The Moat and a View at the Attempts to identify the Location of the Hasmonean Temple
Tuvia Sagiv Shekarka
The Moat and a View at the Attempts to identify the Location of the Hasmonean Temple
Tuvia Sagiv Shekarka
March 2022
Sections
Methodology
Difficulties in locating the site of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem
"Jerusalem, hills enfold it" (Psalms 125:2)
Location of the Antonia Fortress
The walls of the Moriah Compound are not the walls of the Temple Mount expanded by Herod
Location of the Akra Fortress
Borders of the sector in which the Temple Mount and Holy Temple may be located
Elevation ofthe Holy Temple
Height of the Akra Fortress
Summary
Quotations from the textual sources
Data and basic assumptions
Methodology
The starting point for the research of Jerusalem has been that the Mt. Moriah Compound - the Haram el Sharif- is the Temple Mount as expanded by Herod.
This assumption became the paradigm, but casting doubt on this paradigm opens possibilities of a new understanding of the findings from the area of the Moriah Compound.
Difficulties in locating the site of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem
Most scholars and religious authorities assume that the Holy of Holies was located at the site where the Dome of the Rock now stands. However, the identification of the place where the Holy Temple was situated is not clear. 1
The text of Tractate Middoth in the Mishnah referring to the location of the Temple is not specific, but ambiguous: "The greater part of it was on the south; next to that on the east; next to that on the north; and the smallest part on the west." 2
The Mishnah does not note the precise distance of the courtyard (Azarah} from the walls of the Temple Mount, in contrast to the accepted practice in describing all of the other components of the Temple and the courtyards.
It is difficult to understand the meaning of the concept "greater part" [rubo]. How can a "greater part" be found in the south as well as in the north?
If the "greater part" is more than 50% then how is it possible that the sum of the
1 For a summary of the various opinions, see Sagiv Shekarka (1974).
2 Mishnah, Tractate Middoth 2, 1.
measurements in the south and north exceed 100%?
The continuation of the verse in the same tractate is also unclear, stating,
"The part which was most extensive was the part most used." Does the usage refer to the empty area on the Temple Mount, or the opposite?
The Temple is the usage, and most of the Temple was in the south?3
Not only do the above statements pose a problem, but the dimensions of the sacred Compound do not match what is written in the source texts. According to the Mishnah and Josephus, the Temple Mount was a square area. Tractate Middoth states that the Temple Mount was 500 X 500 cubits, equal to 60 dunams. 4 Josephus
wrote that the area of the Temple Mount was one ris by one ris, which are only about 40 dunams. 5
In contrast, the sacred precinct visible to us is a trapezoid with an average measurement of 300 m X 500 m, i.e., about 150 dunams. The sacred precinct is therefore 2.5 times the dimensions of the Temple Mount as noted in the sources.
On the site itself, no findings were discovered in situ from the Second Temple
period - no wall, nor pillar, and not even an inscription that could help identification and serve as a starting point for identifying the location of the Holy Temple and the Holy of Holies.
Identification of the site of the Holy Temple based on ancient traditions that were transmitted from generation to generation by local residents, or based on early
3 Rabbi Samson ben Abraham of Sens (early 13th century) on Mishnah, Tractate Middoth 2, 1.
4 Mishnah, Tractate Middoth 2a. The side of the cubit in this article was set as 44.4cm. Bahat, 2020, p. 49; Sagiv, n.1, p. 439. Note: a dunam is approx. a quarter of an acre. 1,000 m x lm.
5 Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 15,401. The gap in the measurements may be explained by
Josephus having referred to the internal size of the floor of the Holy Temple, while the Sages described the outer circumference of the Temple.
writings of travelers who described the site, is a faulty practice. The literary sources note that the Holy Temple was destroyed by the Romans, with not a single stone left in place. 6
After the Bar Kochba rebellion (135 CE), Jews were forbidden to reside in Jerusalem and Judea and so they dispersed themselves in the Galilee and outside of the country. For 500 years, until the Arab conquest, there was no continuous valid tradition referring to the location of the Temple.
During the Byzantine Era, Christian residents concealed the site of the Holy Temple and ignored it. In the famous mosaic Map of Madaba, there is no reference to the Temple Mount or to the Holy Temple (Fig. 1). 7 During that period, only a few Jews could reach the remnants of the Holy Temple and recite dirges, but it is difficult to use their testimony as a basis for solid conclusions. 8
Testimonies as to the location of the Holy Temple are late, discontinuous, and unreliable. Due to the religious and political sensitivities, no orderly archaeological digs were conducted on the site. Findings that were discovered in unsupervised digs did not produce results. 9 From here we can learn that the tradition - both in the Christian world, the Muslim world, and in the Jewish consciousness - according to which the Holy of Holies was in the area of the Dome of the Rock, is not based on findings from the site, nor on any reliable intergenerational testimony.
In the 19th century, interest arose in the western world regarding the Temple
Mount and the Holy Temple. This interest did not arise only from religious motives,
6 Matthew 24:2.
7 M. Avi-Yonah, 1953, pp. 129-156.
8 0. Limor, 1998.
