The dillerence between the stronghold of Zion and the citadel of Millo seems to be accentuateil in the following passages :—
' And David dwelt in the stronghold [mUzildah), and called it. The city of D.ivid. And David built round about Millo and inward' (2 S 5*'). ' And he built the city round about, from .Millo even round about ; and Joal) repaired the rest of the city' (1 Ch 11*). Millo is mentioned as separate from the walls of the city also in the following passages, 1 K 9"- " U-'', 2 Ch 32'. The meaning of Millo is given in QPIi as rampart, and by Ge.senius (Lex.) as a rampart or mound, built up and lilled with stones or earth. Lightfoot says, ' Millo. which was an outward place and the suburb of Zion, distinguished and parted from Zion by a wall, yet a member of it and belonging to it.' Williams (Ilobj City, jiart ii. p. 43) says, ' It must never be forgotten that Jerusalem was originally two distinct cities united together by David.' Stanley has pointed out that the strong- hold, fort or castle, of Zion, in all the passages (2 S 5'- »• ", 1 Ch ll"- '■ "), represents the Hebrew words mizudah (nivio) or mezdd ("i>'3), the root meaning a lair whence hunters seek their prey, and to which they can flee as unto a safe retreat (Gesen.); the word itself denoting the top or summit of a mountain, or mountain castle. This word in the LXX is tr^ in all these instances as 7) irtpioxv- Grove has also pointed out that Millo is rendered in every case (except 2 Ch 32') by the LXX as i) &Kpa (the citadel), which they employ nowhere else in the OT. This word ii d.Kpa is also used both by Josephus and the Book of Maccabees for the fort or citadel overlooking the temple to the northwest, during the struggle with the Mace- donian ailheients of Antiochus, which was at last razed and the rocky hill levelled by Simon Mac- cab:cus (.Jos. A nt. XIII. vi. 7 : BJ V. iv. 1 ; but cf. I Mac 1*"- 14»" ). Sayce (PEFSt, 1883, p. 214) also points to a ' stronghold of Zion ' on the lower hill
HIXNOM, VALLEY OF
HIXNOM, VALLEY OF
387
taken Viy David before lie stormed the Jebiisite citadel on the upper hill ; " and states further, ' The dual form Je'ushalaim, which apparently goes back to the time of the Maccabees, jirobably refers to the old division of Jerusalem into the lower city and the temple-liill.' The whole testi- mony aitpears, therefore, to be in favour of a Jerusalem separated into two portions — one called the lair or stronghold, which is the city of David, the other called the Millo or citadel. Now, the Book of Neliemiah clearly seems to place the city of David on the spur of Ophel south of the temple, above Siloam (Neh 3" 12"). Again, Josephus, while placing i) dKpa (the citadel) to the nortli- west of the temple, also speaks of the lower part of the city being taken by David, and places it near Opliel. The Books of Maccabees speak of the same citadel (^ &Kpa) as Josephus does, and call the temple mount Sion (1 Mac 4*^ 5"). It there- fore ap|iears, that to accept the Ophel spur as the city ot David or Zion, and the high ground east of the holy sepulchre as the Millo or citadel of the ancient Jerusalem, will satisfy the various data in the OT, the Books of Maccabees, and Joseplius. We thus arrive at the conclusion that the boundary- line between Judah and Benjamin, whicli went up the valley of Hinnoni, was drawn south of either the spur of Ophel or of the citadel (^ Sitpa), or of both.
The next point to ascertain is the position of En-rogel ; and this seems comparatively easy, as there appears to be a consensus of opinion at the present daj' that it corresponds to the copious Virgin's Fountain. It is the only known fountain in the vicinity of Jerusalem. The IJir Kyiib is a w,lt and not a sprinri, the water being 7U to 80 ft. below the surface of the ground in summer. In a land where there are so few springs, this alone ought to identify it. The Virgin's Fountain is close to the stone Zehweileh, which Ganneau has identilied as the stone Zoheletli, which is close to En-rogel (1 K P). This position of En-rogel satisiies the requirements of the two passages (2 S 17", 1 K 1"). Josephus describes it in two pa-ssages (Ant. VII. xiv. 4, IX. x. 4) as close to the royal gardens, and the Book of Nehemlah places the king's garden near Siloam (Neh 3"). The Virgin's Fountain also appears to be Gihon- in-the-valley (Siloam being liiiion). Thus Heze- kiah stopped the upper outlet at the Virgin's Fountain (Gihon) and brought it through the rock to Siloam (2 Ch 32**) to the west side of the city of David, the city of David being on Ophel.
'i'he thir<l (loint to ascertain is the general position of the ' mountain tliat lieth before the valley of 11. westward.' As.suming that the fountain of Nephtoah is identilied with 'Ain Li/ta, about 2A miles to the north-west of Jerusalem, the mountain which lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward appears to be the high ground immediately north of Jerusalem, which, though not exactly a mountain, is the highest ground in the neiglibouiliood, from which vallevs start in all directions to the Mediterranean and t)ead Sea. The site of the Kussian hospice may be said to occupy the position of this moun- tain. The line of boundary between Juilah and Benjamin may now be traced from En-shemesh (evst of .lerusalem) to En-rogel, thence up the valley of Kidron to a point opposite to tlie .southern Bide of the temple, thence acro.ss the temple courts south of the temple, and up the valley on the south side of Akra to the Jall'a gate, and thence north by the Uussian hospice to Lifta. Under this disposition the valley of Kidron becomes the