The Greek inscriptions are brief and legible, consisting of immense letters deeply carved in the face of the rock, either over the door, or by the side, of the Sepulchres. Upon the first we observed these characters: 66 +TH CAPIAC OF. THE HOLY "Having entered by the door of this Sepulchre, we found a spacious chamber cut in the rock, connected with a series of other subterranean apartments, one leading into another, and containing an extensive range of receptacles for the dead. . . . "The Hebrew inscriptions, instead of being over the entrances, were by the side of the doors. Having but little knowledge of the characters with which they were written, all that could be attempted was to make as faithful a representation as possible of every incision upon the stone, without attempting to supply any thing by conjecture; and even admitting in certain instances doubtful traces, which were perhaps casualties caused by injuries the stone had sustained, having no reference to the legend. . . . . "From the imperfect state of this inscription, and the decomposition of the rock itself, whereon it is placed, the copy may be liable to error. It was made, however, with great care, and due attention was paid to the position of the lines. The words of the inscription are supposed to be Arabic, expressed in Hebrew and Phoenician characters. All the face of this mountain, along the dingle, supposed to be the Vale of Gehinnon by Sandys, is marked by similar excavations. p. 556. "Continuing our researches along this dingle, as it inclines towards the east, before its junction with the larger Valley of Jehosaphat, we came to Sepulchres.... similar to those described. ... near the place commonly shewn as Aceldama, or the Field of Blood. "None of these inscriptions are now in a state to be interpreted. . . . In the second, the mixture of letters, usually called Etruscan and properly Phoenician, with the characters of the Greek alphabet, added to the imperfect state of the inscription, seem to render illustration hopeless. "In some of these Sepulchres were ancient paintings, executed after the manner of those found upon the walls of Herculaneum and Pompeii; except that the figures represented were those of the Apostles, the Virgin, &c. with circular lines, as symbols of glory, around their heads. These paintings appeared upon the sides and upon the roof of each sepulchral chamber, preserving a wonderful freshness of colour, although much injured by Arabs and Turks, whose endeavours to efface them were visibly displayed in many instances." p. 568. What Dr. Clarhe describes as " hopeless," and abandons in despair, it becomes us not to attempt without the greatest circumspection and modesty. In desperate cases all that can be done is to guess, at a peradventure; and where nothing of consequence depends on the result, conjecture impeaches neither the intention, nor the integrity of the conjecturer. We could willingly have spared ourselves this laborious inquiry; but, apparently, the discovery affords evidence in support of Biblical history; and that object is worth the trouble. We therefore state our thoughts; desiring the reader to accept them as conjectures only. We begin with the second inscription, copied from Dr. C. page 568. What are blanks in Dr. C. are marked in smaller letters. The first three lines read thus: Onкn-a Conditorium, or receptacle for the dead, a Sepulchre ;—dià orparnyòv—by order of the general, Titus Flavius, Son of Vespasian, Prince of the Roman Youth. Whatever be thought of the letters proposed for filling up the blanks, it is clear that this inscription mentions, "the Son of Vespasian ;”—also, that the existing word in the third line is, a Latin word, juvenes ;-and that the first is a Greek word importing a Sepulchre. The following lines of the original, which are too much obliterated to be read, may be names of persons (soldiers?) here deposited by order of the general;-the last word transcribed seems to be EISN. The Roman army was composed in part of foreigners, ignorant of Latin; and among them Asiatics, equally ignorant of Greek: nor can we suppose the soldiers, natives of Italy, were themselves learned. We are not, therefore, to wonder at incorrect language written by them, or at the mixture, conspicuous in this inscription, which presents at the same time Greek words and Greek letters; with a Latin word and Latin letters; also Phenecian letters, and originally, no doubt, a Phenecian word. Supposing this inscription to commemorate soldiers who fell at the siege of Jerusalem, under Titus, we avail ourselves of whatever authority it affords for assigning a like character to the inscription No. 1. Dr. C. page 555. The upper lines of it are too much mutilated to be restored by us; but being Hebrew letters, they may possibly refer to Galilean troops. The last line but one we read thus : Eɣ¬Ỷ~CO'INTXTRI SYRUS GOINTTILIN Whether this be one name, Cyrus Quintillian, or two names, Cyrus and Quintillian, we know not; nor is it of any consequence. It is enough, that this inscription also contains several names; and that neither Cyrus nor Quintillian can be deemed Hebrew. Moreover, this inscription is a mixture of letters derived from different languages. The third letter in Cyrus, is the Hebrew resh; the x in Quintillian, is the Samaritan tau, or T; the last letter but one is the Hebrew jod, ; and the last letter itself is the Samaritan nun, N. Thus we have two demonstrative proofs of a mixture of letters in the same inscriptions, written by soldiers, at the date of the promulgation of the Gospel. Thus has providence very unexpectedly brought to light an undeniable evidence for the truth of the Gospel History, in a matter apparently so minute and incidental as to have escaped the imaginations of all critics and commentators, to this day; neither could they have conjectured the truth. All our learned say, the inscription on the cross of Jesus was in three languages. "It was," says Dr. Doddridge, "written in Latin, for the Majesty of the Roman Empire; in Greek for the information of the vast numbers of Hellenists that used that language, as indeed most provinces of the Roman Empire did (see Brerewood's Enquiries, chap. i.