9 G. Barkai, Y. Zweig Dvira, "Project sifting Temple Mount dirt in Gazelle Valley," Studies in the City of David and Jerusalem, 7, (2012), p. 47.
but also - and mainly - from a research approach that attempted to discover the truth about the Temple and its location. With the beginning of scientific measurements, it became clear that the precinct visible to us is larger than the dimensions of the Temple Mount noted in the sources, and the number of opinions increased about the sites of the original Temple Mount and the Holy Temple.
Some scholars posited that the Temple stood to the south of the Dome of the Rock (Fig. 2}. 1° Kaufmann argued that the Temple was located north of the Dome of the Rock (Fig. 3} 11while others determined that the Holy of Holies was located on the
Dome of the Rock (Fig. 4).12 Another school of thought held that the rock of the Dome of the Rock was the site of the Holy Temple's Altar (Fig. 5). 13
There were some scholars who raised the hypothesis that the Temple and Holy of Holies were not on the Dome of the Rock, but proposed no alternative location. 14
It is interesting to note that even before the 19th century and the surveys that were carried out, there were Jewish textual sources that challenged the consensus
according to which the Holy of Holies was located on the Dome of the Rock. In the 13t h century, Rabbi David Kimchi (the "RaDaK"} wrote in his explication of Isaiah that the Holy of Holies was desolate, and was never rebuilt by non-Jews.15
10 Silvetzky, 2017; Brawer, 1910; Roffeh, 1978/9; Sagiv (n. 1); Fergusson, 1878.
11 Kaufman, 1983
12 Ritmeyer, 1992; Z. Koren, 2007..
13 Schick,1890; Oilman, 1913; Goren, 1992: 188.
14 Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote in his 20th century explication of the Zohar: "And the rock that is now located on the site of the Temple is distant/far from the Holy of Holies, and is not the Foundation Stone that disappeared." Nitzotzei Hazohar, Pekudei, p. 480.
15 Radak, Isaiah 54:10.
Another 13th century Jewish scholar, Ashtori HaParhi, stated that the Temple was south ofthe Dome ofthe Rock. 16 The "Holy ARI" (R. Yitzhak Luria) of the 16th century, wrote that the Holy of Holies used to be located in an area with no other structure, although during his lifetime the Dome of the Rock already rose above the
compound. 17
Based on the commonly-accepted interpretation, the 16th century commentator David ben Solomon ibn Zimra (the RaDBaZ) argued that the Foundation Stone is the rock on the Dome of the Rock - the location of the Holy of Holies. However, a very
careful reading of his writings shows that his intention was to state that the stone is
indeed the Foundation Stone, but is not the site ofthe Holy of Holies. 18 In light of the difficulties in locating the site of the Temple using commonly accepted means, this is a proposal to identify its location in a different way.
The method proposed in this article is based on an analysis of topographical data and archaeological finds from excavations inside of and adjacent to the Moriah Compound. Structures that are likely to collapse may be destroyed and their materials removed. In contrast, topographic findings such as hills, moats and aqueducts are rigid and do not disappear easily - and surely not in ancient times.
However, in the event that a moat was filled in or a hill flattened, it constituted an unusual event reported in writing. This is true mainly about Jerusalem, which has much written about it since biblical times to the present.
16 Ashtori HaParhi, Kaftor VaFerah, Jerusalem, 1897, pp. 92-93.
17 N. Bachrach (1648), Introduction, Chapter 9.
18 RaDaK, Reponsa, II, 1930 edition; Sagiv Shekarka, 2003.
The current article is based on several sources: I Ma ccabees19 written in the 2nd century BCE; Antiquities of the Jews2°and the Wars of the Jews21 , both by Josephus, written in the 1st century BCE; and the Tosefta, Tractate Pesahim, which discusses
the Passover sacrifice in the Holy Temple, a source originating in Eretz Israel without
other redactions. 22 Most of these texts were written during or close to the time of the events they reported, without metaphorical language, and rich in topographical
descri pt ions.23
I will attempt to identify the location of the Temple and Holy of Holies based on the topographical data of the Moriah Compound and around it, comparing them to the ancient literary data describing the sites near the Temple, their interrelationships, and the possibilities of sight lines extending from each point.
The topographical data of present-day Jerusalem appear in several sources: on
the 19th century ordnance maps by Charles Warren and Charles Wilson 24; data from
;
the governmental Survey of lsrael25
and results of digs around the Compound by B.
Mazar, R. Reich, and E. Shukrun. 26 Recent additional results are from digs in the Givati Parking Lot by D. Ben-Ami, Y. Tchekhanovets, and S. Dan-Gur. 27
19 / Maccabees.
20 Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews.
21 Josephus, Wars of the Jews against the Romans, (Heb., L Ullmann trans.)
22 Tosefta, Pesahim 3:12, Zuckermandel edition
23 B. Bar Kochba, The Akra Appendix, 1980
24 Warren, 1876; Wilson, 1865 .
25 Jerusalem, The Old City, 1:2500 km, Israel Survey, 1985.
26 Mazar, 1986; Reich, 2011; Shukrun, 2012.
27 D. Ben-Ami, Y. Tchekhanovets, and S. Dan-Gur, 2021.
The sanctified Haram el-Sharif compound located southeast of the Old City of the present, will be called in this article the Moriah Compound (Fig. 6). Ancient Jerusalem, currently called the City of David, lies at the lower portion of the Moriah Ridge, growing lower from north to south: from the area of Zedekiah's Cave towards the Muslim Quarter, the Moriah Complex, the City of David, to the Pool of Siloam. The peak of the rock underneath which lies the Cave, which is the edge of the Moriah Ridge in the north, lies at +771 m above sea level [amsl]. At the south, the Moriah Ridge ends as it meets the point between the Kidron Brook and the Ben Hinom Valley - at the Pool of Siloam. The Pool is located at +625 m amsl.
