by
Damien F. Mackey
“And as [Jesus] went out of the Temple [note that Jesus and the disciples
were standing outside the Temple walls
and looking back toward the Temple enclosure], one of his disciples
saith unto him, ‘Master, see what buildings are here!’ And Jesus answering said
unto him, ‘Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone
upon another, that shall not be thrown down’"(Matthew 24:1). Without the
slightest doubt, when Jesus in his prophecy spoke about the destruction of the
Temple, he was certainly including in his prophecy the stones of the outer
walls that enclosed the Temple as well as the buildings of the inner Temple.”
Dr. Ernest L. Martin
I have so far, largely following the important geographical research of Dr. Martin in Jerusalem,
compiled
the following relevant articles on the layout of ancient Jerusalem and its
environs:
https://www.academia.edu/32929762/Newly-discovered_Seleucid_Fort_Acra_a_challenge_to_identity_of_Temple_Mount
Dr. Ernest L. Martin has supplied a lot more fascinating historical and geologico-archaeological material - which seems to me to be generally irrefutable - in his brilliant article at: http://askelm.com/temple/t980504.htm
The Temple Mount
and Fort Antonia
We all remember the proverb that a picture is worth a thousand words. This
is so true. When we are able to view a site that we have been reading or
hearing about, the historical and architectural information associated with the
area becomes much more meaningful and the subject better understood. That is
certainly the case with the Temple built by Herod the Great that existed in the
time of Christ Jesus along with the adjacent fortress that dominated the
landscape known as Fort Antonia. The truth is, no one in modern history (nor
for the past 1900 years) has actually witnessed the complex of buildings that
comprised the Holy Sanctuary and the fort that was built to protect it. This is
one of the reasons why I have wanted to present to all of you on the ASK mailing
list the first general view of what the Temple and Fort Antonia looked like to
the inhabitants of Jerusalem during the time of Jesus. Once we recognize the
actual situation of the two structures that I show in the illustrations, and
once you realize their dimensions, many points of teaching that we observe in
the New Testament will make much better sense to us.
In a word, a true perspective of those two buildings that occupied the
greater part of northeastern Jerusalem (west of the Mount of Olives and the
Mount of Offense) will provide a panoramic view that will show the sheer beauty
and majesty of the Mother City of the Jews in the early part of the first
century. Without doubt, it was a splendid and awesome display of architectural
grandeur at its best. My new book "The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot"
will present the full and interesting details.
What you are about the see in the illustrations at the conclusion of this
Report is the description of the Temple and Fort Antonia as presented by
Josephus, the Jewish historian. He was an eyewitness to the City of Jerusalem
before the Romans destroyed it in A.D.70. I have had our artist draw both a
horizontal aspect as though you would view the buildings from above (in outline
form as an architect would draw the edifices), and also to show a vertical
aspect that gives a three dimensional effect as seen from the east side of the
buildings. The squared or rectangular stones that comprise both structures are
very large but they are not drawn to exact scale. They represent an artist’s
impression given with my directions in accord with the descriptions recorded by
Josephus. If you will read Josephus yourself, you will find that our
illustrations simply depict the eyewitness accounts of Josephus as he stated
them in his literature.
The vertical sight will be that from the top of the southern part of the
Mount of Olives known as the Mount of Offense which was directly east of the
old city of David formerly located south of the Gihon Spring. This is the best
place to view ancient Jerusalem. My new book will illustrate these points
clearly.
A Panoramic View of Ancient Jerusalem
Let me start by mentioning a scene that usually occupies the attention of
each person who visits Jerusalem for the first time (or who returns year after
year to see the archaeological remains of the Jerusalem of Herod and Jesus).
That particular scene is observed from the Mount of Olives just in front of the
Seven Arches Hotel. This is where people can obtain the best over-all view of
the ancient and modern City of Jerusalem. Before I present you with some
details concerning this inspiring and unforgettable prospect, let me relate a
little about myself for some of you who only recently have come on the A.S.K.
mailing list through the Internet. This will allow you to understand my deep
interest and my personal involvement with the City of Jerusalem over the past
four decades.
