Abbildungen der Seite

thew, xvii. 1., and the original Greek, some such distinctive character in the hill seems to be required; . Õpos úbraoy xat' idiav, if the words xat' idar' and apart are in either case applied to the mountain. We confess, however, that we perceive no such necessity in either language: our own version would indeed afford no real argument, although we should not hastily ascribe error to it without duly weighing the matter. The passage from St. Mark, ix. 2., may fairly serve as a commentary on the preceding citation; and there, in each language, as Mr. J. has cited them, the words under consideration are most specifically applied to the three Apostles.

• The figure of Mount Tabor is that of a cone with the point struck off.

The summit is by no means an extensive plain (as described by some of Dr. Clarke's party who did not personally visit it), being only a very few acres, nearly covered with the ruins of a fortress, without one solitary tenant, and entirely destitute of cultivation.' Yet it is curious that, although the extent given to this area by Maundrell does not greatly vary from that of Mr. Jolliffe, as he describes it to be of an oval form, about two furlongs in length, and one in breadth, so complete a discrepancy exists in the two accounts of the nature of the surface. Maundrell, who states

that he ascended it, calls the top “ fertile and delicious ;" | while Mr. J. speaks of the absence of cultivation in a manner

which seems to imply also a want of beauty, natural as well as artificial.

In the journey from Nazareth to Jerusalem, the traveller passed over the plain of Esdräelon.

· The extensive vale interposed between Nazareth and Jinnin has at different times, and on different occasions, been termed, the plain of Esdraelon, the field of Megiddo, the plain of Gallilee, an:l the plain of Saba. It is a portion of the land of Canaan, which even in the present neglected state is still distinguished by the luxuriancy of its produce, and appears to merit the peculiar character of fertility so emphatically given it in the sacred writings; though from the higher degree of cultivation to which the Delta is subjected, its comparative superiority over the land of Egypt cannot now be recognized. But the richness of its surface is not the only claim which this district presents to our attention; it is calculated to excite our interest in a peculiar degree, as having been the scene of those military events, which, in different periods of remote ages, decided the fate of powerful armies. The traveller, however faintly impressed with the convictions of Revelation, who traverses Palestine with the Scriptures as his guide, can scarcely fail, when he enters on the field of Megiddo, to acknowledge the influence of that local emotion, which Johnson with such truth Z 3


and eloquence ascribes to the visitor of Marathon. That man, indeed, is little to be envied, who would not feel his patriotism more fervent in the plain of Gallilee, or his religion grow purer amidst the ruins of Jerusalem.'

We ought to have observed before that Mr. J. did what he recommends to others in this extract, --. He traversed Palestine with the Scriptures as his guide,'-- and seems to have made constant and excellent use of his directory. The romantic beauties of Naplouse and its vicinity, situated between the mountains Ebal and Gerizim, the antient Sichem, call forth as much admiration from the present traveller ás from his predecessors in the same path : — but we must hasten on to Jerusalem, respecting which the notices occupy a predominant portion in the volume.

Like his predecessors, Chateaubriand and Dr. Clarke, Mr. Jolliffe indulges in an eloquent display of his feelings on approaching the Holy City. The effect of this rapture, however, so natural in a traveller contemplating such a prospect, and actuated by such reflections as it must in course excite, is much weakened by the immediate succession of a long and little enlivened narrative of its rise and history, from the age of Melchisedec to the final loss of Palestine by the descendants of the Crusaders at the elose of the thirteenth century. This is a barrier, we suspect, which many will pass through without waiting till their passport or knowlege of Jewish history has been accurately examined, and proceed to the interesting objects which lie beyond it. It seems, indeed, very unlikely that this historical review could ever have formed a portion of the original correspendence (which was not intended for the press), and it has probably been since embodied with it; the author having failed to remark how ill such matters suit the forms of epistolary communication.

Our chief object at Jerusalem will be that which was the first with the traveller.

. In the following description of the "holy places," I shall at present confine myself to the narrative of the person who was de. puted by the guardian of Mount Sion to accompany us through the town: on some future occasion we may be enabled to examine his statement more at leisure, and perhaps to discuss it more rationally, than when under the influence of a recent impression.

· The tomb of our Saviour is inclosed in a church to which it has given name, and appears in the centre of a rotunda, whose summit is crowned by a radiant cupola. Its external appearance is that of a superb mausoleum, having the surface covered with rich crimson damask hangings, striped with gold. The annexed sketch, though taken under the disadvantage of frequent interruption, may serve to give you some idea of its form. The entrance looks towards the east; but, immediately in front, a small chapel has been erected to commemorate the spot, where the angel appeared to the two Marys. Just beyond this is the vault in which the Redeemer submitted to a temporary interment: the door of admission is very low, probably to prevent its being entered otherwise than in the attitude of adoration. The figure of the cave is nearly square, extending rather more than six feet lengthways, and being within a few inches of the same width ; the height I should imagine to be about eight feet: the surface of the rock is lined with marble, and hung with silk of the colour of the firmament, At the north side, on a slab raised about two feet, the body of our Saviour was deposited; the stone, which had been much injured by the devotional zeal of the different pilgrims, is now protected with a marble covering; it is strewed with flowers and bedewed with rose-water, and over it are suspended four-and-forty lamps, which are ever burning. The greater part of these are of silver, richly chased; a few are of gold, and were furnished by the different sects of Christianity *, who divide the possession of the church.'