The sources note that there were several peaks along the Moriah Ridge: a rocky cliff on which the Antonia Fortress was located, peak of the Holy of Holies, site of the Foundation Stone; and the hill on which the Akra is located. At present, it is possible to identify a single peak only in the Moriah Compound - the one on which the Dome
of the Rock stands, at +744m amsl. 28 We are unable to know if this is the peak of
the Antonia, the Foundation Stone, or perhaps the peak of the Akra [Khakra].
On the eastern flank is the ridge of the Mt. of Olives comprising Mt. Scopus, the Mt. of Olives and the Silwan neighborhood. The height of the ridge is +855 m amsl, while facing the Moriah Compound its height is +805 m amsl. The Kidron Brook passes between the ridge of the Mt. of Olives and the Moriah Ridge, meeting the Ben Hinnom Valley in the south. To the west is the Upper City comprising the Old
28 The cliff of the al-Omariya School is artificial, formed by quarrying in the Moriah Compound at the
foot of the school.
City and the area outside of the walls now called Mt. Zion. The Upper City and the Moriah Compound is separated by the "Valley of the Cheesemakers" - the Tyropoeon Valley.
The highest point of the Upper City is located on the western wall. At the Jaffa Gate the Old City is at+ 764 m amsl. The highest point of the Old City is at the corner of the Christian Quarter adjacent to the Church of Notre Dame, at+ 770 m amsl.
We can sum up by saying that the peaks of the hills surrounding ancient Jerusalem from north, east, and west are higher than the Moriah Compound, which is higher only than the City of David.
Location of the Antonia Fortress
According to Josephus, the Antonia Fortress stood on a rocky cliff 50 cubits {22 m)
higher than the surrounding ground, at the northwest corner of the Temple Mount. 29 Facing the Antonia, the Temple stood on a hill no higher than 22 cubits
{approx. only 10 m) above the level of the Temple Mount. 30 Josephus's statement
regarding the Antonia is reliable since the fortress existed in his lifetime, and he witnessed battles fought in it.31 As he wrote, the Antonia was built by Herod over
the remnants of a previous fortress called the Bira -the Tower. Underneath the
29 Josephus, Wars, 5, 238.
30 Wars, 5, 190-214. The measurements fit the description in Tractate Middoth.
31 Wars, 6, 93-99.
fortress were the remains of an ancient fortress called Strato[n]'s Tower. 32
North of the Antonia Fortress a moat was dug. 33
Since the 19 th century, we have evidence referring to a moat in the northern area
of the Moriah Compound. Except for this moat, there is no other manmade moat in or around the Moriah Compound.34 Archaeologists have hypothesized that the al Omariya School is standing on the site of the Antonia Fortress, 35 (Fig. 7} ; however,
it is difficult to accept this assumption, since it contradicts Josephus's statement that the moat was north of the Antonia fortress. 36
From a military standpoint, as well, the moat should have been located north of the Antonia fortress because the Temple Mount had natural protection by the Kidron Brook to the east and the Tyropoeon Valley to the west. To the north, there was easy access to the Temple Mount, and indeed, all of the conquerors throughout generations stormed the Temple Mount from the north. 37 The moat to the north of the Antonia fortress was designed to make its walls higher to create an additional barrier to the enemy. There is no logic in placing a moat between the Temple and the fortress.
The moat located on the site of the Moriah Compound connects the Tyropoeon
Valley with Nahal Beizeita (Wadi Beit Zeita) completing the line of defense circumscribing the Temple Mount (Fig. 8}. The progress of Pompey's battles moved
32 Wars, 1, 75-83; Antiquities, 15, 403; 13, 312-313.
33 Wars, 5, 149-150.
34 Bahat (seen. 4), p. 4.
35 Ibid., p. 53..
36 Mazar (see n. 26), p. 51.
37 Pompey, Herod, Titus, Mota Gur.
from north to south, as well, comprising filling in the moat, erecting siege batteries, conquering the fortress, and entering the Temple M ount .38
Under Pompey's command {63 BCE), the moat was filled, which is how he could
bring his war machines up to the wall of the fortress then called the Bira, and from there he could proceed towards the Temple. 39
During Herod's rule, the city spread northwards, the moat was uncovered and separated between the Beizeita neighborhood north of Jerusalem and the fortress,
then called Antonia. 40
During the Great Revolt Titus erected siege batteries to conquer the Antonia from the north. Filling the moat and bringing the battering rams made it possible for him to conquer the fortress and from there to advance towards the Temple Mount and the Holy Temple. 41
What arises from all of the above sources is that the Antonia Fortress had to have been located south of the moat, which is why the al-Omariya School cannot be the site of the Antonia.
The walls of the Moriah Compound are not the walls of the Temple Mount expanded by Herod
According to Josephus, the moat designed to protect the fortress and the Temple
Mount was outside of the Temple Mount compound. The archaeological remnants of the moat are within the bounds of the Moriah compound. This fact is a clear proof
38 Wars, 456-472.
39 Wars, 1, 145
40 Wars, 5, 149-151.
41 Wars, 5, 467.
that the walls of the compound were built after the Great Revolt and not by Herod. The Moriah Compound is larger than the Temple Mount, and the builders closed into it both the Antonia and the moat.