My first visit to Jerusalem was in the year 1961. Since then I have
returned to the city over thirty times from areas in Europe or America where I
have lived. Though I am an American, I have professionally taught college in
England where I lived for fourteen years (from 1958 to 1972). In Jerusalem, I
worked personally on a daily basis with Professor Benjamin Mazar in the archaeological
excavations at the western and southern walls of the Haram esh-Sharif. My
working association with Professor Mazar on that site lasted for two months
each summer during the years 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973. Over that period
of five summers, I was the academic supervisor for 450 college students from
around the world who were digging at that archaeological excavation directed by
Professor Mazar. Time magazine in its Education Section for September 3,
1973 featured my academic program for granting college credits for students who
worked under my superintendence at Professor Mazar’s archaeological excavation
sponsored by the Israel Exploration Society and Hebrew University. Besides this
particular professional association at the excavation, I have personally guided
more than 800 people around all areas of Israel explaining its biblical and
secular history.
Though I am not an archaeologist by profession (my M.A. is in Theology and
my Ph.D. is in Education), I have written several books and other major studies
on the history and geography of Jerusalem especially in the periods of Jesus,
the Roman Empire and Byzantium. I mention these brief biographical points to
show that I have had considerable opportunity to study and to know the history
of ancient Jerusalem.
With this in mind, let’s return to the top of the Mount of Olives to be
reminded of the splendid panoramic perspective depicting the remnants of
ancient Jerusalem as well as witnessing the vibrant and bustling modern City of
Jerusalem. For the 450 college students and the 800 persons I have guided in
their visits to Jerusalem, I have always taken them to this spot on the Mount
of Olives in order for them to visualize, as a beginning lesson, what ancient
Jerusalem was really like.
Observing Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives
The view is spectacular. There is no scene from other areas of Jerusalem
that can replicate the grandeur of the ancient archaeological remains of the
city. What dominates the scene, as one looks westward, is a rectangular body of
walls with gigantic stones perfectly aligned with one another in their lower
courses. These four walls present to the observer a feeling of majesty and awe
at what the ancients were capable of accomplishing by their architectural achievements.
These walls surround the area presently known as the Haram esh-Sharif (the
Noble Enclosure). The stones of the lower courses in those walls are in their
pristine positions. They are still placed neatly on top of another without any
major displacement from their original alignments. These lower stones are
clearly Herodian in origin, and in some places in the eastern portion of the
wall they are pre-Herodian. There are certainly more than 10,000 of these
stones still in place as they were in the time of Herod and Jesus.
No archaeological authority has been able to count all the stones of the
four walls surrounding the Haram esh-Sharif because many of the stones are
still hidden from view. But at the holy site at the Western Wall (often called
the "Wailing Wall") there are seven courses presently visible within
that 197 feet length of the wall in the north/south exposure. That section
contains about 450 Herodian stones. There are, however, eight more courses of
Herodian stones underneath the soil down to the ground level that existed in
the time of Herod and Jesus. Even below that former ground level, there are a
further nine courses of foundation stones. If that whole section of the
"Wailing Wall" could be exposed, one could no doubt count around 1250
Herodian stones (probably more) of various sizes. Most stones are about three
to four feet high and three feet to twelve feet long, but there are varying
lengths up to 40 feet (with the larger stones weighing about 70 tons). One
stone has been found in the Western Wall that has the prodigious weight of 400
tons (Meir Ben-Dov, Mordechai Naor, Zeev Aner, "The Western Wall,"
pp.61, 215). If one could extend by extrapolating the number of stones making
up the four walls surrounding the Haram, there has to be over 10,000 Herodian
and pre-Herodian stones still very much in place as they were some 2000 years
ago. All of these stones in those four walls survived the Roman/Jewish War of
A.D.70-73.
The grand centerpiece within the whole enclosure is the Muslim shrine called
the Dome of the Rock. It is centrally located in a north/south dimension within
the rectangular area of the Haram. To the south of the Dome and abutting to the
southern wall is another large building called the Al Aqsa Mosque with its
smaller dome. And though from the Mount of Olives modern Jerusalem can be seen
in the background (and its contemporary skyline of buildings is interesting),
the whole area is overshadowed and dominated by the Haram esh-Sharif with those
ancient walls that impressively highlight the scene.
This is the view that modern viewers are accustomed to see. But let us now
go back over 1900 years and imagine viewing Jerusalem from this same spot. It
is from this vantagepoint that Titus (the Roman General) looked on the ruins of
Jerusalem after the Roman/Jewish War in A.D.70. The description of what Titus
saw is very instructive. We should read his appraisal in the accounts preserved
by Josephus because Josephus and Titus were both eyewitnesses. Notice not only
what Titus observed, but also what he left out of the narrative (War VII.1,1).
