existed in his time, but it must have undergone considerable alterations, for we know that it suffered greatly when it was taken by Nebuchadnezzar. The city is said to have been founded in the year of the world 2023, and in its original state occupied only the two hills of Acra and Sion, upon the latter of which the Jebusites built a fortress, and gave it the name of their ancestor. Joshua made himself master of the Lower Town, but the Jebusites remained masters of the citadel until the time of David. It is necessary, however, to quote the description of Josephus, as it is the basis of all statements concerning the site of Jerusalem. Adopting Whiston's translation, we find the historian thus proceeding in his account of the Jewish War: "The city of Jerusalem was fortified with three walls on such parts as were not encompassed with impassable valleys, for in such places it hath only one wall. The city was built upon two hills, which are opposite to one another, and have a valley to divide them asunder, at which valley the correspondng rows of houses on both sides end. Of these hills, that which contains the upper city is much higher, and in length more direct. Accordingly, it was called the Citadel by King David, but by us it is called the Upper Market Place. The other hill, which was called Acra, and sustains the Lower City, is in the shape of a moon when she is horned; over against this there is a third hill, but materially lower than Acra, and parted formerly from the other by a broad valley. However, in those times when the Asamoneans reigned, they filled up that valley with earth, and had a mind to join the city to the Temple. They then took off part of the height of Acra, and reduced it to be of less elevation than it was before, that the Temple might be superior to it. Now, the Valley of the Cheesemongers, as it was called, and was that which we told you before distinguished the hill of the Upper City from that of the Lower, extended as far as Siloam. On the outsides these hills are surrounded by deep valleys, and, by reason of the preci

pices on both sides, are everywhere impassable." Recurring to the walls mentioned in the first sentence of the passage now quoted, Josephus says, " Of these three walls the old one was hard to be taken, both by reason of the valleys, and of that hill on which it was built, and which was above them. But besides that great advantage as to the place where they were situated, it was also built very strong, because David and Solomon, and the following kings, were very zealous about this work." After a more minute account of the walls, he adds, that "the city in its ultimate extension included another hill, the fourth, called Bezetha, to the north of the Temple, from which it was separated by a deep artificial ditch. This new built part of the city was called Bezetha in our language, which, if interpreted in the Grecian language, may be called the New City." As this part of Jerusalem belongs to the New Testament history, it will not at present engage our attention.

Tasso gives a topographical description of Jerusalem, the accuracy of which is affirmed by all travellers—

"Jerusalem is seated on two hills,

Of height unlike, and turned side to side, The space between a gentle valley fills,

From mount to mount expansed far and wide;
Three sides are sure enchas'd with crags and hills,
The rest is easy, scant to rise espied;
But mighty bulwarks fence that plainer part,
So art helps nature, nature strengtheneth art.

The town is stored of troughs and cisterns, made
Devoid of grass, unfit for ploughman's trade,
To keep fresh water, but the country seems

Not fertile, moist with rivers, wells, and streams. There grow few trees to make the summer's shade,

To shield the parched land from scorching beams, Save that a wood stands six miles from the town, With aged cedars dark, and shadows brown.

Acra, and Mount Moriah, on which the Temple was built; or they may be considered as two hills, after Mount Acra was levelled, and the valley filled up which separated it from Mount Moriah. Zion was the largest of those hills, and contained the Upper City, the City of David, with the citadel, the strength of which, and its strong position, enabled the Jebusites long to retain it as their stronghold, and to maintain their command over the lower part of the city even when the Israelites occupied it with them. Mount Zion, which is almost excluded from the present city, formed the southern portion of ancient Jerusalem. "It is nearly a mile in circumference," says Dr Richardson, "is highest on the west side, and towards the east slopes down in broad terraces on the upper part of the mountain, and narrow ones on the side, as it slopes down towards the brook Kedron. This Mount is considerably higher than the ground on which the ancient city stood, or that on the east leading towards the Valley of Jehoshaphat, but has very little relative height above the ground on the south and on the west, and must have owed its boasted strength principally to a deep ravine by which it is encompassed on the east, south, and west, and the strong high walls and towers by which it was enclosed and flanked completely round." This ravine is described as being about 150 feet in breadth; and its depth, or the height of Mount Zion, above the bottom, about sixty feet. The bottom is rock, with a thin sprinkling of earth, and in the winter season conveys off the water which falls into it from the high ground. On both sides the rock is cut perpendicularly down, and it was probably the quarry from which much of the stone used for building the city was taken.

