more remarkable, inasmuch as it materially assists the plausi bility of his plan, at the expense, however, of its fidelity. Had that valley been distinctly marked, it would have been seen that his Mount Zion, instead of having the continuation of the ravine as its western boundary, joins on to the high ground in that direction*; a circumstance concealed by the indeterminate manner in which its form is expressed by Dr. C. Unable as we are to collect from either traveller, the precise figure and extent of this eminence, we cannot pretend to decide how far Dr. Clarke is warranted in representing, that the dimensions of the area which would be formed by taking the whole of it into the plan of Jerusalem, would correspond to the circumference of the ancient city. The necessity for this bold supposition, however, is completely obviated, since it appears from Dr. Richardson's description, that, by including the whole of Mount Zion, now traversed by the modern wall, and by extending the northern boundary as far as the sepulchral caverns of the Kings, we should gain an area corresponding to the measurements of the ancient city as given by Eusebius. Here, again, it is impossible to acquit Dr. Clarke of gross inaccuracy. In his outline of the modern town, the area of the Temple forms part of the line which marks the southern wall; while the space beyond, the part of Mount Zion not enclosed, is as much as possible contracted. In Dr. Richardson's plan, the town extends considerably southward of the Temple, and the unenclosed part of the hill, in which is the sepulchre of David, appears to be more than one half. As to the notion that the modern town has gained in a northern direction, so as to comprise places without the ancient wall, we are now quite persuaded that it does not deserve a moment's notice. It was invented merely to protect the monstrous fooleries of the Holy Sepulchre from the annihilating proof that the modern Calvary could never have been without the walls, and that it has, therefore, no pretensions to be considered as the site of the Crucifixion. In this opinion, which required, however, no confirmation, we are amply supported by Dr. Richardson.

But to return, for the present, to Mount Zion. Our Author states, that the greater part of it is now without the wall of the city. In about the middle of the hill, stands the long, dingylooking mosque,' said to be built over the tomb of the prophet David; for so the royal Psalmist is designated by the Moslems. To the right of this mosque, between it and Zion

*It is, in fact, only the termination of the rocky flat that extends between Bethlehem and Jerusalem.

gate, is a small Armenian chapel, erected on the supposed site of the palace of Caiaphas. A few paces to the West, is a Christian burying-ground; and among the lettered tomb'stones are several inscribed in the language of our own 'country,' which cover the ashes of Englishmen. A little to the South of this, is shewn the place where the Virgin Mary expired; and on the North side of the gate, the place where the cock crew to Peter!!

Such,' continues Dr. Richardson, is the sum total of the information which the Traveller receives from his guide respecting the topography of this interesting spot, Mount Zion. At the time when I visited this sacred ground, one part of it supported a crop of barley, another was undergoing the labour of the plough, and the soil turned up consisted of stone and line mixed with earth, such as is usually met with in the foundations of ruined cities. It is nearly a mile in circumference, is highest on the west side, and towards the east falls down in broad terraces on the upper part of the mountain, and narrow ones on the side, as it slopes down to the brook Kedron. Each terrace is divided from the one above it by a low wall of dry stone, built of the ruins of this celebrated spot. The terraces near the bottom of the hill are still used as gardens, and are watered from the pool of Siloam. They belong chiefly to the inhabitants of the small village of Siloa immediately opposite.

Mount Zion is considerably higher than the ground on the North on which the ancient city stood, or that on the East leading on to the Valley of Jehoshaphat, but has very little relative height above the ground on the South and on the West, and must have owed its boasted strength principally to a deep ravine, by which it is encompassed on the East, South, and West, and the strong high walls and towers by which it was enclosed and flanked completely round. This ravine or valley, as the term has been rendered, though the word trench or ditch would have conveyed a more correct idea of its appearance, seems to have been formed by art on the South and on the West; the surface of the ground on each side being of nearly equal height, though Mount Zion is certainly the highest, yet so little so, that it could not have derived much additional strength from its elevation. The breadth of this ditch is stated by Strabo to be about 150 feet, and its depth, or the height of Mount Zion above the bottom of the ravine, to be about 60 feet. The measurement, in both instances, is nearly correct, and furnishes one among many proofs that we derive from other sources, that the places now called by these names are the same as those that were anciently so denominated. The bottom of this ravine is rock, covered with a thin sprinkling of earth, and, in the winter season, is the natural channel for conveying off the water that falls into it from the higher ground; but, on both sides, the rock is cut

* The proper proportion of the trench as to breadth, is injudiciously disregarded in the plan.

perpendicularly down, and most probably it was the quarry from which the greater part of the stones were taken for building the city. The precipitous edge of the ravine is more covered with earth on the side of Mount Zion than on the other side, which is probably owing to the barbarous custom of razing cities from their foundation, and tumbling both earth and stone into the ditch below. The loose stones have been all removed from it for building the present city. This ravine extends further North than the present wall of the city, and ends in a gradual slope of deep earth, so as to countenance the opinion that it once extended further than it does now.' Vol. II. pp. 348–50.

