k 
4S2 CLARKE'S TRAVELS. 
(where the sepulchres appear which now exhibit, in so many 
instances, the words of an inscription, THC AFIAC CIWN,) was, 
in fact, Mount Sion ; opposed, upon the south, to Moriah, 
and divided from it by this valley.* That the summit of 
this mountain was formerly included within the walls of the 
ancient city, the remains upon it, at this hour, not only of 
walls, but of sumptuous edifices.f seem forcibly to demon¬ 
strate. In this view of the subject, the topography of the 
city seems more reconcilable with ancient documents. The 
present church of the holy sepulchre, and all the trumpery at¬ 
tached to it, will, it is true, be thrown into the back ground 
hut the sepulchres of the kings of Judah, so long an object of 
research, do then become a prominent object in the plan: tile 
possible site of our Saviour’s tomb may be denoted; and 
--—Siloa's brook, that flow’d 
Fast by the oracle of God,—* 
will continue in the situation assigned for it by Christian wri¬ 
ters of every sect and denomination,^ since the age of the 
apostles and earliest fathers of the church. 
It was upon the Mount of Olives that the Messiah deliver¬ 
ed his prediction concerning the downfall of Jerusalem ; and 
the army of Titus encamped upon the very spot? where its 
destruction had been foretold. JNTot that, by the introduction 
of this fact, any allusion is here intended to the particular 
place shown as “ the rock of the prediction.” The text of 
the Evangelist|| proves that our Saviour, when he delivered 
>-<33st hie terra fissa, atque dicitur vallis filiorum hinom, ubi twv ccemeteriu^l. , ' , 
But Eusebius (ad vocena rauv^aja) places this valley upon the eastern side of the 
city. All the valleys around Jerusalem were places of sepulture; particularly that 
now called Jehosaphat, which is upon the eastern side. But whenever the observa¬ 
tions of an early writer tend to interfere with the notions entertained by the Catho¬ 
lics of the topography of Jerusalem, they endeavour to accommodate the text to 
thjeir notions, or else explain away its meaning. 
* Rauwolff, speaking of the Tyropceon mentioned by Josephus, says, “ This valley 
hath been, since the'desolation, so filled up, that no depth at all appeareth in our days, 
but only without the fountain gate, by the Fountain Siloah.” (See Travels into the 
Eastern Countries, Ray*s edition, p. 289. Lond. 1693.) A deep valley filled up, so 
that even the marks of its existence have disappeared ! Is it possible to credit this; 
especially when such a valley was of use in fortifying the city, by rendering the 
walls above less accessible? Josephus says (lib. vi. de Bell. c. 6. Colon. 1691.) 
that the oldest of these three walls was extremely strong, owing to the depth of the 
inferior valley. 
f“ Whose height yet shews the reliquesof nomeane buildings.” Sandys’ Travels, 
p. 186. Lond. 1637. 
t Josephus (lib. vi. de Bell. Jud. c. 6.) describes the valley which separated the up¬ 
per town from the lower, as terminating with the Fountain Silos ; and t^bis is the caso 
with Sandys’ valley of Gehinnom. 
( Josephus de Bell. Jud- lib, vi. cap. 5. Colon. 1691. 
^ ; Luke s ch. xiXvS7, 