This omission will become of prime importance in our inquiry regarding the true
location of the Temple. Titus commanded that only a part of a wall and three
forts were to remain of what was once the glorious City of Jerusalem. Notice
what is stated in War VII.1,1.
"Now as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder,
because there remained none to be the objects of their fury (for they would not
have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done), Caesar gave
orders that they should now demolish the entire city and Temple, but should
leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminence; that is,
Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the
city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such
as were to lie in garrison [in the Upper City], as were the towers [the three
forts] also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it
was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all
the rest of the wall [surrounding Jerusalem], it was so thoroughly laid
even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was
left nothing to make those that came thither believe it [Jerusalem] had
ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the
madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great
magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind" (Whiston trans.,
italics, bracketed words mine).
This eyewitness account about the total ruin of Jerusalem has given
visitors to Jerusalem a major problem in relation to what we witness of ancient
Jerusalem today. The fact is, Titus gave orders that the Temple was to be
demolished. The only man-made structures to be left in Jerusalem was to be a
portion of the western wall and the three fortresses located in the Upper City.
This was Titus’ intention at first. But within a short time, even that portion
of the western wall and the three fortresses in the west were so thoroughly
destroyed that not a trace of them remained (unless the so-called "Tower
of David" near the present day Jaffa Gate as scholars guess is a part of
the foundation of Hippicus or Phasaelus). At the conclusion of the war, the
Tenth Legion left Jerusalem a mass of ruins. Stones from those ruins were
finally used in the following century to build a new city called Aelia. But by
late A.D.70, there was nothing left standing of the Temple or the buildings of
Jerusalem. Josephus stated:
"And truly, the very view itself was a melancholy thing; for those
places which were adorned with trees and pleasant gardens, were now become
desolate country every way, and its trees were all cut down. Nor could any
foreigner that had formerly seen Judaea and the most beautiful suburbs of the
city, and now saw it as a desert, but lament and mourn sadly at so great a
change. For the war had laid all signs of beauty quite waste. Nor had
anyone who had known the place before, had come on a sudden to it now, would he
have known it again. But though he [a foreigner] were at the city itself, yet
would he have inquired for it" (War VI.1,1).
What the Modern Visitor Observes
These descriptions by Josephus are what he and Titus saw from the Mount of
Olives. But this is NOT what we observe today. We see something remaining from
the period of Herod and Jesus that is quite different. Directly to the west, we
view an awe-inspiring architectural relic of the past that is splendidly
positioned directly in front of us. It dominates the whole western prospect of
this panoramic view. That ancient structure is the Haram esh-Sharif. Its
rectangular walls are so large in dimension that the Haram effectively obscures
much of the view of the present old city of Jerusalem. And certainly, without
the slightest doubt, the Haram (in its lower courses of stones that make up its
walls) is a building that survived the Roman/Jewish War. Indeed, it is an
outstanding example of the early architectural grandeur that once graced the Jerusalem
of Herod and Jesus that has withstood two thousand years of weathering,
earthquakes, wars and natural deterioration.
What is strange, and almost inexplicable at first, is the fact that
Josephus mentioned the utter ruin of the Temple and all the City of Jerusalem,
but he gave no reference whatever to the Haram esh-Sharif or that Titus had
commanded that those walls should remain intact. And through the centuries, up
to our modern period, there are over 10,000 stones still in their original
positions making up the four walls of the Haram. As a matter of fact, in Titus’
time there were probably another 5,000 stones that were left on the upper
courses of the four walls that have been dislodged and fallen to the ground
over the centuries since the first century. What must be recognized is the fact
that Titus deliberately left the rectangular shaped Haram esh-Sharif
practically in the state he found it when he first got to Jerusalem with his
legions. Strangely, Titus must have ordered that those four walls be retained
for all future ages to see.
Without doubt, the Haram esh-Sharif with its gigantic walls was a survivor
of the war. But how could Josephus have failed to account for the retention of
such a spacious and magnificent building that was clearly in existence in
pre-war Jerusalem? The continued existence of those extensive remains of the
Haram esh-Sharif seem (at first glance) to nullify the appraisal of Josephus
and Titus. Remember, they said that nothing of Jerusalem was left. "It
[Jerusalem] was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it
up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came
thither believe it [Jerusalem] had ever been inhabited."