Josephus stated that that during the reign of Agrippa II, several years before the
Great Revolt, all of the construction work was completed, and 18,000 laborers were suddenly unemployed. 42 This means that the Temple was complete before being destroyed. The Western Wall of the Moriah Compound, visible today, was
incomplete in its northern section, and we can see stones which were not completely dressed {Fig. 9). This is an additional proof that the Western Wall of the Moriah Compound is not the western wall of the Temple Mount, and that the Moriah Compound is not the Temple Mount. Furthermore, at the base of the Western Wall coins were discovered that were minted about 20 years after Herod's death. This means that the walls ofthe compound were not built by Hero d.43
Location of the Akra Fortress
According to the textual sources, in addition to the Antonia Fortress located at the north of the Temple Mount, there was an another fortress located south of the Temple Mount at the northern edge of the City of David. This fortress was called the Akra, or the Khakra.
From the Akra it was possible to view the Temple Mount, but it hid the view towards the Temple from the direction of the City of David. 44 The Akra was the focus
42 Antiquities 20, 219.
43 Unde rneath the Western Wall, coins were found dating from 17 CE (about 20 years after Herod died). See above n. 26, Shukrun.
44 Wars, 252, 12.
of the actions by the Seleucids and the Hellenists. It was built in 167 BCE by
Antiochus IV Epiphanes and destroyed by Simon the Hasmonean in 141 BCE. 45 The Akra was especially strong, and Simon did not succeed in taking it by storming its
walls or destroying it. Its defenders surrendered only after Simon besieged the fortress and blocked food supplies. 46Josephus added more information in
Antiquities of the Jews, stating that not only was the structure destroyed but the hill on which it stood was leveled through three years of intense work. 47 The testimony
of removing the hill was conveyed only by Josephus, without any other proof from
other contemporary texts that reported on the conquest of the Akra. 48 Josephus also notes that after destroying the Akra and leveling the hill, the Temple rose above everything and could be sighted from the City of David. 49 For many years, no
findings were discovered in the City of David, neither were any remnants of the fortress from the Hasmonean era found. Scholars posited that the Akra did not stand at the north of City of David at the foot of the Temple Mount, but in another location, looking towards the Temple Mount. Since one could view the Temple Mount both from the east as well as from the west, there have been numerous opinions regarding the Akra's location (Fig. 10).
In 2015, excavations in the Givati Parking Lot, at the foot of the Moriah Compound, revealed impressive remnants of a wall, tower, and glads, dated to the period between Antiochus V and Antiochus VII -the period in which, according to
45 Wars, I, 50
46 Maccabees I, 13:49-50.
47
Antiquities, 13, 216-217; Wars, 5, 139
48 Maccabees I, 13:50. It seems that Simon the Hasmonean did not even destroy the fortress. Tractate Ta'anith, 2:23.
49 Wars, 5, 139.
sources, the Akra stood in place (Fig. 11). 50 The finds were discovered on a level of
+700 m amsl. The archaeologists determined that the finds were relics of the Akra fortress, and their discovery put an end to the decades' long argument regarding its locat ion. 51
The elevation of the Temple Mount according to the accepted method of measurement is +743 amsl. 52 The walls are approximately 10 m high (23 cubit s),53 their highest point at an elevation of approx. +753 amsI. This means that in order to enable a sightline from the Akra towards the Temple Mount, the Akra fortress and the hill had to be at least 53 m above the ground level of the City of David (approx.
110 cubits). This height is not characteristic of Hellenistic siege towers which were lower in height.
In light of these data, even scholars who had theorized that the Akra was in the City of David began to raise doubts at the possibility of viewing the Temple Mount
50 Ben-Ami, Tchekhanovets, and Dan-Gur (n. 27)
51 Y. Tsafrir, "The Akra and Proposals for Locating the Akra," in Jerusalem: Jerusalem throughout the ages, Open University, p. 124; Y. Tsafrir, Source of the Seleucid Akra in Jerusalem, Cathedra 14 (1980), pp. 17-40. According to Josephus, "Jonathan [the Hasmonean] built "another wall in the midst of the city, in order to exclude the market place from the garrison which was in the citadel; and by that means to hinder them from any plenty of provisions" (Antiquities XIII, 182). In contrast, in Maccabees I, the text states that Jonathan "raised a great mount between the tower and the city" (Maccabees I, 12:36). It is likely that the line of fortifications that were revealed is the junction between the Greek Akra fortress with the Hasmonean city. The finds discovered in the dig - including arrows and sling stones bearing the Seleucid monarchy imprint - are proof that the wall and glacis that were discovered are part of the fortifications constructed by Jonathan. It is likely that the "mount" is the glacis that was uncovered (Fig. 12). The Akra fortress itself was located north of the fortifications line that was uncovered, on a higher level. Perhaps there will be found remnants of the rocky cliff on which the Akra stood (Fig. 13).
52 The elevation of the Holy Temple, assuming that its location was on the Dome of the Rock, is +753
m (22 cubits) ams!. Although the elevation of the Rock is +744 m amsl, we must calculate the height of the Temple from the level of the Temple Mount that was determined in accordance with the level of the rocks now existing on site.
