Jerusalem, in the days of Christ, had two walls, termed the ** first" and the '' second." It is with the second wall that we are here chiefly concerned. It be- gan at a tower, named Gennatli, of the first wall, curved outward to the north, and ended at the castle of Antonia. The third wall embraced a wide suburb on the north and north-west This comprehended a sort of new city, and was built in consequence of the large population which by degrees fixed their abode in the space which Iklls between the second and third walls. This wall was begun under Claudius, at least forty-one years after Christ (Josephus, War^ v, 4, 3 ; comp. Tacit Hist, v, 12). This third wall, then, did not exist in the time of our Lord ; and Robinson allows that if the present site of the sepulchre foil without the second wall, all the conditions of the general question would be satisfied. Many travellers and antiquarians have decided that this was the case, whUe others, more numerous perhaps, but not better qualified to judge, have come to the opposite conclusion. See Jerusa- lem (Topogr(q)hj/), (It is worthy of remark that Dr. Kiepert, of Berlin, the most experienced cartographer probably, especially on this and kindred subjects, has vacillated on this pohit in the maps of his own con- straction, some of them including and others excluding the contested site abng the course of the wall in ques- tion.) The whole question turns upon the position of the gate Gennath : if this was at the extreme north- west angle of Zion, then the second wall, in order to be at all ** circling" (KvicKo{ffuvov\ could not well have excluded the site hi question ; but if, as is more prob- able, it was some distance east of the tower Hippicus (for while Josephus, ut sup., expressly begins the first and third walls from this tower, he begins the second fhmi this ffatSj situated along the northern part of the first wall), then the second wall could hardly have bent sufficienUy to the west to include it See Gennath. The city bulged out on- the north, as it contracted on the south, thus bringing (Solgotha into its central parts. Robinson, however, asserts that the second wall must either have excluded the Pool of Hezekiah, which (as he thinks) was in the dty, or included the site of the sepulchre, which was out of the dty. This alterna- tive, however, although by no means a fatal objection, is not absolutely necessary, as nuy be seen on refer- ence to various plans of the city that have been con- structed, in which the second wall leaves both where the Scriptures place them. See Hbzbkiah's Pool. But the distance fh>m the westem point of the Temple to the present rite of the sepulchre Robinson considers insuffideht, it -bdng only about a quarter of a mile. We know not that there is any thing in scriptural ac- count which gives support to this notion. A distance of a quarter of a mile appears quite enough for the re- corded events, to say nothing^of the essential weakness
of such a position ; for how can Bobinsoo know tfait his measures extended along the same ground as eor Lord was hurried over? But reason has already been given why the Jews should have taken no very pn. tracted course.
I Two or three additional facts in confirmation of tiie identity of the present place nuy finally be addooed. I Buckingham (^PaleH. p. 288) says, "The present nek I called Calvary, and inclosed within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, bears marks in every part that b ns- ked of its having been a round nodule of rock standinf above the common levd of the surface.*' Schob {Di Gdgotha nfu, p. 9) states that he traced tiie. renudns of a wall, which ran as the second wall on the pits runs, excluding (xolgotha, and taknig in the Pool of Hezekiah (Raumer, p. 852). It may also be remaifc. ed that, since the publication of Robinson*8 work, Sas- mer has put forth a piece {Bekrdge tvr Bib. Gtog, 1843), in which he revises his PaidtHna so far as Robinson's ascertained results render necessary ; but he remaifls of the same opinion in regard to the possibility of tiw present Church of the Sepulchre being out of the dtr. At most, a very few hundred yards only can the or^ nal Golgotha have lain ftt>m the present site, and the evidence in fovor of ita identity, if not decisive, is £ir stronger than any that has been adduced agamst it At the best, then, very small is the reason for distorb- ing the convictions and distiessing the hearts of the rincere believers who virit the Holy Sepulchre in order to give vent to their tearful gratitude and cherish their pious fidth. A similar conclurion is warmly contend- ed for by Dr. Olin (Traveii m the East, ii, 276 sq.), and I still more at length by Mr. Williams {Bofy City, vol ii, ! ch. i and ii). It is also ably examined and maintsbed I by Thrapp (Ancient JerutaUm, Lend. 1855). It has, I however, been either stoutly denied or lightly sneered I at by many other writers, who nuy be styled as belong- ing to the modem anti-traditionaiy school. At the head of these is Dr. Robinson, who takes every occa- ' sion to impugn the authenticity of scriptural localities in general, as now pointed out— Kitto, s. ▼. See Goi^