of water; which however was not expected to hold out through the summer.

In searching in this quarter for traces of the second wall of the ancient city, we came to the Coptic convent, situated at the northern end of the reservoir. This had been recently rebuilt and was not yet completed. On inquiring of the master-mason, who had charge of the whole work, in respect to the excavations which had been made, he informed us, that in digging to lay the foundation of the new wall, running from E. to W. they had come upon an old wall of large hewn stones parallel to the present N. wall of the reservoir, and 57 feet distant from it towards the North. This wall, he said, was ten or twelve feet thick, laid in cement, and also plastered over on the S. side with cement, like the wall of a reservoir. The bottom below was rock, which was also covered towards the South with a coating of small stones and cement several inches thick, like the bottom of the present pool. In laying the foundations of another part of the convent, he had also dug down along a part of the present northern wall of the pool, which he found to be built of small stones; so small indeed that he had been compelled to remove them and build up the wall anew. All these circumstances led him to the conclusion, that the Pool of Hezekiah once extended further North, as far as to the old wall above described. To this conclusion we could only assent; for the stones thus dug out were still lying around, and bore every mark of antiquity. They were not indeed large, like those of the temple-walls; but were bevelled, and obviously of ancient workmanship.

We are told of king Hezekiah, that he "made a pool and a conduit, and brought water into the city;" and also that "he stopped the upper water-course of Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side

of the city of David." From this language we can only infer, that Hezekiah constructed a pool within the city on its western part. To such a pool, the present reservoir, which is doubtless an ancient work, entirely corresponds; and it is also fed in a similar manner. The pool must of course have been situated within the second wall of Josephus; and its present position serves therefore to determine in part the probable course of that wall.2

Bethesda. Sheep Pool. In the Gospel of St. John we are informed, that "there was at Jerusalem, by the Sheep [-Gate], a pool, which was called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches." This pool the monks and many travellers have chosen to find in the deep reservoir or trench on the north side of the area of the great mosk. They give to it the different names of Bethesda and the Sheep-Pool; and in the two long vaults at its S. W. corner, they profess to find two of the five ancient porches. The natives call it Birket Isrâîl. There is not the slightest evidence that can identify it with the Bethesda of the New Testament. Eusebius and Jerome, and also the Itin. Hieros. do indeed speak of a Piscina Probatica shown in their day as Bethesda, a double pool, one part of which was filled by the winter rains, and the other was reddish as if formerly tinged with bloody waters. But neither of these writers gives any hint as to the situation of the pool. The name has doubtless been assigned to the reservoir in question compara

1) 2 Kings xx. 20. 2 Chr. xxxii. 30. Comp. also Sirac. xlviii. 9. 2) See above, p. 462.

3) John v. 2. The ellipsis in the Greek text is to be supplied by nun gate, from Nehemiah iii. I. See Bos Ellips. Graec. art. núlŋ. Lightfoot Opp. II. p. 587.

4) Quaresmius calls it Piscina Probatica; but seems to doubt VOL. I.

62

about the porches; II. p. 98, seq. Comp. Cotovic. Itin. p. 258. Maundrell Apr. 9th.

5) Onomast. art. Bethesda.These fathers supplied the ellipsis in the Greek text so as to read: "There was in Jerusalem by the sheep[-pool], a pool which was called," etc. They thus make here a double pool.

tively in modern times, from its proximity to St. Stephen's Gate, which was erroneously held to be the ancient Sheep-Gate.' The dimensions of the reservoir have already been given; and the reasons assigned why I hold it to be the ancient fosse which protected the fortress Antonia and the temple on the North.2 That it was formerly filled with water, is apparent from the lining of small stones and cement upon its sides. But from what quarter the water was brought into it, I am unable to conjecture; unless perhaps it may have been fed from the Pool of Hezekiah, or more probably from the superfluous waters formerly collected from the aqueduct and elsewhere, in the cisterns of the adjacent Haram esh-Sherîf. The reservoir has now been dry for more than two centuries; during which its deep bottom has been in part a receptacle of filth, and in part occupied as a garden of herbs and trees.3

FOUNTAINS. The only sources, or rather receptacles, of living water now accessible at Jerusalem, are three in number. They are all situated without the present walls, in and along the deep Valley of Jehoshaphat. We begin with that lowest down the valley.