53 The eastern wall of the Temple Mount existed earlier than the time of Herod. The height of the
gates was 20 cubits, on which a doorpost 3 cubits high (minimum). We may estimate the height of the southern wall as similar, until Herod built the Royal Stoa.
from the City of David, and wondered if indeed there was a hill at the edge of the
City of David that was leveled by Simon the Hasmonean. 54 Despite these doubts, scholars determined that Josephus's testimony must be accepted, according to which, without the hill, there was a view ofthe Temple from the City of David for a
long period of about 120 years, from Simon the Hasmonean to the reign of Herod. 55
However, if we accept the hypothesis that the Temple was located where the Dome of the Rock is now, it would not have been possible to see it from the City of David, even though there is no hill or fortress to hide the view (Fig. 14).
Discovering the location of the Akra necessitates a renewed study of the issue of the site of the Temple. If we locate the Temple at a lower point and nearer to the City of David, it may be possible to have sighted it from the City of David.
Borders of the sector in which the Temple Mount and Holy Temple may be located
Based on the topographical findings in the north of the Moriah Compound, and in light of the archaeological finds in the south of the compound, we can calculate estimated borders of the sector to determine where the Temple was situated.
The Akra stood in the south, and we can hypothesize that the archaeological finds that were discovered are part of the southern section. To the north of the Akra was the Temple Mount on which the Temple stood.
B. BarCochba(n.23)
55 The Royal Stoa built by Herod was higher than the elevation of the Temple Mount by 100 ft or more (approx. 30 m), thus concealing the view from the City of David. Antiquities, 15, 415.
Excavators in the Givati Parking Lot concluded that during the Hasmonean era the breadth of the city from east to west was no more than 65 m.
According to Josephus, the width of the Temple Mount was 187 m (ris). This means that the City of David could not have comprised the Temple Mount and the Temple. From here we can conclude that the Temple Mount and Temple did not stand in the City of David but north of it, in the area of the Moriah Compound.
The Antonia Fortress stands in the northwest of the Temple Mount that rested on a rocky cliff. The moat lay to the north of the fortress. If the moat mentioned in the sources was the moat we know of today, then the rock of the Dome of the Rock, located south of the moat, is the rocky precipice on which the Antonia stood. We can therefore hypothesize that the site of the Temple is not the Dome of the Rock but south of it in the area of the al-Kas fountain of today (Fig. 15).
The elevation of the Holy Temple
Josephus affirmed that the rocky cliff on which the Antonia fortress stood rose 50 cubits above its surrounding ground. On the surface, it would seem that it was possible to determine the elevation of the level of the Temple Mount at about 50 m lower than the level of the rock of the Dome of the Rock. However, evidence exists that during the Crusader conquest, the Crusaders hewed parts out of the Dome of
the Rock rocky land, crushed the pieces, and sold the fragments at an exorbitant price. The fragments were built into churches throughout Europe (Fig. 16). 56
56 Eli Schiller, Dome of the Rock, (Jerusalem: 1967), p. 23.
Based on this we can state that the present elevation of the rocky cliff cannot be the starting point for determining the elevation of the Temple Mount.
The Tosefta argues in Tractate Pesahim: "How did they clean the Priestly
Courtyard? They would put a stopper in the aqueduct up to regulate the water and rinse the floor until it was as clear as milk." 57 There is a consensus among scholars
that the Tosefta reflects Eretz Israel traditions, and is considered a reliable source.
(Tosefta Pessahim 4:12).
Based on the archaeological find, the Lower Aqueduct, dated to the Hasmonean era, is the only aqueduct extending from Solomon's Pools south of Bethlehem to the Moriah Compound. 58 The elevation of the aqueduct at the foot of the Jewish Quarter, at the closest point to the Moriah Compound, is +737.7 m ams l.59
According to the Tosefta, we can estimate that the aqueduct reached the Priestly Courtyard at a level of +737.5 m amsl. However, we cannot locate the Temple on the Dome of the Rock, whose present elevation is+ 744 m amsl, since at this location the force of gravity does not enable water from the aqueduct to reach the Priestly Courtyard.
According to Charles Warren's survey, the elevation of the rock south of the
Dome of the Rock is+ 735 m amsl. 60 This means that only south of the Dome of the Rock can the level of the Temple Mount be lowered and water from the aqueduct can reach the Priestly Courtyard.
57 Tosefta Pessahim, 3:12 (Zukermandel Edition); Sagiv Shekarka, 1988.
58 Mazar, 1989, p. 188.
59 Sagiv Shekarka (n. 1), 463.
60 Gibson, Below the Temple in Jerusalem ,Oxford 1996, p. 33
Based on the location of the moat and on the elevation of the aqueduct we can therefore hypothesize that the Holy Temple stood south of the Dome of the Rock in the area of the al-Kas Fountain.
Height of the Akra Fortress
We have no sources as to the height of the Akra fortress, but do have evidence of the Hellenistic war engines used to conquer fortified areas. One was called the Helepolis ("taker of cities") - a mobile siege tower invented by Polyidus of Thessaly. Soldiers on the tower could shoot arrows, sling stones, and gain access to high walls. The siege tower could be of a height up to 40 m (Fig. 17).