What is even more strange is the modern belief that the Haram esh-Sharif
must be reckoned as the site of the Temple Mount. If present scholarly opinion
is correct, this means that Titus and the Roman legions did not destroy the
outer walls of the Temple in its middle and lower courses. The Romans left over
10,000 stones in place around the Haram. This modern belief of scholars and
religious authorities (whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian) that the retention
of those 10,000 stones around the Haram represents the remnants of the walls of
the Temple make the above descriptions of their demolition by Josephus and
Titus as being outlandish exaggerations. And true enough, this is precisely how
most modern scholars, theologians, religious leaders and archaeologists view
the matter.
Professor Williamson, who translated Josephus, said this was the case. He
remarked that the thorough desolation that Titus was supposed to have seen in
front of him was: "An exaggeration. A great deal of the southern part of
the Temple enclosure was spared. The whole of the south wall of its successor, the
present wall round the Haram esh-Sharif, the southern section of the west wall
(the ‘Wailing Wall’, where the fall of Jerusalem is still lamented) and a short
stretch of the east wall running up from the southeast corner are Herodian to a
considerable height" (The Jewish War, p.454, note 2). We will see
abundant evidence in my new book that Josephus was not exaggerating. This is
because that enclosure known as the Haram esh-Sharif was NOT the Temple Mount,
nor was the structure then officially reckoned as a part of the municipality of
Jerusalem.
Our modern scholars and religious authorities consistently state that we
cannot believe Josephus literally in his accounts concerning the important
descriptions that he provides. We will discover, however, that it is the modern
scholars and the religious leaders who are wrong and not Josephus. Josephus,
the historian/priest, knew what he was talking about. Jerusalem and the Temple
were totally destroyed and not a stone of them was left in place. The truth is,
the Haram esh-Sharif was NOT the Temple Mount.
Josephus Was Not Exaggerating
It is time for us to realize that it is the modern scholars who are wrong, not
the eyewitness accounts of Josephus and Titus. Jerusalem and the Temple
were indeed destroyed to the bedrock just as they relate. Regarding this, there
are other sections of Josephus’ accounts to show that he was not exaggerating.
Josephus was keen on telling his readers that all the walls around
Jerusalem were leveled to the ground. Note his observation: "Now
the Romans set fire to the extreme parts of the city [the suburbs] and burnt
them down, and entirely demolished its [Jerusalem’s] walls"
(War VI.9,4.).
This reference shows that all the walls, even those enclosing the outskirts
of Jerusalem, were finally leveled to the ground. To reinforce the matter,
Josephus said elsewhere: "When he [Titus] entirely demolished the rest
of the city, and overthrew its walls, he left these towers [the
three towers mentioned above] as a monument of his good fortune, which had
proved [the destructive power of] his auxiliaries, and enabled him to take what
could not otherwise have been taken by him" (War VI.9,1).
These two accounts by Josephus, along with the previous observations given
above, confirm that there was a literal destruction of all the walls
surrounding Jerusalem (except the small section of the wall in the western part
of the Upper City that was afterward destroyed because not a trace of it has
been mentioned of its retention by later eyewitnesses or found by modern
archaeologists). Indeed, after A.D.70 there is not a word by any historical
record that even speaks of those three fortresses in the Upper City having a continuance
that Titus at first thought to leave as standing monuments showing the power of
Rome over the Jews.
But again, these descriptions of Josephus and Titus of total ruin seem to
be at variance with what we witness today. Let’s face it. From the Mount of
Olives we behold the four walls of the Haram still erect in all their glory,
and they are prominently displayed with a majesty that dominates the whole of
present-day Jerusalem. The lower courses of those walls clearly have
10,000+Herodian and pre-Herodian stones on top of one another. As a matter of
fact, those rectangular walls are even functioning ramparts of Jerusalem today.
They have been in constant use throughout the intervening centuries to protect
the buildings that were built in the interior of that enclosure called the
Haram esh-Sharif.
Again I say, if those rectangular walls are those which formerly surrounded
the Temple Mount (as we are confidently informed by all authorities today), why
did Josephus and Titus leave out of their eyewitness accounts any
mention about this retention of this magnificent Haram structure? They spoke of
the utter ruin and desolation of Jerusalem and of the Temple, not the survival
of any buildings that the Jewish authorities once controlled. Be this as it
may, Josephus and Titus were certainly aware that the walls of the Haram
survived the war. Why did Josephus and Titus not refer to those walls of the
Haram that remained standing in their time? My new book will explain the reason
why, and very clearly.