Well of Nehemiah or Job. This is the deep well situated just below the junction of the Valley of Hinnom with that of Jehoshaphat. The small oblong

1) See above, p. 480. I have not found the name Piscina Probatica distinctly applied to this reservoir earlier than Brocardus A. D. 1283, (c. 8,) and Marinus Sanutus A. D. 1321, lib. III. 14. 10. These writers speak also (especially Brocardus l. c.) of a large reservoir adjacent to the church of St. Anne, called Piscina interior, now apparently destroyed. This latter seems to have been the Piscina Probatica of the earlier historians of the crusades; see Gesta Dei per Fr. p. 573. Will. Tyr. VIII. 4, fin. Jac.

de Vitr. c. 63. They mention indeed the present reservoir as “lacus quidam ;" but give it no name; Gesta Dei, p. 573. Will. Tyr. 1. c. Sir John Maundeville in the 14th century places the Piscina Probatica within the church of St. Anne; Lond. 1839. p. 88. Comp. also F. Fabri and Rauwolf in Reissb. des heil. Landes, pp. 252, 609.

2) See above, p. 434.

3) Cotovic. Itin. p. 258. Quaresmius II. p. 98. Comp. p. 344,

above.

plain there formed, is covered with an olive-grove, and with the traces of former gardens extending down the valley from the present gardens of Siloam. Indeed this whole spot is the prettiest and most fertile around Jerusalem. Frank Christians call this the well of Nehemiah, supposing it to be the same in which the sacred fire is said to have been hid during the Jewish captivity, until again recovered by that leader of the exiles. But I have not found this name in any writer earlier than the close of the sixteenth century. Those who mention the well before that time, speak of it only as the En-Rogel of the Old Testament. The native inhabitants call it Bîr Eyûb, the Well of Job.3

It is a very deep well, of an irregular quadrilateral form, walled up with large squared stones, terminating above in an arch on one side, and apparently of great antiquity. There is a small rude building over it, furnished with one or two large troughs or reservoirs of stone, which are kept partially filled for the convenience of the people. The well measures 125 feet in depth; 50 feet of which was now full of water. water is sweet, but not very cold; and is at the present day drawn up by hand. An old man from Kefr Selwân was there with his cord and leather bucket, and drew for us. He said the water was good and would sit lightly on the stomach. In the rainy

1) 2 Macc. i. 19-22. Formerly also Puteus ignis; see Quaresmius II. p. 270, seq. Cotovic. p. 292. Doubdan Voyage p. 136.

2) So Brocardus c. 8. Marinus Sanutus III. 14. 9. De Salignac in A. D. 1522, Itin. Tom. X. c. 1. Cotovicus in 1598 calls it Puteus ignis; and Quaresmius seems to be the first to give it the name of Nehemiah.

3) I know not the occasion of this name; yet it occurs in Mejr edDîn in A. Ď. 1495, as if already of long standing; Fundgr. des Or. II.

The

p. 130. It is found also in the Arabic version of Joshua in the Paris and London Polyglotts, for En-Rogel, Josh. xv. 7. The Jewish Itinerary published by Hottinger in hist Cippi Hebraici, says this well is properly that of Joab, though the Gentiles call it the well of Job; p. 48. Ed. 2. This does not at all help the matter. And besides, this Itinerary cannot be older than the last half of the sixteenth century; since it speaks of the building of the walls by Sultan Suleimân; p. 34.

season the well becomes quite full, and sometimes overflows at the mouth. More usually, however, the water runs off under the surface of the ground, and finds an outlet some forty yards below the well. Here, the old man said, it commonly flows for sixty or seventy days in winter, and the stream is sometimes large. An Arabian writer describes the Bîr Eyûb as built up with very large stones; and as having in its lower part a grotto or chamber walled up in like manner, from which the water strictly issues. It might be inferred, perhaps, from the same account, that in a season of drought, the Muhammedans had sunk this well to a greater depth.'

It is singular that the earlier historians of the crusades make no mention of this well; although on account of the abundance of its living water, it must have been of great importance to the Franks. That it existed before their day is obvious; for it is mentioned by Brocardus in A. D. 1283, as being one of the fountains of the Old Testament. It may not improbably have been filled up; and thus have remained unknown to the first crusaders. It is apparently of high antiquity; and there can be little doubt, that it was rightly regarded by Brocardus as identical with the En-Rogel of Scripture; though probably it may have been enlarged and deepened in the course of ages. The fountain En-Rogel is first mentioned in the Book of Joshua, in describing the border between the

1)Mejr ed-Din Hist. of Jerus. in Fundgr. des Or. II. p. 130.

2) Jac. de Vitriaco says expressly of Jerusalem, "fontes autem non habet, excepto uno, qui Siloe nominatur;" c. 55. But he probably would not regard this well as a fountain.

3) See the story related in the work ascribed to Hugo Plagon,

respecting an ancient well below Siloam, which was discovered and cleared out about A. D. 1184, and furnished an abundant supply of water. Hug. Plag. Contin. Gallica Historiæ Guil. Tyr. in Martini et Durand Collect. ampl. Tom. V. p. 889, seq. Wilken's Gesch. der Kreuzz. III. ii. p. 248.