2. Topography.— The chief authority for Jeru- salem in tlie 1st cent. A.D. — its topography no less than its history— is the Jewish writer Josephus. His historical works cover the period with which we have here to deal, and it is to the details there furnished that we owe most of our knowledge of the fortunes and aspect of the city in the Apostolic Age. Any account of the topography of Jerusalem at this time must necessarily follow the descriptions of Josephus, as interpreted by the majority of modern scholars. It has always to be kept in mind, however, that there is considerable difference of opinion on many points, and that the views of the minority, or even of an individual, although we may not be able to accept them, are to be re- garded with respect.
i. The City Walls, as they existed at the time of the siege in A.D. 70, first claim attention.
(a) First Wall.— In historical order, but not according to the standpoint of the besiegers, for whom the first wall was the third, the walls of Jerusalem on the north side proceed from the in- terior to the exterior of the city. At all times the south side of the city had only one encompassing wall, but during most of our period there were three walls — the third only in part — ui)on the north side. The first of these nortiiern walls com- menced on the W. of Jerusalem near the modern Jaffa Gate, and ran in an easterly direction along the northern face of the so-called S. W. Hill, cross- ing the Tyropoion Valley, which then markedly divided tiie city from N. ibo S., and joining the W. wall of the Temi)le enclosure. At its W. extremity it was marked by the three towers of Herod the Great — Hippicus, Phasael, and Mariamne (or Mariamme) ; and at the Temple end it ran near to the bridge which gave access from the S.W. Hill to the outer court of the Temple. This point is
now marked by the modern Bab es-Silsilek, and Wilson's Arch found here stands over the remains of an older bridge which is doubtless the viaduct of Josephus's time. From the Tower of Hippicus the wall ran southwards and followed approximately the line of the modern W. wall, but it extended further south, turning S.E. along Maudslay's Scarp and proceeding in a straight course to the Pool of Siloam, at the mouth of the Tyropceon Valley. At this time the pool possibly lay outside the waU (F. J. Bliss and A. C. Dickie, Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894-1897, pp. 304, 325), although G. A. Smith places it inside [Jerusalem, i. 224). After crossing the Tyropceon, at some point or other, the wall was continued in a N.E. direction, running along the slope of Ophel to join the Temple enclosure at its S.E. angle. A considerable part of this wall upon the S. side of the city has been excavated by Warren, Guthe, Bliss, and Dickie. The last two explorers found remains of two walls with a layer of debris between. Bliss is of opinion that the under wall is the one destroyed by Titus, and he says further : ' There is no evid- ence, nor is it probable, that the south line was altered between the time of Nehemiah and that of Titus' (Excav. at Jerus., p. 319).
We are here concerned with the subsequent history of the wall upon the S. side only in so far as after the destruction by Titus it appears to have been rebuilt on a new line to form the S. side of the Roman camp upon the S.W. Hill, this being the line of the modem city wall on the S. The part upon the W., together with Herod's three towers, was spared by Titus and utilized by him for the 'Camp.' So also, we may infer, was the wall skirting the W. side of the Tyropceon, running N. and S. from the neighbourhood of the bridge to the region of the Pool of Siloam to form the E. boundary of the S.W. Hill. This wall is not mentioned by Josephus, but its presence may be concluded from the fact that Titus had to commence siege operations anew against that division of the city which stood on the S.W, Hill ('The Upper City'). According to C. W. Wilson, the ground enclosed by the walls of the Upper City extended to 74^ acres. The new wall drawn on the S. side over the summit of the hill reduced the area to about 48^ acres, only a little short of the normal dimen- sions of a ' Camp ' {Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre, p. 143 f.).
{b) Second Wall. — According to Josephus, this commenced at the Gate Genath (or Gennath) in the First Wall, and circled round the N. quarter of the city, running up to Antonia, the castle situated attheN.W. corner of the Temple area. It had fourteen * towers, compared with sixty on the First Wall and ninety on the Third. Its extent was therefore limited in comparison with the others. There is much discussion as to its actual line in view of the importance of this for the determina- tion of the site of Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre. This is a question that falls to be treated under the Gospel Age, although we have an interest in the projection of the wall towards the N., sincb upon this depends the view taken of the line of the Third W^all. With the majority of modern in- vestigators we decide for a limited compass, no part being further N. than the extremity which went up from the Tyropceon to Antonia. The Gate Genath has not been located, but it must have been in the neighbourliood of the three great towers, and perhaps lay inside of all three. C. M. Watson concludes from a study of the records ana from personal investigation of the site that th* Second Wall was most probably built by Antipater, father of Herod the Great. He interprets Josephus