reservoirs south of the Mosque, which-if we are to take the architect-engineer of the Pasha of Jerusalem as a credible witness-complete the proof on this head.

The acute, sustained, and ingenious argument by which Mr Sandie shews that there must have been a branch ravine of the Kedron separating Antonia from the temple, is, indeed, quite conclusive. It is borne out by recent discovery. But the ascertained position of the ravine explodes Mr Sandie's theory. Mr Sandie was right in holding that there was a ravine. He was wrong in placing it where he did. We regret to speak of a theory, which was so finely and elaborately spun, as being rent in pieces. But the demands of truth are inexorable. What, then, was the Sakhrah? and how is the veneration with which it is regarded to be accounted for? The opinion of Dr Barclay, who locates it within the north cloister" of the temple, for the purpose of getting it out of the way, and because, " unless in some way excluded from view, it would be an entirely useless and very unsightly object in the court of the Gentiles," is beneath criticism, and unworthy of serious refutation. Great as is the homage which is paid by men to money, Dr Barclay will surely stand alone in thinking that, because this cave of the Sakhrah was "a safe depository for treasure," it became to Jew, Christian, and Mohammedan, an object of profound interest and

reverence.

In the present state of our knowledge, therefore, we favour the view commonly held, and ably vindicated by Pierotti, Bartlett, and others, namely, that this rock is the summit of Mount Moriah, beside which was the threshing-floor of Araunah, on which David, by express divine injunction, erected an altar unto the Lord, and where the Lord answered him from heaven by fire upon the altar of burnt-offering; where, also, Solomon afterwards placed the great brazen altar of burnt-offering in front of the naos, or holy house. Those who object to this view, are bound to explain why this rock was left in its natural rough state amid the splendour of the temple. It will be remembered that the altar was to be of unhewn stone, and not reached by steps. The brazen structure of Solomon could only therefore be an ornamental casing for the rock, whose upper surface no tool had, nor has yet, touched. The shape of the Sakhrah quite adapts it for this purpose; and it has a regular slope on the south side leading up to the higher part, which, according to rabbinical tradition, was the position. of the inclined ascent. The rock is large enough to suit the size of the brazen altar, which was to be 30 feet square. We must content ourselves with remarking, that such a history sufficiently explains the veneration which has centred on this famous but mysterious spot, and with referring to Pierotti and

The Site of Calvary.

329

Bartlett for detailed proof that, on this view of the case, the rock satisfies all the requisite conditions.

Keeping in view the true place of the ravine already spoken of, namely, to the north of the temple, many of the positions for which Mr Sandie contends, in his scholarly book, with much skill and ability, are in perfect harmony with our topographical creed, which isolates the temple hill, surrounds it with a ravine, -at least on three sides,-and perfectly accords with the statements of the Jewish historian. We do not concur with Mr Sandie in his location of Acra and Zion; but we agree with him in thinking that Calvary must have been in the vicinity of Antonia, beside some thoroughfare leading out of the city into the country, and probably in the valley of the Kedron.

When the reader enters on the perusal of the bulky octavo called "The City of the Great King, by J. T. Barclay, M.D., Missionary," he has some reason for doing so with high expectations. He is told in the garrulous preface that the author has been engaged in "kindred studies" for more than twenty years; yet, after a three years' residence in Jerusalem to boot, he had no thought of publishing until, as he informs us, providential circumstances occurred which "gave him opportunities and facilities for research and observation possessed by no one in modern times"! He was called to give his medical services to the Effendi, who was sent as architect to Jerusalem by the Sultan; and as he fortunately succeeded in relieving this Turkish functionary of some disagreeable complaint, the Effendi petitioned the Mejlis or Congress of Jerusalem for liberty to associate his medical adviser with himself in designing the proposed repairs, alterations, and decorations of the Mosque of Omar (or Kubbet es Sakhrah). In this Dr Barclay frankly allows that the Effendi was actuated, not so much by gratitude for his skilful services, nor by a high appreciation of his "technic abilities "-much as he valued them-as by the desire to take advantage of some philosophical instruments which Dr B. had in his possession! The Effendi's request being granted, the American Hakeem, in the novel capacity of architect, enjoyed free access to every part of the Haram area and "other holy places which have been seen by no Christian eye since the chivalric but unenlightened period of Frank domination." And now he felt himself called upon to give the "important and interesting information " to the world of which his "laborious investigations" had put him in possession. allow that Dr B. appears to have availed himself of his access to holy places, and of his other means of acquiring information, with enthusiasm and diligence; but, as we accompany him, we desiderate in him at every step the qualifications which mark the true archæologist and topographer. Of confident

We

hypothesis and dogmatical assertion there is no lack in this volume; but we wish for evidence where we have only oracular averments and unsupported opinions. The historical statements are often untrustworthy; nor are the author's materials, such as they are, disposed in a simple and natural way. On the contrary, they are brought together in a confused mass, bidding defiance to all the rules of correct classification and arrangement, although, from the titles of the chapters, one would, at the first glance, suppose it to be otherwise. The style, too, is vulgar and impure; and its inaccuracies must often offend the taste of a scholarly reader. A few specimens of inaccuracy, out of many more which we have noted, will shew that we do not wantonly prefer this grave charge. Among the classic beauties of the performance, we find tessara for tesserae; cujus animam regnit," for regnat; "pro dolor," for proh dolor!"clauditer" for clauditur; "monasterium de valle Josephat," for de vallis; "Piscina gemilares," for gemellorum; "locus patriarci," for patriarchæ; "Ecclesiae St. Pelagii, St. Petri, St. Johannis," for Sti. Pelagii, &c. "Domus templi sen officiane Fratrum militae Templi," for officina fratrum militiae, &c. We have such phrases as "this late Anno Domini;" and "the esquiline character" of one of the gates of ancient Jerusalem (the dung gate), when the word should have been (if the author had any idea in his head at all) sterquilinarian. Pages could be filled with the colloquialisms and the Americanisms which disfigure the book.