A Quandary for Modern Christians
These facts present a major problem for Christians. If those rectangular
walls of the Haram are indeed the same walls (in their lower courses) that
formerly embraced the Temple Mount, why are these stones (more than 10,000 in
number) yet so firmly on top of one another? The continued existence of those
gigantic and majestic walls would show that Titus did not destroy the walls of
the Temple, if those walls did surround the Temple. Why is this a difficulty
for Christian belief? The reason is plain.
Christians are aware of four prophecies given by Jesus in the New Testament
that there would not be one stone left upon another either of the
Temple and its walls or even of the City of Jerusalem and its walls (Matthew
24:1,2; Mark 13:1,2; Luke 19:43,44; 21:5,6.). But strange as it may appear, the
walls surrounding the Haram esh-Sharif still remain in their glory with their
10,000+ Herodian and pre-Herodian stones solidly in place in their lower
courses. If those stones are those of the Temple, the prophecies of Jesus can
be seriously doubted as having any historical value or merit in any analysis by
intelligent and unbiased observers.
Indeed, the majority of Christian visitors to Jerusalem who first view
those huge stones surrounding the rectangular area of the Haram (and who know
the prophecies of Jesus) are normally perplexed and often shocked at what they
see. And they ought to be. The surprise at what they observe has been the case
with numerous people that I have guided around Jerusalem and Israel. They have
asked for an explanation concerning this apparent failure of the prophecies of
Jesus. Why do those gigantic walls still exist? If those walls represent the
stones around the Temple, then the prophecies of Christ are invalid.
The usual explanation, however, to justify the credibility to Jesus’
prophecies is to say that Jesus could only have been speaking about the inner
Temple and its buildings, NOT the outer Temple and its walls that surrounded
it. This is the customary and the conciliatory answer that most scholars
provide (and it is the explanation that I formerly gave my students or
associates). The truth is, however, this explanation will not hold water when
one looks at what Jesus prophesied. One should carefully observe the prophecies
of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels. They plainly state that one stone would not
rest on another of the Temple, its buildings, and his prophecies also embraced
its outer walls. The Greek word Jesus used in his prophetic context to describe
the Temple and its buildings was hieron (this means the entire Temple
including its exterior buildings and walls). Notice what Vincent says about the
meaning of hieron.
"The word temple (hieron, lit., sacred place)
signifies the whole compass of the sacred enclosure, with its porticos, courts,
and other subordinate buildings; and should be carefully distinguished from the
other word, naos, also rendered temple, which means the temple
itself — the "Holy Place" and the "Holy of Holies." When we
read, for instance, of Christ teaching in the temple (hieron) we
must refer it to one of the temple-porches [outer colonnades]. So it is from
the hieron, the court of the Gentiles, that Christ expels the
money-changers and cattle-merchants"( Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament,
Vol. I., p.50).
The exterior buildings of the Temple including its walls were always
reckoned within the meaning of the word hieron that Jesus used in his
prophecies concerning the total destruction of the Temple. There were several
outer divisions of the Temple that were distinguished from the Inner Temple,
and these outer appurtenances were accounted to be cardinal features of the
Sanctuary. As an example, note the New Testament account stating that Satan
took Jesus to the "pinnacle of the Temple" (Matthew 4:5). The
pinnacle section was the southeastern corner of the outer wall that surrounded
the whole of the Temple complex. The wording in the New Testament shows that
this southeastern angle belonged to the Temple — it was a pinnacle [a wing]
"of the Temple." That area was very much a part of the sacred edifice
to which Jesus referred when he prophesied that not one stone would remain on
another.
There is an important geographical factor that proves this point. When
Jesus made his prophecy that no stone would be left on one another, Matthew
said that Jesus and his disciples had just departed from the outer precincts of
the Temple. This means that all of them were at the time viewing the exterior
sections of the Temple (the hieron) when he gave his prophecy (Matthew
24:1). The Gospel of Mark goes even further and makes it clear that the outside
walls of the Temple were very much in the mind of Jesus when he said they would
be uprooted from their very foundations. "And as he [Jesus] went out of
the Temple [note that Jesus and the disciples were standing outside the
Temple walls and looking back toward the Temple enclosure], one of his
disciples saith unto him, ‘Master, see what buildings are here!’ And Jesus
answering said unto him, ‘Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be
left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down’"(Matthew
24:1). Without the slightest doubt, when Jesus in his prophecy spoke about the
destruction of the Temple, he was certainly including in his prophecy the
stones of the outer walls that enclosed the Temple as well as the buildings of
the inner Temple.