We may therefore consider ancient Jerusalem as situated on a mass or ridge of barren hills, forming the southern end of a plain which extends northward towards Samaria, and of which Mount Zion forms the southern and most elevated part. The component hills of this mass are not now

so distinctly marked as the description of Josephus would suggest, but he himself describes one hill as having been levelled, and the valley which separated it from the adjoining hills filled up; and the present undulated appearance of the site may be ascribed to the wearing away of the hills and the filling up of the valleys, or to the concurrence of both causes. But taking the site of Jerusalem as a whole, and without attending to the distinction of hills, it is surrounded, on the east, west, and south, by valleys of various depth and breadth, but to the north it extends into the plain which is locally designated the Plain of Jeremiah, and is the best wooded tract in the neighbourhood. The town began at the southern or Mount Zion part of this site, its progressive extension being necessarily northward as stated by Josephus; and in its ultimate extension, according to the same historian, comprehended a circuit of thirtythree furlongs, or very nearly four miles, whereas that of the modern town is not more than two and a half miles. The con- . fining valleys are often mentioned by the inspired writers, and those on the east and south are very deep. The former is the Valley of Jehoshaphat, through which flows the brook Kedron; the latter is generally called the Valley of Hinnom, a name which is also extended by some travellers to the western and less deeper valley, while others call it the Valley of Rephaim, and the Valley of Gihon. On the opposite side of these valleys rise hills mostly of superior elevation to the city itself. That beyond the brook Kedron on the east is the Mount of Olives; that on the south side is usually designated the Hill of Offence, or the Hill of Evil Counsel, which is broad and barren, loftier than the Mount of Olives, and without its picturesque beauty; and this is considered by some travellers to be the true Mount Zion, for even its situation has been disputed. On the west there is a rocky flat, which has a considerable elevation towards the north, and which is termed Mount Gihon. At Scopo, where the Romans encamped under Titus at

the memorable siege, the ground is considerably elevated above the immediate site of the city. Hence, perhaps, the beautiful expression of David," As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about his people."

The

It is impossible to contemplate Jerusalem in its ancient state without the strongest emotions, and the ordinary panoramic paintings of even the modern city recall to the serious mind many overwhelming and sacred historical associations. best view of it is said to be obtained from the Mount of Olives, which is usually visited by travellers for that purpose. This view comprehends in the distance the Dead Sea and the mountains of Arabia Petræa. To the west, the city, with its surrounding valleys and all its topographical characteristics, is below and very near the spectator, the Valley of Jehoshaphat only intervening between the city and the Mount. The relative height of the surrounding mountains gives Jerusalem an apparent elevation inferior to what it actually possesses. Its real elevation is estimated by Mr Buckingham at 1500 feet above the level of the sea, and this situation moderates the heat of the climate, which seldom exceeds 84° Fahrenheit in summer. There are also frequent falls of snow in the mountains, which rarely occurs in the southern parts, especially the plains, of Palestine. The barren and cheerless character of the country many miles round Jerusalem, whatever may have been its former condition, has excited the surprise of some travellers that it should have ever been selected as the site of a great city. But it ought to be recollected that the disadvantages under which it now labours are the results of wars, desolations, pestilences, and the natural indolence of its Moslem masters. The situation of the town, observes Mr Carne, "on the brink of rugged hills, encircled by deep and wide valleys, bounded by eminences the sides of which were covered with groves and gardens, added to its numerous towers and Temple, must have given it a singular and gloomy magnificence

scarcely surpassed by any other city in the world." Whatever may have been the motives for the selection of this spot for the metropolis of Judea—as it cannot be denied that there are many places in the interior and on the coast which greatly excel Jerusalem in beauty, with more ample advantages for commerce, and a larger supply of water-whether the original choice was one of accident or design, or whether David naturally selected it because he had been born in its neighbourhood, we know that Solomon permanently fixed its metropolitan character by the erection of the Temple, and it was chiefly the Temple which in subsequent times maintained Jerusalem as the capital of the Holy Land. Even after the destruction of that magnificent fabric, the mere fact that it had existed at Jerusalem sufficiently influenced the national partialities, and prevented the selection of a new or more advantageous site for a metropolis when opportunities occurred. The revolt of the Ten Tribes, and the erection of the separate kingdom of Israel, after the death of Solomon, farther operated against any intentions of change which might have arisen, during the long series of years after Jerusalem had become in a civil sense the capital of the smaller of the two kingdoms into which the country was divided, although it always remained the ecclesiastical metropolis of the whole territory of the Tribes.

Ancient Jerusalem was situated on the frontiers of Judah and Benjamin, a part of it being built in the territory of both Tribes, and hence it is sometimes considered a part of the one and sometimes of the other. By the distribution of Joshua it belonged to Benjamin, Josh. xviii. 28, but by right of conquest it belonged to Judah-that Tribe having twice subdued it, first under the Judges, and afterwards under David. But to revert more minutely to its ancient history, although Joshua made himself master of the lower town in the first year of his arrival in Cauaan, we find the Jebusites mentioned among those of the league