JERUSALEM

of the Jebuslte city, and it is one for which far leas light can be obtained from an examination of the ground than in the case of the other problem mentioned. As soon as David had established himself in his new surroundings, ills first care was to bring the ark of Jahweh into the city (2 S 6), but his desire to erect a permanent building for its reception was frustrated by Nathan the prophet (2 S 7). The site of the Temple was chosen, namely, the threshing-floor of Araunah (2 S 24") or Oman (1 Ch 2115), one of the original Jebuslte inhabitants, and preparations were made for its erection.

As soon as Solomon had come to the throne and quelled the abortive attempts of rivals, he com-menced the work of building the Temple in the second month of the fourth year of his reign, and finished it in the eighth month of his eleventh year (1 K 6). His royal palace occupied tliirteen years (1 K 7')- These erections were not in the 'city of David' (1 K 9"), which occupied the lower slopes of Ophel to the south, but on the summit of the same hill, where their place is now taken by the Mohammedan 'Noble Sanctuary.' Besides these works, whereby Jerusalem received a glory it had never possessed before, Solomon built Millo, whatever that may have been (1 K ff"), and the wall of Jerusalem (9'*), and 'closed up the breach of the city of David' (H^'), — the latter probably referring to an extension of the area of the city which involved the pulling down and rebuilding elsewhere of a section of the city walls.

3. The Kings of Judah.— In the fifth year of Rehoboam, Jerusalem sustained the first siege it had suffered after David's conquest, being beleaguered by Shishak, king of Egypt (IK 14^), who took away the treasures of the Temple and of tlie royal house. Rehoboam provided copper substitutes for the gold thus lost. The royal house was again pillaged by a coalition of Philistines and Arabs (2 Ch 21") in the time of Jehoram. Shortly afterwards took place the stirring events of the usurpa-tion of Athaliah and her subsequent execution (2 K 11). Her successor Joash or Jehoash distinguished himself by his repair of the Temple (2 K 12); but he was obliged to buy off Hazael, king of Syria, and persuaded him to abandon tiis projected attack on the capital by a gift of the gold of the Temple (2 K 12"). Soon afterwards, however, Jehoash of Israel came down upon Jerusalem, breached the wall, and looted the royal and sacred treasuries (2 K 14") . This event taught the lesson of the weakness of the city, by which the powerful king Uzziah profited. In 2 Ch 26'- " is the record of his fortifying the city with additional towers and ballistas; the work of strengthening the fortifications was continued by Jotham (2 K 15», 2 Ch 27'). Thanks probably to these pre-cautions, an attack on Jerusalem by the kings of Syria and of Israel, in the next reign (Ahaz's), proved abortive (2 K 16'). Hezekiah still further prepared Jerusalem for the struggle which he foresaw from the advancing power of Assyria, and to him, as is generally believed, is due the engineering work now famous as the Siloam Tunnel, whereby water was conducted from the spring in the Kidron Valley outside the walls to the reservoir at the bottom of the Tyropoeon Inside them. By another gift from the apparently inexhaustible royal and sacred treasures, Hezekiah endeavoured to keep Sennacherib from an attack on the capital (2 K 18"); but the attack, threatened by insulting words from the emissaries of Sennacherib, was finally averted by a mysterious calamity that befell the Assyrian army (2 K IQ''). By alliances with Egypt (Is 36') and Babylon (oh. 39) Hezekiah attempted to strengthen his position. Ma-nasseh built an outer wall to the 'city of David,' and made other fortifications (2 Ch 33"). In the reign of Josiah the Book of the Law was discovered, and the king devoted himself to the repairs of the Temple and the moral reformation which that discovery involved (2 K 22) . The death of Josiah at Megiddo was disastrous for the kingdom of Judah, and he was succeeded by a

JERUSALEM

series of petty kinglings, all of them puppets in the hands of the Egyptian or Babylonian monarchs. The fall of Jerusalem could not be long delayed. Nebuchad-nezzar of Babylon captured and looted it, and carried away captive first Jehoiachin (2 K 24"), and finally Zedekiah, the last king of Judah (ch. 26).

The aspect and area of the Jerusalem captured by Nebuchadnezzar must have been very different from that conquered about 420 years before by David. There is no direct evidence that David found houses at all on the hill now known as Zion; but the city must rapidly have grown under him and his wealthy successor; and in the time of the later Hebrew kings included no doubt the so-called Zion hiU as well. That it also included the modem Acra is problematical, as we have no in-formation as to the position of the north wall in pre-exilic times; and it is certain that the quite modem quarter commonly called Bezetha was not occupied. ■To the south a much larger area was built on than is included in modem Jerusalem: the ancient wall has been traced to the verge of the Wady er-Rababi. The destruction by Nebuchadnezzar and the deportation of the people were complete: the city was left in ruins, and only the poorest of the people were left to carry on the work of agriculture.

4. The Return. — When the last Semitic king of Babylon, Nabonidus, yielded to Cyrus, the represen-tatives of the ancient kingdom of Judah were, through the favour of Cyrus, permitted to re-establish themselves in their old home and to rebuild the Temple. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah are the record of the works tden undertaken, the former being specially concerned with the restoration of the Temple and the religious observances, the latter with the reconstruction of the fortifications of the city.

The Book of Nehemiah contains the fullest account that we have of the fortifications of Jerusalem, and it has been the most carefully studied of any source of information on the subject. A paper by Prof. H. G. Mitchell on the ' Wall of Jerusalem according to Nehe-miah' (in the JBL for 1903, p. 85) is a model of exhaustive treatment. Careful comparison is made therein between the statements of Nehemiah and the results of excavation. We cannot here go into all the arguments brought forward for the identifications, but they seem conclusive. Starting at the head of the Wady er-Rababi (Valley of Hinnom so-called), we find at the S.W. corner of the wall a rock-scarp which seems to have been prepared for a strong tower, identified with the tower of the furnaces (Neh 3"). Then comes the Valley -gate, which has been found half-way down the valley (Neh 3"). At the bottom of the valley, where it joined the Kidron, was the Dung-gate (Neh 3") , outside of which was found what appears to have been a cess-pit. Turning northward, we find the Fountain- gate (Neh 3") in close proximity to the 'made pool,' i.e. the pool of Siloam at the foot of the T3Topceon Valley; and theWater-gateon Ophel,overthe' Virgin's Fountain.' The gates on the north-east and north sides of the wall cannot be identified, as the course of that part has not been definitely determined. They seem to have been, in order, the Horse -gate the East-gate, the gate Ham-miphkad ('the appointed'?), after which came the corner of the wall. Then on the north side followed the Sheep-gate, the Fish -gate, and, somewhere on the north or north-west side, theOld-gate. Probably the Ephraim- and Comer -gates (2 K 14") were somewhere in this neighbourhood. Besides these gates, the Temple was provided with entrances, some of whose names are preserved; but their identification is an even more complex problem than that of the city-gates. Such were the gate Sur and the Gate of the guard (2 K 11'), the Shallecheth-gate at the west (l Ch 26"), Farbar (26'«),andtheEast-gate(Ezk 11'). The Beautiful -gate, of Ac 3'° was probably the same as the Nicanor-gate, between the Women's and the Priests' Court: it is

439