The high ground here described on the opposite side of this trench, is, we apprehend, what Pococke has marked as the • Hill of Evil Council,' which he places to the Westward of the • Mount of Offence.' It still contains, according to our Author, the remains of a ruined village, generally called,' that is, by themonks, the Casa di mal Consiglio, because here the priests and scribes are said to have taken counsel to put our Lord to < death.' These remains are the sumptuous edifices' of Dr. Clarke; not that he examined them, but that is his version of the words of Sandys, who says, that their height yet shews the relics of no meane buildings.' According to Dr. C., the mountain,' as he calls it, is covered with ruined edifices," and his lively fancy sees in them the probable ruins of a citadel;' and then, by a bolder flight, he imagines the eminence as once surmounted by the" bulwarks, towers, and "regal buildings" of the House of David.' It is certainly much to be regretted, that no modern traveller should have thought it worth his while to examine these remains, and strange that not even the modern name of the eminence should be known. The Mount of Offence, and the Hill of Evil Council, are appellations without meaning, and only serve to proclaim the ignorance of those who have undertaken to illustrate the topography of the sacred city. They have not even been uniformly applied to the same localities; for the Mount of Offence of Sandys is the Hill of Evil Council of Pococke, who applies the former designation to the rocky flat on the South-east of the city, at the end of the valley of Jehoshaphat. But what is in itself sufficient to overturn Dr. Clarke's hypothesis, is, the fact, that his Mount Zion is decidedly lower than the ground on the opposite side of the ravine, over which the wall of the modern city passes; whereas we are told by Josephus, that the hill which contained the upper city was much higher than Acra. So far from its being a position of greater strength or more commanding aspect, answering to the idea of a citadel, Dr. Richardson's account makes it appear that it was in every respect less adapted to stand a siege than

the opposite elevation, as, besides being absolutely lower ground, it would be with ease approached from the West. Mount Zion, on the contrary, has the ravine on three of its sides, while the Tyropæon running in a transverse direction, separated it from the hill sustaining the lower city, so that it appears to have been defended on all sides, either by a natural or an artificial ravine.*

We can no longer hesitate, then, to give up Dr. Clarke's conjecture as wholly unworthy of his learning and great abilities; and while we plead guilty to having once entertained it as probable, we must be allowed to remark, that it was something more positive than the want of correct information which misled us. But where is the Tyropæon? We look for it in vain in Dr. Richardson's Plan, and were surprised to find him citing Josephus as stating that the ravine between Mount Zion and the lower city was filled up by the Asmoneans.' The valley filled up under the Asmonean dynasty, was that which separated Acra from that part of Mount Moriah on which the Temple was built, and which Josephus states was naturally lower than Acra: the top of Acra was taken off at the same time, so as to reduce the elevation, and the city was thus joined to the Temple. Dr. Clarke with some justice ridicules the idea that the deep valley described by Josephus as of use in fortifying the city, could be filled up; though the Author whom he cites, is not responsible for the absurdity he charges upon him. The words of Rauwolff are, not that the valley was absolutely filled up, but only, so filled up,' since the desolation, that no depth at all appeareth in our days, but only without the fountain gate, by the fountain Siloa.' This exception is important as marking the termination of the ravine, while the words, no depth at all,' would lead us to expect that some trace of it was still discernible. It is at this point, that a more minute examination, aided, if necessary, by excavation,. would be most likely to throw light on the subject. The Pool of Siloam itself would seem to have particular claims to attention. It is described by Dr. Richardson as receiving a strong current of water by a subterraneous passage cut in the North side of Mount Zion, which seems as if it came by a conduit cut through the rock from the Pool of Hezekiah on the West side of the city.' That Pool is just without the city, near the Bethlehem gate; and in all probability, a line drawn from that gate, or from the Castle of David, to the Pool of Siloam, would give the direction of the Tyropæon or Valley of Millo. Either

Josephus de Bello Jud. lib. vi. c. 6.

by excavating the ravine near the Pool of Hezekiah, or by ex amining the source of that of Siloam, this fact might, one would think, be easily ascertained. The latter is also called the Fountain of the Stairs.'

A flight of sixteen steps leads down to a platform, and another flight of thirteen steps leads down to the water, which is fresh and good. The passage by which the water comes out, has obviously been formed by art, and is so large that a person, by stooping a little, may walk along it under the mountain. The water is about three feet deep, and seems to be stagnant in the pool; but there is a considerable stream constantly flowing from it, by a passage which is also cut in the rock for a good way down, and goes to water the gardens on the lower slopes of Mount Zion. There are the remains of a Christian Church that once adorned the entrance to this pool, which, like the fountain of Castalia, or the Spring of Arethusa, seems in days of yore to have been treated with signal respect.' Vol. II. pp. 357, S.

If future travellers will but follow out the hint here furnished, they may possibly return from the Pool of Siloam, seeing much more clearly than their predecessors, as regards the topography of the holy city. Till this point, we mean the direction of the Tyropæon, is ascertained, the topography of Zion cannot be considered as complete. But there is little room to doubt that in this direction were "the stairs that go down by the city of David," referred to Neh. iii. 15; and if so, the identity of the mount must be considered as established beyond all possibility of mistake.

As to Mr. Buckingham's conspicuous mountain command'ing the whole of Jerusalem,' which he places to the South of the modern town, and which we supposed to be meant for the same as the Zion of Dr. Clarke,-his description turns out to be so wholly inapplicable to the Hill of Evil Council, that we must rather refer it to the high mountain rising directly from the bed of the Siloa,' marked 100 in Dr. Richardson's plan, but hitherto unexamined by any traveller. This we presume to be what Pococke means by the Mount of Offence: it is strange that no one has ever thought of learning its real name from some intelligent Jew. It is considerably higher than the groupe of hills on which Jerusalem lies, and, together with the Mount of Olives on the East, Scopo and Mount Gihon (if that be its proper appellation) on the North, and the low rocky flat on the West, forms a chain of elevations answering to the Scripture representation of Jerusalem as guarded by mountains: "As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so the "Lord is round about his people from henceforth, even for ever." (Psalm cxxv. 2.)

There is still much confusion and uncertainty in the appli