The Whole City of Jerusalem Also to be Destroyed
Jesus went even further than simply prophesying about the destruction of
the Temple and its walls. He also included within his prophetic predictions the
stones that made up the whole City of Jerusalem (with every building and house
that comprised the metropolis — including the walls that embraced its urban
area). According to Jesus in Luke 19:43,44, every structure of Jewish Jerusalem
would be leveled to the ground —to the very bedrock. "For the days shall
come upon thee [Jerusalem], that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee,
and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee
even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not
leave in thee one stone upon another."
So, in the prophecies of Jesus, not only the stones that made up the Temple
and its walls were to be torn down, but he also included within that scope of
destruction even the stones that comprised the totality of the City of
Jerusalem. We are left with no ambiguity concerning this matter. The prophecies
about the Temple and the City of Jerusalem either happened exactly as Jesus
predicted or those prophecies must be reckoned as false and unreliable. There
can be no middle ground on the issue. If one is honest with the plain meaning
of the texts of the Gospels, Jesus taught that nothing would be left
of the Temple, nothing left of the whole City of Jerusalem, and nothing
left of the walls of the Temple and the City.
Josephus and Titus Agree With Jesus
Was Jesus correct in his prophecies? Was Jerusalem with its Temple and
walls leveled to the ground? What is remarkable is the fact that the eyewitness
accounts given by Josephus and Titus agree precisely with what Jesus
prophesied. Note what these two men observed. "It [Jerusalem with its
walls] was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug
it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make
those that came thither believe it [Jerusalem] had ever been inhabited" (War
VII.1,1).
All the land surrounding the city of Jerusalem was a desolate wasteland.
Note Josephus’ account.
"They had cut down all the trees, that were in the country that
adjoined to the city, and that for ninety stadia round about [for nearly ten
miles], as I have already related. And truly, the very view itself was a
melancholy thing. Those places that were before adorned with trees and pleasant
gardens were now become a desolate country in every way, and its trees were all
cut down. Nor could any foreigner that had formerly seen Judaea and the most
beautiful suburbs of the city, and now saw it as a desert, but lament and mourn
sadly at so great a change. For the war had laid all signs of beauty quite
waste. Nor, if any one that had known the place before, and had come on a
sudden to it now, would he have known it again. But though he were at the city
itself, yet would he have inquired for it notwithstanding" (War VI.1,1,
following the Whiston translation).
After A.D.70, people would have seen utter desolation in all directions.
Every stone of every building and wall in Jerusalem was dislodged from its
original position and thrown down to the ground. Josephus provides reasonable
accounts of later events after the war was over to show how this complete
destruction was accomplished. Much of the destruction came after the war had
ceased.
For six months after the war, Josephus tells us that the Tenth Legion
"dug up" the ruins of the houses, buildings and walls looking for
plunder. They systematically excavated beneath the foundations of the ruined
buildings and houses (they had many of the Jewish captives do the work for
them). They also had the whole area turned upside down looking for gold and
other precious metals that became molten when the fires were raging. This
caused the precious metals to melt and flow into the lower crevices of the
stones. Even the foundation stones contained melted gold from the great fires
that devoured Jerusalem. This plundering of every former building or wall in
the municipality of Jerusalem resulted in the troops overturning (or having the
remaining Jewish captives overturn for them) every stone within the
city. We will soon see that this activity resulted in every stone of Jewish
Jerusalem being displaced.
This continual digging up of the city occurred over a period of several
months after the war. Indeed, after an absence of about four months, Titus
returned to Jerusalem from Antioch and once again viewed the ruined city.
Josephus records what Titus saw.