The future occasion, to which Mr. J. refers in this extract, apparently arrives in his thirteenth letter (p. 147.), where the propriety of the claims of this spot to represent the place of crucifixion and the sepulture of our Saviour are examined more particularly : for, as we shall see from the annexed

passage, the claims of the church of the Holy Sepulchre are in this respect double. +

• The irregularity of the surface on which the temple is erected, has been made subservient to the preservation of that particular part of the mount, where the sacrifice of our Saviour was accomplished. The place where the cross was planted retains its original elevation, the adjacent ground being merely Hattened sufficiently to receive a marble pavement. It is seventeen or eighteen feet above the common floor, and is approached by one-and-twenty steps. The aperture in which the cross was fixed is below the centre of a Greek altar : it appears to have been perforated in the rock, and is encircled by a large plate of silver, inscribed with bas-relief figures, representative of the Passion and other scriptural subjects: thirteen lamps are constantly burning over the altar.'

« * Catholics, Greeks, Armenians, Sirians, Abyssines, Georgians, Nestorians, Cophtites, Maronites, &c. &c. Amongst the variety of " persuasions ” which are to be seen in Jerusalem, there are, as yet, no Protestant establishments, strictly so called, of any denomination.'

+ The building is also said to embrace the scene of some other occurrences, connected with these two principal events, but we purposely omit any notice of them in this place. Z 4


The genuineness of the tradition on which these claims rest has been rather strictly examined by Dr. Clarke. It is a question which requires to be separated in its parts : -Ist, Whether there be good testimony to prove that this church represents either the one or the other of those sites : 2dly, Whether there be good grounds for supposing that it embraces them both; and, 3dly, If one of the two claims is to be rejected, which of the two is least intitled to credit, - which ascertained to be tenable.

On the first question, although we differ from Dr. Clarke, we feel little hesitation in answering in the affirmative. A place of burial, especially one that is connected with such miraculous events, and so interesting to all posterity, is more likely than any other to have been preserved by a faithful tradition. The age of Helena was not so very far removed from the commencement of our æra, (A. D. 325,) but that, in her time at least, the authenticity of traditional evidence as to a spot, to the transactions connected with which an appeal was made by all Christians, may be presumed to have been strongly supported; and it must be recollected that we rest on the tradition then received, the addition of fifteen hundred years being incapable either of diminishing or adding to its value. It may next be observed that the spot does tally with the accounts of the Evangelists. The marble encasements, and other works of art, doubtless conceal the native rock in which the sepulchre of Joseph of Arimathea was formed: but we have elsewhere met with concurrent testimony to prove that the site itself of the church is on a rock, and that the rock, although now invisible within the building, is very apparent without it. One strong objection to all this may be urged; viz. the place on which Mount Calvary, crowned with its church, now stands, if not altogether central in the modern city, certainly is completely embraced within it. The Gospels do not afford any positive testimony that the place either of the Passion or the Interment of our Saviour was without the walls of antient Jerusalem, but a general idea prevails that it was. The tomb was in a garden, excavated from a rock, and was evidently not in any cemetery. The Romans certainly did not allow of burials within a city; and at this time Jerusalem was under their command. The Jews also, who esteemed it a pollution even to walk over the grave of the dead or to come in contact with their tombs, were still less likely to admit of burial within their walls, unless in some public receptacle set apart for such a purpose. From these considerations, we may fairly conclude that the tomb was, as usually supposed, without the


city. The only mode, therefore, of reconciling, with a view to this objection, the church of the Sepulchre with the real place of interment, is by distinguishing the different limits of antient and modern Jerusalem, so as to exclude what is now termed Calvary from the former. If for such a purpose the city be compressed on this side, it must clearly be much extended in some other quarter, in order to have rendered it sufficiently capacious for the population which it undoubtedly once possessed. This enlargement can be made only on the side of Mount Sion, and on uneven ground connected with it, which strikes Mr. Jolliffe as a serious objection, such a site being badly adapted for building: but, independently of the circumstance that we know many cities where such inconveniences have been wholly disregarded, passages of Scripture mention buildings in that part of the hill now without the walls; and, although they were primarily intended for defensive purposes, it seems natural to suppose that sites so protected, and contiguous to a populous city, would soon become a part of it. * We conceive, therefore, that we have very good testimony to make us assent to the proposition that the present church of the Holy Sepulchre does occupy at least one of the sites to which it lays claim.

The second question, whether the double claim can be satisfactorily maintained, will not, perhaps, admit of so sufficient an answer. Mr. Jolliffe, indeed, says that the Gospel is decisive as to the fact of the sepulchre being in the place of the crucifixion; to prove which, he cites the words,“ in the place where he was crucified there was a garden ; and in that garden a new sepulchre: there laid they Jesus ; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.+ It can hardly be urged that these words prove so very close a contiguity in the places of the Passion and the Interment, as local tradition now assigns : but that they were by no means distant is authenticated by them; and so far we have evidence in favour of their contiguity. There are other circumstances, however, which support a contrary presumption. Golgotha, or Calvary, or “ the place of a skull,” is usually supposed to have derived its name (varying


1 Maccab. iv. 60. Josephus, Bell. Jud. v. 4. Taciti Histor. V, 10. We may also add on this subject, that the testimony of the age of Helena may be esteemed as equally valuable with that of the Emperor Adrian, so much nearer to the events under consideration : for, if she removed the objects of Heathen worship placed on these sites in mockery of Christianity, she found them already ascertained. + John, xix. 41, 42.


« ZurückWeiter »