-iv.) and in Hebrew, as it was the vulgar language." That is to say, it was in fact, three inscriptions, each in a different language. It never could enter the mind of any reader that one single inscription was written in words borrowed from three different languages (as the inscriptions copied by Dr. Clarke evidently are)-much less that any single inscription, so short as this, could be written in letters belonging to three different alphabets.-But what says the Evangelist Luke, chap. xxiii. 38?—“A superscription also was written over him in letters ('ypáμμaσiv), of Greek and Latin, and Hebrew." Had it been in three parts, each in one language, it might have been (by one writer at least of the four) described as three inscriptions; but all the evangelists mention it as one inscription; and the apostle John is particular in saying it was a title, and the title, in the singular. Now, from these inscriptions in the rocks of Mount Sion, we learn that it was an ordinary thing for the soldiery to employ letters of the three languages in one inscription; and if Pilate wrote that "title" himself; or, which is much more likely, transferred the labour to some low officer of his guard, the writer did no more in so doing, than did the soldiers of Titus's army a few years afterwards. We have heretofore had occasion to vindicate the correctness of the information obtained by St. Luke, and must be allowed to consider this as another instance of his punctilious accuracy. It is probable, that this superscription was merely written-with chalk, perhaps ; and roughly enough-on a board that was nailed to the head of the cross; not on paper, as painters usually represent it. The monks say the board was olive-wood. It is obvious to remark what support these inscriptions afford to history, which attributes the destruction of Jerusalem to Titus: no additional argument is really necessary but the reader will compare with this evidence what has been adduced on occasion of the Arch of Titus, in Nos. ccI. CCIII. N. B. This mixture of languages and letters accounts at once for the verbal variations observable in the superscription, as given by the Evangelists; each preserving the sense of it, though unable to give a fac simile copy of it to the reader. No. DLXXVI. OBSERVATIONS ON DR. CLARKE'S LOCATION OF THE HOLY SEPULCHRE. REPRINTED FROM THE LITERARY PANORAMA. VOL. XIII. “IT is from [pious] extravagances, constituting a complete system of low mercenary speculation and priestcraft throughout this country, that devout, but weak men, unable to discriminate between monkish mummery and simple truth, have considered the whole series of topographical evidence as one tissue of imposture, and have left the Holy Land worse Christians than they were when they arrived. Credulity and scepticism are neighbouring extremes: whosoever abandons either of these, generally admits the other. It is hardly possible to view the mind of man in a more forlorn and degraded state than when completely subdued by superstition; yet this view of it is presented over a very great portion of the earth; over all Asia, Africa, almost all America, and more than two-thirds of Europe: it is difficult to say where society exists without betraying some or more of its modifications; nor can there be suggested a more striking proof of the natural propensity in human nature towards this infirmity, than that the Gospel itself, the only enemy that superstition ever had, should have been chosen for its basis. In the Holy Land, as in Russia, and, perhaps, in Spain and Portugal, the Gospel is only known by representations more foreign from its tenets than the worship of the sun and the moon. If a country, which was once so disgraced by the feuds of a religious war, should ever. become the theatre of honourable and holy contest, it will be when reason and revelation exterminate ignorance and superstition. Those who peruse the following pages will, perhaps, find it difficult to credit the degree of profanation which true religion has here sustained. As it now is, the pilgrims return back to their respective countries, either divested of the religious opinions they once entertained, or more than ever shackled by the trammels of superstition. Among the early contributors to the system of abuses thus established, no one appears more pre-eminently distinguished than the Empress Helena, mother of Constantine the First, to whose charitable donations these repositories of superstition were principally indebted. No one laboured more effectually to obliterate every trace of whatsoever might have been regarded with reasonable reverence, than did this old lady, with the best possible intentions, whensoever it was in her power. Had the Sea of Tiberias been capable of annihilation by her means, it would have been desiccated, paved, covered with churches and altars, or converted into monasteries or markets of indulgences, until no feature of the original remained." Such are the reflections of Dr. Clarke, on his entrance into the Holy Land; and to their general truth we subscribe without reluctance. The Doctor, however, has, in one particular instance, that relating to Mount Calvary, contradicted so diametrically all foregoing writers, that we cannot avoid a few