 438 Zimisces, 97, 129 Ziráyeh, the, 417

LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET
AND CHARING CROSS.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transcriber’s Note

The transliteration of Arabic words proved difficult to render, particularly with respect to multiple diacritical marks. The printer seemed somewhat undecided about how best to represent the hamza (ʿ) and ayn (ʾ). For example, <img class="inline" src="images/coran.png" height="18" alt="coran" />, <img class="inline" src="images/daidedoat.png" height="18" alt="dai̔ ed doat" />, or <img class="inline" src="images/eshkaas.png" height="18" alt="Eshka‘as" />, and sometimes omitting them (e.g. <img class="inline" src="images/shafiite.png" height="18" alt="Shafi‘íte" /> = ‘Shafiíte’ or ‘Shafiite’ for ‘Shafi‘íte’). They are rendered here as left and right single quotes. Where the mark is printed atop a letter, in mid-word, it is inserted to the left. This avoids a number of unacceptable approximations, e.g., where that hamza appears atop a Latin i, as in <img class="inline" src="images/daidedoat.png" height="18" alt="dái̔ ed do‘át" />, where the dot is retained in the italic form used in the text (_dái̔_)

The page reference (p. 585) for Saladin’s taking of Jersulem is incorrect. It has been corrected to p. 385.

Other errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original. The following issues should be noted, along with the resolutions.

127.19 for dy[e]ing. Inserted.

138.12 but instead of helping Afsi[s/z] Replaced.

160.32 occupied by the caliphat[e] of Cordova Added.

179.9 the time was gone by fo[t/r] negotiation Replaced.

226.33 The next important place attac[h/k]ed Replaced.

239.3 allowed to d[e/i]sperse in various directions Replaced.

283.19 make themselves masters of the position[,/.] Replaced.

331.18 Shaw[a/e], as perfidious as he was ambitious Replaced.

343.1 religion, a famil[i]ar thing, Inserted.

353.14 Guy had taken it all[.] Added.

383.22 Saladin next attacked Beir[u/ú]t Replaced.

383.28 While he was at Beir[u/ú]t Replaced.

389.1 leaving an empty space between;[”] Removed.
Prob.
spurious.

400.2 the Grand Master of the Templars[,/.] Added.

473.18 called the House of St. Mark[,/.] Replaced.