Dr B. speaks of the "accuracy of his maps and other adjuvant illustrations." Concerning his map of the city which, we suppose, is published separately, he affirms, quite characteristically, that "nothing is hazarded in saying that it is the only correct one in existence." If it resemble the plans which belong to this work, this is a statement which only proves how highly the author, in making it, estimated the gullibility of the public. The map of ancient Jerusalem is wretched in execution, and entirely without authority in many of its details. That of Jerusalem under the Crusaders is, on Tobler's testimony, taken from him without acknowledgment, while it pretends to be original. The bird's-eye view of modern Jerusalem has little merit. For some of the best plates, Dr B. is indebted to Bartlett and Williams, whom he has not the grace to mention. In one particular, he shews considerable skill. We refer to his swelling the dimensions of his book by the wholesale importation of large portions of other works, to the extent sometimes of many pages. Will it be believed that in one place about thirty pages are occupied by continuous extracts from Aristeas, Tacitus, and Josephus: while in another part not less than seventy consecutive pages are occupied by

Barclay's City of the Great King.

331

extracts from Arculf, Willibard, Procter's Chronology of the Crusades, Mejr Ed Din Saewulf, Benjamin of Tudela, the Norman Chronicler, and others! Indeed, our author cannot inform us that, by way of an innocent compromise with Mohammedan notions, he voluntarily submitted, before entering the Haram, to what he styles "the rubbing, scrubbing, bumping, thumping, racking, cracking operation of the Turkish bath," without dragging in a lengthened quotation of some six pages, descriptive of this process, which, though ludicrous, is not worthy of a place even in the columns of a Mississippi provincial newspaper, and is inserted here with singularly bad taste. We wonder not that when the explorer of "The City of the Great King" was sending such material to the printer, the publishers-as the former innocently relates-gave him to understand, "to his extreme regret," that "the volume, having already transcended its prescribed limits, must speedily close."

We know not whether this volume be one of that class of works on Palestine, referred to by the author," of whose remunerative circulation there is not even a beginning." But we are sure, after having looked through it as continuously as the fatiguing nature of the occupation would allow, that it is one of that class, of the making of which there need be "no end;' for there is, of course, as little difficulty as merit in re-printing what other men have written. It is with regret we say this of a book which, with all its blunders and blemishes, contains some contributions of permanent value to our knowledge of Jerusalem, by a man who, with strongly-marked transatlantic angularities, is, we doubt not, personally upright and estimable.

W. T.

P.S.-Since the foregoing article was in type, we learn that Lieutenant Warren has been prosecuting his researches at the west wall of the Haram. He has found that the pavement to the east of the pier of "Robinson's Arch," referred to in p. 296, stretches to the temple wall, and that the huge stones of the arch lie huddled together upon it, just as they fell, probably, at the siege by Titus. The depth of the gully below this pavement is probably not less than 60 feet; and it is therefore likely that beneath it there is another arch, under which a stream may be found flowing. It is now regarded as not improbable that the ravine of the Tyropoon will be found to have bent round to the east, cutting off the temple mount from Ophel, and isolating it on the south, as well as on the other sides. He is, while we write, engaged in explorations intended to settle these questions.

The entire arch, which springs out of the temple wall 500 feet to the north of "Robinson's," is now ascertained to be one

of a series of arches which supported another viaduct. Other four arches have been found standing to the west of this massive arch. They decrease in height as they go westward, and terminate in an arched passage or tunnel, 10 feet wide, which has been traced to a point 230 feet west of the temple wall. The arches of this tunnel are built upon others, which are supposed to have been used as tanks belonging to an immense and complicated system of reservoirs, passages, and aqueducts, which Mr Warren is endeavouring to unravel.

At a point 350 feet from the south wall, he has, by sinking a shaft through Ophel, come upon the continuation of the passage to which the "bottomless pit" led, at the foot of the deep excavation near the south-west corner of the Haram. At this point it still runs on southward. The interest of the work increases at every step, and the Christian world will surely not allow investigations so important to be abandoned for want of funds.

:

ART. V.-Mill's Reply to His Critics.

N reading lately the Memoir, Letters, and Remains of

on the causes and consequences of national character, I was much struck with the following:

"The ages in which metaphysics have been most cultivated, have in general been those in which men have been most raised above themselves. Indeed, though I care little for the study, I have always been struck by the influence which it has exercised over the things which seem least connected with it, and even over society in general. I do not think that any statesmen ought to be indifferent as to whether the prevailing metaphysical opinions be materialistic or not. Condillac, I have no doubt, drove many people into materialism, who had never read his book; for abstract ideas, relating to human nature, penetrate at last, I know not how, into public morals."

Had De Tocqueville's studies run in that direction, it would not have been difficult for him to unfold the causes of the phenomena which he has so carefully noted. These phenomena are three in number. First, a taste for philosophic speculation is a mark of an elevated age. It is the sign of a time which believes that there is as much above the surface of the earth, and beneath it, as there is on it; and is seeking successfully