483 
of Edinburgh, Session 1879-80. 
modern area, through the recovery of remains of a citadel, a bridge, 
and a city wall, described by Josephus. 
The recovery of the north-east angle is, however, not as yet com- 
plete, although Colonel Warren has been able to throw light on this 
question also. The north wall of the present enclosure is generally 
acknowledged to be later than the other three, and consists of very 
inferior masonry. The east wall has, moreover, been proved to run 
northwards without any break beneath the surface, beyond the pre- 
sent north-east angle of the enclosure ; but, as already mentioned, 
this part of the east wall is of inferior material and finish though 
marked as ancient by the existence of the ancient red paint letters. 
It seems probable that this wall formed part of the rampart erected 
by Agrippa about 44 a.d. on the north side of Jerusalem, which 
wall joined the east rampart of the Temple enclosure. There are 
indications, which cannot now be given at length, tending to show' 
that the old north-east angle of Herod’s enclosure was situated about 
where the Golden Gate (an edifice of the Byzantine period) now 
stands, and that an area of about 2J acres in the north-east portion 
of the present enclosure was included within the boundaries at a 
period later than that of Herod’s Temple. 
The above remarks apply exclusively to the Second Temple as 
restored by Herod the Great. Although it is certain that the Holy 
House itself and the altar occupied the same spot in the time of 
Herod on which they were first reared by Solomon, the extent and 
position of the surrounding courts as they existed in Solomon’s time 
are as yet entirely unknown, no certain remains of that period having 
been recovered, and no definite accounts of their measurements 
being extant. We know that great alterations were effected by 
Herod; that he increased the area (Josephus says in one passage 
that he doubled it) and that he took away ancient foundations and 
laid others. Considering the lapse of twenty-nine centuries, and the 
alterations deliberately effected at the late period, it seems im- 
probable that we should succeed in restoring the Temple of Solomon, 
though there seems no reason why the main features of that of 
Herod should not be recovered with certainty, in the process of 
explorations, which are still both necessary and possible. 
A second objection to the proposed restriction of the Herodian 
Temple within a square of 600 feet side in the south-west portion 
VOL. x. 3 N 