In the area of the al-Kas fountain, the Priestly Courtyard is at an elevation of
+737.Sm amsl, while the elevation of the Temple Mount is +730 m amsl.
The elevation at the highest point of the wall of the Temple Mount is +740 m amsl. From here we can deduce that it was possible to sight towards the Temple Mount from the Akra, whose estimated height was only +742 m amsl (Fig. 18). Furthermore, placing the Temple to the south of the Dome of the Rock, on a lower level, makes possible a view from City of David towards the Temple after the Akra and the hill were removed, which fits in with what Josephus wrote (Fig. 19).
Summary
The measurements of the Moriah Compound do not match the evidence from written texts that have survived to the present. After the Great Revolt, Jews were prohibited from access to Jerusalem for about 500 years. We have no reliable continuous sources on the location of the Holy Temple; later documents by
Christians and Muslims are not credible, both because of their distance in time from events as well as the writers' bias as they attempted to base their faith on firm ground and erase any remnant of Jewish culture.
The combination between early sources whose writers were personal witnesses or who lived at the time of the events on which they report and between archaeological finds discovered in and around the Moriah Compound, enable the identification of the Holy Temple and its levels - in spite of the fact that due to religious and political reasons it is impossible to excavate the Moriah Compound.
The walls of the Moriah compound are not the walls of the Temple Mount but were constructed after the Great Revolt.
The Antonia Fortress cannot be located in the area of the al-Omariya School north of the moat.
The rock on the Dome of the Rock is a rocky cliff above which the Antonia stood.
The Holy Temple cannot have been located on the Dome of the Rock since the elevation of the stratum of the rock is higher than the elevation of the aqueduct that supplied water to the Priestly Courtyard.
We may hypothesize that the Holy Temple was nestled between the Dome of the Rock and the Akra in the area of the al-Kas fountain, which is lower than the elevation of the Dome of the Rock.
If the Holy Temple had stood in the area of the al-Kas fountain, it would have been possible to see it from the City of David.
The starting point in the research on Jerusalem is the assumption that the Haram al Sharif- the Moriah Compound - is the extended Temple Mount built by Herod. This assumption became the paradigm. However, in light of the location ofthe moat within the Moriah Compound, the fact that the walls were not completed before they were destroyed - which contradicts Josephus's writings -- and the discovery of the cache of coins at the foundation of the Western Wall all necessitate a different interpretation of the finds discovered adjacent to the walls, a new look at the Moriah
Compound, and a different approach to the identification of the location of the site of the Holy Temple and the Holy of Holies. 61
61S. Wekaler-Bdolach, 2015, pp. 53-72, and especially p.72.
Fig.1
The Byzantine Madaba Map mosaic. It has no mention at all of the Temple Mount and the Jewish Temple.
Michael Avi-Yonah, The Madaba Map.
451
...... ------
"l\>111
o•nn"I:,
r,n,n "lvwt
•
ni•n'ln ""IV'l7
10,n.,1
0 i'l'l\"111l
•
• •
••
the Temple
..
,nnu, ,,nv
• ••• fl
IH m om I':"• ;: J
The El Aqsa Mosque mw : : : : ! :
·=.t J
: : : : -: .
.: ·rr----
ct•
• • • •
• • •••
• ,•cC;>- \
G • • ••• , ,
;i'nivnti:.'k{•,,rn ; : '
.. "
a· ooO• • • •••
t·•-
.·.. ..
Fig. 2
Suggested location of the site of the Holy Temple south of the Dome of the Rock (Ashtori HaParchi; Fergusson/Fergusson; Brauer; Rofeh; Sagiv)
Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
i117 Y.ll.\J7 N. o'":l
-
r.
·wv
u•nn"'"
'1i11i') l l
Q
.. -rn\n n "'\V
\'01J'l
,,.
...L
\
.·..
Fig. 3
Suggested location of the HolV Temple north of the Dome of the Rock (Kaufman]
Background p\an: Dan Bahat, 1981
- . -· •••• -·" ·- .. ... - •t'*_,,. ""-llll''""'
" " @ ,..!1'J11J'113ll
OJ!<"ll- 'lJ. "lll'W-1,gt-= -•-•.;,•_• ;•:_.•_e::_<l•:.J
D
4
4
111111 n ,"111
1011101
the Temple
"
.. •
•
• •
••
..
• • •
•
..l ..:
, ,nnm ,1m>
Ill Ill
0
1111 9 -
p:--;-:-:--:
nn,1> nnintl : : : : ! : j
•· 1n1•vy,,p-nn • • • • .•
•C.°!
c• • • • a • ,,-!
0 ti • • • • ••
c l!=rr-----'• e • • a a a ,,:;]
:•0. 1. _•._•.••.::I: :::; _f
." r ,n1vn11':ix7n•n
i1'1Y.ll.\J7X
,v.,,,
\>\ti
O'nn,.i
f1nrn
.n,mm·wv
..
'. -• - --
11l'H');i "lVV,
(Oln,:,J
••
•
• •
..
.•. ..
'
....
• •
- ·--;--Ill----
a ,.--------- -,n,
0 a.
•
..a....
"
0 • D D O I
nn'JlP nn,nt : : : : : J
1n1 1 11p, 17-n • • • • .•
' 9 • • •• ,,-!
a O D D O IJ')j
• •.•..·•,:;!