remarks on his new hypothesis. The reputation of the author renders such investigation necessary; for, if his principles be erroneous, and yet should prevail, assuredly the latter error will be worse than the first and the extreme of believing nothing reported by monks, may prove more injurious to Christianity than that credulity which, in common with the Doctor, we sincerely and deeply lament. Happy would it have been, as we suppose, if Helena had left the sacred places to speak for themselves, and narrate their history in all the simplicity of nature-if they were in the simplicity of nature, in her time;—but, if they were already spoiled, disfigured, and laboriously thrown into confusion, by the governing powers before her time, then it seems to be treating her memory with unmerited harshness, to impute to her those effects which we now regret. She did no more than restore to honour those places which she found purposely and violently mutilated, and excessively dishonoured. Dr. Clarke has shewn himself a rash geographer, in reference to the Holy Land, in several instances; and it will not surprise any one to find, that he has erred with equal infelicity in determining the situation of Mount Calvary with relation to the city of Jerusalem. Speaking of the place of crucifixion, he asks, "Of what nature was that place of crucifixion? It is very worthy of observation, that every one of the Evangelists (and among these, he that saw it and bare record') affirm that it was the place of a Skull;' that is to say, a public cemetery, 'called in Hebrew, Golgotha;' without the city, and very near to one of its gates. St. Luke calls it Calvary, which has the same signification... Can there be aught of impiety or of temerity in venturing to surmise, that upon the opposite summit, now called Mount Sion, without the walls, the crucifixion of the Messiah was actually accomplished?... Among the Sepulchres at the base of this Mount, there was one which particularly attracted our notice, from its extraordinary coincidence with all the circumstances attaching to the history of our Saviour's tomb. The large stone that once closed its mouth had been, perhaps for ages, rolled away. Stooping down to look into it, we observed, within a fair sepulchre, containing a repository, upon one side only, for a single body; whereas, in most of the others, there were two, and in many of them more than two. It is placed exactly opposite to that which is now called Mount Sion. As we viewed this sepulchre, and read upon the spot the description given of Mary Magdalene and the disciples coming in the morning (John xx.), it was impossible to divest our minds of the probability that here might have been the identical tomb of Jesus Christ; and that up the steep which led to it, after descending from the gate of the city, the disciples strove together, when John did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.' They are individually described as stooping down to look into it; they express their doubts as to the possibility of removing so huge a stone, that when once fixed and sealed, it might have baffled every human effort. But upon this, as upon the others already mentioned, instead of a Hebrew or Phenecian inscription, there were the same Greek characters, destitute only of the Greek cross prefixed in the former instances." Dr. Clarke, accordingly, in his Map of the City of Jerusalem, has placed three crosses, at no great distance from these tombs, indicating his opinion as to the place of the Messiah's crucifixion. This hypothesis it is our purpose to invalidate, by observing I. That by universal consent, the place of the crucifixion is called Mount Calvary; -Dr. Clarke himself calls it "a hill:" he even complains of those who think it might be a low hill:-Now, in the place marked by him, there is no hill whatever ; but a descent, between the town of Jerusalem and the city of David: and the Doctor describes the disciples as "descending from the gate of the city." This argument alone were decisive till this ingenious traveller finds a hill in this place II. In such a confined situation as the Doctor has chosen for the scene, no transaction could be beheld from a distance; yet it is expressly said (Matthew xxvii. 55; Luke xxiii. 49.), " all his acquaintance, and many women were there, beholding afar off."-This implies a certain elevation; such a situation, only, being sufficiently conspicuous; it implies moreover an open place. III. The Doctor's scene being the public passage from Jerusalem to the City of David [as Temple-Bar from London to Westminster], the Jews would never have suffered the profanation of the Holy City by the execution of criminals within its precincts. IV. That travellers did not enter Jerusalem by passing through the City of David, is most probable, as they now do not; Simon the Cyrenian, therefore, coming out of the country, was not met with hereabouts; and "those travellers who passed by and reviled," did not pass by here. V. It was "as the soldiers came out," that is, from the governor's residence-not from Jerusalem, they met Simon, coming out of the country:-Now the governor's residence being in the northern part of Jerusalem, they certainly met Simon in that northern part; not in the south, where Dr. Clarke has placed the crosses. VI. That it is probable tradition is right in fixing the "Gate of Justice" near to the governor's residence ;-whereas, Dr. Clarke places it at the farthest possible distance; so that the concourse must have passed through the very heart of Jerusalem; which, considering the then agitated state of the public mind, presents a formidable objection. Let us now examine what really are the Local Particularities required by the story. |