During the reigns of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was the metropolis of the land of Israel; but, after the revolt of the ten tribes under Jeroboam, it became the capital of the kings of Judah, during whose government it underwent various revolutions. It was captured four times without being demolished: 1. By Shishak, king of Egypt, (2 Chron. xii.) from whose ravages it never recovered its former splendour. 2. By Antiochus Epiphanes, who treated the Jewish nation with great barbarity. 3. By Pompey the Great, who reduced Judea into a Roman province, and rendered the Jews. tributary to Rome: and, 4. By Herod, with the assistance of a Roman force under Sosius. It was first entirely demolished by Nebuchadnezzar, and again by the emperor Titus, A. D. 70. The turbulent Jews having filled up the measure of their iniquities, by their repeated insurrections, drew down upon themselves the implacable vengeance of the Romans. Titus ineffectually endeavoured to save the temple: it was involved in the same ruin with the rest of the city; and, after it had been reduced to ashes, the foundations of that sacred edifice were ploughed up by the Roman soldiers. Thus literally the prediction of our Redeemer was fulfilled, that "not one stone should be left upon another that should not be thrown down.” Matt. xxiv, 2. But Titus, in order that posterity might judge of the glory and value of his conquest, left three towers standing, as monuments of the prodigious strength and grandeur of the city; and also a part of the western wall, which he designed as a rampart for a garrison to keep the surrounding country in subjection. The emperor Adrian rebuilt Jerusalem, only on part of the former site of the city: he left out mount Sion,

which was the strongest part, levelled mount Moriah that there should not be the least vestiges of the temple remaining, and included mount Calvary which was before without the walls. He called it Ælia Capitolina, placed a Roman colony in it, and strictly prohibited any Jew, on pain of death, to enter it. Dio Cassius says, that he caused the figure of a sow to be carved on one of the gates, out of spite to the Jews. Thus the city remained till Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor, who greatly improved it, and restored its former name. During that emperor's reign, the Jews made various efforts to rebuild their temple, which however were always frustrated: nor did better success attend the attempt made A. D. 363, by the apostate emperor Julian, who from enmity to the Christians, favoured the Jews, and attempted to rebuild the temple, but was miraculously prevented. An earthquake, a whirlwind, and a fiery eruption compelled the workmen to abandon their design. Jovian revived the severe edict of Adrian, and the Greek emperors continued the prohibition. In the reign of Heraclius, Chosroes, king of Persia, took and plundered it but Heraclius soon recovered possession. In the year of our Lord 637, the Christians surrendered it to Omar, the Saracen Caliph, who built a mosque upon the site of Solomon's temple. It remained in the possession of the Saracens above four hundred years, and then was taken by the Turks, who retained it till the year 1099, when the Franks took it under Godfrey of Bouloigne, general of the Crusaders. The Franks kept possession eightyeight years, i. e. till 1187, when the Turks under Saladin, retook it by capitulation, and with them it remained ever since.

So from the destruction of Jeru

salem by the Romans to the present day that city has remained almost in a state of ruin and desolation; and has never been under the government of the Jews since, but has been oppressed and broken down by a succession of foreign masters. We see the predictions of the holy Scriptures verified at this moment before our eyes, in the desolate state of the once celebrated city and temple of Jerusalem, and in the present condition of the Jewish nation, dispersed over every region of the globe; but the period will come, according to ancient prophecy, when "He that scattereth Israel will again gather them."*

VIII. Of the Cities of Refuge.

THE cities of refuge among the Israelites were widely different from the Asyla among the Greeks and Romans, as also from the privileged altars among the Roman Catholics. Those among the Hebrews, were for the protection of such only as had slain a person involuntarily. The temples and altars of the latter often served for the protection of the most profligate characters. Among the Hebrews, cities of refuge were highly necessary, because the old patriarchal law still remained in force: viz. that the nearest a-kin had a right to avenge the death of his relation, by slaying the

Bp. Porteus's Lectures on St. Matthew, vol. ii, pp. 166--218. Bp. Newton on the Prophecies, Dis. 18, 19, 20, 21. Kett's History the Interpreter of Prophecy, vol. i, p. 262, note.

murderer; for the original law enacted, that "whosoever shed man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed;" (Gen. ix, 6.) and none was judged so proper to execute this law, as the man who was nearest a-kin to the deceased. As many rash executions of this law might take place, from the very nature of the thing, it was deemed necessary to qualify its claims, and prevent injustice; and so the cities of refuge were enjoined by the divine command as proper for this purpose. But these cities of refuge afforded only a pro-tempore asylum till the case could be fairly examined by the magistrates in the presence of the people, or the elders, their representatives. Josh. xx, 4, 6. If he was found worthy of death, they delivered him to the avenger, that he might be put to death; if not, he was to remain in the city of refuge till the death of the high priest. Deut. xix, 12. *

There were six cities of refuge appointed out of the forty-eight cities assigned to the Levites; three on each side of Jordan. On the western side of Jordan were Kedesh and Hebron at the two extremities of the promised land--one was in Galilee, the other in the tribe of Judah; both in mountainous countries: and Shechem, which was in the tribe of Ephraim nearly in the middle between both. On the east side of Jordan were Btzer in the plain opposite to Jericho: Ramoth in Gilead, which was about the midst of the country

Before the institution of the cities of refuge, the altar appears to have been a sanctuary for those who have involuntarily killed a person; (see Exod. xxi, 14.) and afterwards the altar was accounted an asylum. See 1 Kings ii, 28.

occupied by the two tribes and half, about the middle of the mountains of Gilead: and Golan, which was the capital of a district called Gaulonitis, in the land of Bashan, towards the southern extremity of the lot of Manasseh. Josh. xx, 7, 8. Thus the cities of refuge were distributed through the land, at proper distances from each other, that they might be convenient to every part of the land; and it is said they were situated on eminences, that they might be easily seen at a distance. The Israelites were commanded to "" prepare the way," that is, to make the roads good, which led to these cities, and to keep them in proper repair. The Rabbins tell us that these roads were thirty-two cubits broad, smooth and plain. Where there were brooks or rivers there were good bridges, all watery places were drained, and the surface kept smooth and hard. Where there were cross roads, finger posts were erected with the inscription Refuge, Refuge, to direct the inadvertent manslayer where to bend his course, to whom every moment was precious to run for his life. It has been thought that there is an allusion to this practice in Luke iii, 4--6, where John the Baptist is described "as the voice of one crying in the wilderness, prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." He was the Messiah's forerunner, and in that character was to remove the obstacles to men's flying to him as their asylum, and obtaining the salvation of God.*

Dr. Lightfoot's Works, vol. ii, p 47.

Universal Hist. vol. i,

p. 648, fol. ed. Godwin's Moses and Aaron, b. ii, c. 5. Jenning's Jewish Antiq. b. ii, c.5.