D ll::::r-,------'
C a D D D II
1:1 ·• _
.,
. re n n .,
r ,,, n 1.:w1 :'r':"'.
• • •• -,i
• • ••• "'!"'
\
IIJ!nt>J',•n•;, "IV't';i
runn
(?) D'111m<i'I
C
T n 11 :t
.... o omtn t5.m
the Moriah Compound,
::f I
I
\'.. t3I :J fI
.. I :J /
...- • .... l!fliTTli' • IH::, r
I.••., I I
8 I
l I I
J
r.:
s
.r1.2:
I
I
.._ I
---
/ "l
/
I I I I
f
! I I
I
I
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
.. \
\
\
\
\ .
\ .
0 250 'T.l 500 \
\
\
Fig. 6
The Haram el-Sharif compound to be referred to as the Moriah Compound, is
Fig. 7
i
\\. 1,
>'·.\_..-
: I,
; \ '\_
! \"'-'
\ j '\
! '\', \ \
! '.:'\.\\ \·
\ \'
-; \ 'I, \'
' i I,
rr\' \.-.
i
' \
\
j
\
\
\
' \ \
\
\
\
\
1
,.-.-.:. \ 1
\ \
l
\
,:) \
I I
Fig. 8
The moat linked Nahal Bei2eita and the Tyropoeon Valley, completing the
, - T
Fig. 9
The walls of the Temple Mount were completed before the Destruction of the Holy Temple, and 18,000 laborers remained jobless. The Western Wall was not complete before it was destroyed. Example of a stone which the stonedressers did not complete.
The Western Wall is not the wall ofthe Holy Temple.
,---------------- --------------------
Fig.10
Various options suggested as to the identity of the site of the Akra which would allow a view to the Temple Mount
Y. Tsafrir, "Site of the Seleucid Akra in Jerusalem," Kadmoniot, 1973, pp. 125-126.
Fig. 11
Remnants from the Hasmonean period unearthed in the Givati Parking Lot, comprising a tower, wall, and glacis
The Givati Parking Lot, Hadshot Haarcheologia, 133 (2021)
Fig.12
Sling stones and arrows made of metal bearing seals of the kings of Greece from the Seleucid period discovered near the wall and glacis
The Givati Parking Lot, Hadshot Haarcheologia, 133 (2021)
11.:i r1 .IU y:::i.nny .' ,n-T p ., nn• n
., II!
;;
the Akra
II!
-
L !'
:5
Fig.13
Location of the Akra, as proposed by archaeologists
The Givati Parking Lot, Hadshot Haarcheologia, 133 (2021)
------------------
----r-- "" , "u ,
I I
--------------------
LI . I I
-----
'· . ,
I. - I
· · 1 I!
i I
1
·
·
------ 1 I . · · I · I I
uir
. I j I I ·! j I j I
- "LO'I LO
!r"-0. 1 d
cLCo)1·
oco m1 . a, oJ· "-'I
N 1·
'°L
'°L'°L_ "'! '°j_ -·-- '°_i
the City of David.
':'..L ---·- :"1
r-. r:::.i_ --- - - - _- _;_ -·-·-·-·'
theDome of the Rock,
Fig.14
ltlD 50 0 50 100 150 200 250 700
If we assume that the Holy Temple stood on the Dome of the Rock, it would not have been possible to sight it from the City of David, even if there were no Citadel and hill
fPlil lil
7-fr
11
11 \\
11 \
1111 \
11
I\ I
' I .
11\ '\ / ',
.\\ \ '\ / / Ill
IL---- --- - - ----- --- - - --- ....l!
t----- --· - - -- - -- - ---
Fig.15
We may hypothesize that the Holy Temple stood south of the Dome of the Rock in
•
-- ..- ,e - - -·-
I \
I \
I
,,_,,.,_ l
l:p&lc,,ll:fll',ol'lt --- ·
, .....,_ .....,_
----tsll/lW
,,-.,..,,,..,_,,.,.._,,.._.,Ila _
Fig.16
Hypothesis: The rock on the Dome of the Rock, before parts of it were hewn out and sold for their weight in gold throughout Europe. The shape of the protrusions of the rock are reminiscent of the Golgotha Rock in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
Fig.17
A typical siege tower from the Seleucid period could be as high as 40 m
------------
I
I I
! I I I
I
- - I
I
. I I .
u-,1· col I -<ti
O- Ni oJ.. I
I .· I I
. I I
I I I
I I I
ui · J
I . · I · I $
,<-,-O·, L -
U<"0>.1_U"')''.L
,......
-te·l-·- j_ c<cDi_ .- m'='.i_ m:4 .....·I .-•- - - r:-J_ .'l. .0..L. _. J
, City of David, 'El Kas (the Cup)
....L ·'
Dome of the Rock
lOD 50 0 50 100 150 200 250 llJIJ
lw J I \ 1 1 \
I ..I
. '·
\f:\lll..tl:l ) .
Fig.18
If we assume that the elevation of the Holy temple was low and close to the City of David, then it would have been possible to sight the Holy Temple from the Akra
fortress.
--
-- --·
I
- --,-----r---,---,---r11 / - . -p.
Ill I I
--1 I I I ! j . I I I
u-5 I d "'I. col I .J · Ni 01 I
- i · I I I I j Ii I I I I j j ! ! j ! I I I
,,.,_ "'· LC)· r---. co m. m ol - r<'>
«>L
<01..«>J_
4 . j_
«>L ':}_ _j r--- ··-·-·-·-r:::t._. r---J_ -
.