"As he came to Jerusalem in his progress [in returning from Antioch to
Egypt], and compared the melancholy condition he saw it then in, with the
ancient glory of the city [compared] with the greatness of its present ruins
(as well as its ancient splendor). He could not but pity the destruction of the
city…. Yet there was no small quantity of the riches that had been in that city
still found among the ruins, a great deal of which the Romans dug up; but the
greatest part was discovered by those who were captives [Jewish captives were
forced by the Roman troops to dig up the stones of their own city looking for
gold], and so they [the Romans] carried it away; I mean the gold and the
silver, and the rest of that most precious furniture which the Jews had, and
which the owners had treasured up under ground against the uncertainties of
war."
Three Years After the War
We now come to the final appraisal of the complete desolation of Jerusalem.
Note what Eleazar, the final Jewish commander at Masada, related three years
after the war was finished at Jerusalem. He gives an eyewitness account of how
the Romans preserved Fort Antonia (the Haram) among the ruins. What Eleazar
said to the 960 Jewish people (who were to commit suicide rather than fall into
the hands of General Silva who was on the verge of capturing the Fortress of
Masada) is very important in regard to our present inquiry. This final Jewish
commander lamented over the sad state of affairs that everyone could witness at
this twilight period of the conflict after the main war with the Romans was
over.
Jerusalem was to Eleazar a disastrous spectacle of utter ruin. There was
only one thing that remained of the former Jerusalem that Eleazar could
single out as still standing. This was the Camp of the Romans that Titus
permitted to remain as a monument of humiliation over the Mother City of the
Jews. Eleazar acknowledged that this military encampment had been in Jerusalem before
the war, and that Titus let it continue after the war. The retention
of this single Camp of the Romans, according to Eleazar, was a symbol of the
victory that Rome had achieved over the Jewish people. His words are recorded
in War VII.8,7. Several words and phrases need emphasizing, and I hope I
have done so:
"And where is now that great city [Jerusalem], the metropolis of the
Jewish nation, which was fortified by so many walls round about, which had so
many fortresses and large towers to defend it, which could hardly contain the
instruments prepared for the war, and which had so many ten thousands of men to
fight for it? Where is this city that was believed to have God himself
inhabiting therein? it is now demolished to the very foundations, and
hath nothing left but THAT MONUMENT of it preserved, I mean THE CAMP OF THOSE [the
Romans] that hath destroyed it, WHICH STILL DWELLS UPON ITS RUINS;
some unfortunate old men also lie ashes upon the of the Temple [the
Temple was then in total ruins — all of it had been burnt to ashes], and a few
women are there preserved alive by the enemy, for our bitter shame and
reproach."
What Eleazar said must be reckoned as an eyewitness account of the state of
Jerusalem in the year A.D.73. This narrative is of utmost importance to our
question at hand. This is because Eleazar admitted that the City of Jerusalem
and all its Jewish fortresses had indeed been demolished "to the very
foundations." There was nothing left of the City or the Temple. This is
precisely what Jesus prophesied would happen.
Eleazar even enforced this. He mentioned the "wholesale
destruction" of the city. He said that God had "abandoned His most
holy city to be burnt and razed to the ground" (War VII.8,6 Loeb).
And then, a short time later, Eleazar concluded his eyewitness account by
stating: "I cannot but wish that we had all died before we had seen that
holy city demolished by the hands of our enemies, or the foundations
of our Holy Temple dug up, after so profane a manner" (War VII.8,7).
Yes, even the very foundation stones that comprised the Temple complex
(including its walls) had been uprooted and demolished. They were then "dug
up" and not even the lower courses of base stones were left in place.
According to Eleazar, the only thing left in the Jerusalem area was a single
Roman Camp that still hovered triumphantly over the ruins of the City and the
Temple. He said that Jewish Jerusalem "hath nothing left." The only
thing continuing to exist was the "monument" (a single monument) preserved
by Titus. And what was that "monument"? Eleazar said it was "the
camp of those that destroyed it [Jerusalem], which still
dwells upon its ruins."
What could this Camp of the Romans have been? This is quite easy to
discover when one reads the accounts of the war as recorded by Josephus. The
main military establishment in Jerusalem prior to the war was Fort Antonia
located to the north of the Temple (which is now the Haram esh-Sharif). In my
new book "The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot," I will give an
abundance of information to show that the Haram was considered Roman property
even before the war. Because Antonia was the property of Rome, they had no
reason to destroy those buildings that already belonged to the Romans. That is
why Titus left Fort Antonia (the Haram esh-Sharif) and its walls in tact (as we
see them today). ….
No comments:
Post a Comment