called by David the foiv (<ppoijpiov), ' but by us the Upper Agora' (^7 ifu d7opd), and that the other hill, called Akra ("Aispa), supported the lower city (tt)!"
«tdT(i) x6\tv) (l('«;vf, V. iv. I). From these passages it is clear that Jo.s. considered the city in David's time to have coincided with the ujiper and lower city of his own days ; and he describes the old wall surroinuling the upper city ( Hdrs, V. iv. 2) as having been built by Daviil and Solomon. He agrees with the LXX in iilciitifyingblillo (that part of the city which was not the fort) with the quarter called Akra by the Greeks, though he also uses the word (with the article, however) of the fort itself. He regards the term 'city of David' as equivalent to Jerus. as it existed in David's time. He never u.ses the term Zion, which (see ZlON) is in no part of the t)T identilied with any particular quarter of the city, though in the 1st cent. B.C. the author of I Mac appears to apiily thin name esp. to the Temple hill. The site of the uj>pLr city, or Upper .'\gora, is by i.'cneral consent identilied with the principal S.W. hill of Jerus., which Christian writers from the -Itli cent. A.D. downwards call Zioa. It is also not disputed that the lower city
lay to the N. of this hill, which commanded the whole town, and waa indeed the only hill on which a strong military situaliu a could be found. Tlie meaning of the word -Millt; is doubtful (it is usually rendered ' rampart' or ' tilling'), and the site is not clearly indicated in the OT, but there is no rea-son to doubt that .Jos. is right in identifying it with the lower city of his own time. It appears clear, then, that the Temple hill was not included in Jerusalem. It was the site of a threshiug-Uoor, and such floors are always found outside towns and villages in Palestine. When the Temi)le was built, and the quarter of the N'ethinim arose on Ophcl (' the swell'), — a name applied later to the lower and narrower spur of the same hill S. of the Temjile, — walls were of necessity extended to in- clude this new quarter. The 'city of David' thus became a term apidj-ing to the old main quarters of Jerus., which alone existed in David's age, or perhaps esp. to the stronghold of Zion or upjjer city, it lias, however, been siijijiosed by some recent wTiters {e.g. W. R. Smith, C. Wilson, Stade, Sayce, Buhl)* that the term 'city of David' should be applied to the spur S. of the 'remple, the name Ophel not applying to the whole spur. It is clear, however (Neh a-"- "i IVars, V. iv. 2), that Ophel was a place with houses, and the spur in question presents an area of only a few acres, the crest bein^ lower than the summits of the other hills, and unhtted for the erection of a citadel. The theory rests partly on a [lassage wliich, as rendered in AV^, would make the aqueduct from Gihou run 'to the W. side of the city of David,' under (Ipliel (2 Ch 32^). The true rendering (as given by Keil and others) may be, however, ' westwards to the city of David,' which agrees with the supposition that the latter term ajqdies to the upper city. It is sometimes also urged that the tombs of the kings buried ' in the citj- of David' were on Ophel — a question to be considered later. The indications found in other Iia.s.sages seem to show that no part of the Temjile rid<'e was within the city of David. In 1 K 8' we find the ark described as brought up to the Tein)>le 'out of the city of David '(so 2 Ch 5-). In Neh 3'-'' the 'stairs that go down from the city of David ' are noticed with Siloam. In 2 Ch .'52' ' the Millo' is placed 'in the city of David,' and it was not on the Temple ridge. In 2 Ch 33''' we read that Manasseh built 'an outer wall westwards to the citj' of DaWd, as far as Gihon in the ravine.' It appears therefore that the topography shown in most recent maps is correct, and that the city of David included the fortress (I'li?) of the upper city, and the quarter called Jlillo, or the lower city to the N. Solomon also fortihed 'the Millo' (1 K 9**), and 'shut in the ravine (?; RV 're- paired the breach ' j Heb. n?'"*" "'^J) °f ^''^ ''■'y "' David his father' (1 K 11'') ; and after the building of his own palace he brought his Egj'ii. ((Ueen to her palace ' out of the city of David ' (1 K 9-"). Subse- quent notices of Millo (2 K 12^, 2 Ch 32») do not throw much more liglit on the subject, though Silla, noticed in the lirsl of these, may be connected with the ' causeway ' of another pa.ssage ( 1 Ch 2l>"'), and with the stairs from the city of David, if the word (see SlLLA) means 'steps.' The cau.se- way in question was W. of the Temple. As re- gards the water supply of Jerus. at this time the Gihon spring (now called the Virgin's Fountain) was at some distance from the u]iper city ; but it is possible that the great reservoir (now called Unmmi'nnd-liiilriik, ' the Patriarch's I'ool,'and by others Hezekiah's I'ool), which stands immeiliatcly N. of the upper city, wasalrcailv in existence wilhiu the walls. It is very prohabfy the ' upper ihx-' '