,_i. ·- - -·'
, City of David, 'El Kas (the Cup), Dome of the Rock,
l□Il 50 0 50 100 150 200 250 71'.lil
Fig.19
Placing the Holy Temple south of the Dome of the Rock on a lower elevation enables a sight line from the City of David towards the Holy Temple.
Quotations from the sources referred to in the footnotes
Mishnah, Tractate Middoth, 2, 1
The Temple Mount was five hundred cubits by five hundred cubits. The greater part of it was on the south; next to that on the east; next to that on the north; and the smallest part on the west. The part which was most extensive was the part most used.
Rabbi Samson ben Abraham of Sens (1150-1230), Commentary on the Mishnah,
Tractate Middoth 2, 1
The greater part of the Temple Mount on which the Holy Temple was built was on the south, most of the building in the south of the mount was the most used part - used for the Courtyard. Second to it was from the east, whose usage was less than the most used part. In the east, it was used less than the south, and the usage of the north was less than the east, and less than all of the sections, since there was no use of the Sanctuary. My tongue fails me...
5. Antiquities of the Jews, 15, 401. - Dimensions of the Temple Mount and the Royal Stoa
All of this was the wall whose circumference reached four ris and each side extended to the length of a ris. The Royal Stoa with three walks, whose length reached from the eastern valley to the western valley, was thirty feet in breadth and one ris in length.
8. The Traveler from Bordeaux, Ora Limor, Mas'ot Eretz Hakodesh (Travels in the Holy Land), Jerusalem, 1998. (Heb.)
Each year, the Jews would anoint the pocked stone with oil, and recite dirges with sighing and groaning while tearing their clothing.
29. Wars of the Jews, 5, 238
Now as to the tower of Antonia, it was situated at the corner of two cloisters... of that on the west, and that on the north; it was erected upon a rock of fifty cubits in height, and was on a great precipice; [...] the rock itself was covered over with smooth pieces of stone,
30. Wars, 5, 195
... for that second [court of the] temple was called "the Sanctuary," and was ascended to by fourteen steps from the first court.
Mishnah, Tractate Middoth, 2, 3
Within this was the Hel, which was ten cubits [broad]. There were twelve steps there.
Wars, 5,197
From here, leading to the gates were other stairways of five steps each.
Wars, 5,206
Now there were fifteen steps, which led away from the wall of the court of the women to this greater gate;
2, 5 Mishnah, Tractate Middoth,
Fifteen steps led up from it [Courtyard of the Women] to the courtyard of Israel.
Wars, 5,207
...that most sacred part of the temple, it was ascended to by twelve steps
Mishnah, Tractate Middoth, 3, 1
Between the porch and the altar there were twenty-two cubits. There were twelve steps there.
32. Antiquities, 15, 403
Now on the north side [of the temple] was built a citadel, whose walls were square, and strong, and of extraordinary firmness. This citadel was built by the kings of the Asamonean race, who were also high priests before Herod, and they called it "the Tower." But for the tower itself, when Herod...had fortified it more firmly than before, in order to secure and guard the temple, he...gave it the name of the Tower of Antonia.
33. Wars, 5, 149
Bezetha[...] lies over against the tower Antonia, but is divided from it by a deep valley, which was dug on purpose, and that in order to hinder the foundations of the tower of Antonia from joining to this hill, and thereby affording an opportunity for getting to it with ease, and hindering the security that arose from its superior elevation; for which reason also that depth of the ditch made the elevation of the towers more remarkable.
38. Wars (Simhoni), 5, 456-472
Four batteries [that the Romans built]. The one near the Antonia was thrown down by the Fifth Legion. While they were bringing the siege engines, Yochanan dug a tunnel underground from the Antonia to the batteries workers.
39. Wars, 1, 145-147
But Pompey himself filled up the ditch that was on the north side of the temple, and the entire valley also, the army itself being obliged to carry the materials for that purpose. And indeed it was a hard thing to fill up that valley, by reason of its immense depth [...] but the towers on this side of the city made very great resistance, and were indeed extraordinary both for largeness and magnificence.
42. Antiquities, 2, 219
At the same time, the building of the Holy Temple was also completed. The people therefore saw that more than eighteen thousand laborers were idle and were in need of wages [...] they entreated the king to rebuild the stoa in the east. This stoa was in the section of the external courtyard [...] which King Solomon had built.
Antiquities, 12, 252
Antiochus IV [...] burned the most beautiful sections of the city and after he destroyed its walls built the Akra in the Lower City because it was high and rose above the level ofthe Holy Temple
Wars, I, 50
Simon, after he overcame the guard of the Akra, destroyed it.
I Maccabees, 13:49-50
They also of the tower in Jerusalem were kept so strait, that they could neither come forth, nor go into the country, nor buy, nor sell; wherefore they were in great distress for want of victuals [...] Then cried they to Simon, beseeching him to be at one with them; and when he had put them out from thence, he cleansed the tower from pollutions.
Antiquities, 13, 215-217
Simon also captured the Akra in Jerusalem and destroyed it utterly [...] and all participated in this and broke up the mount [...] and within three full years they had destroyed it to the very foundations to a smooth level. From that time onward the Holy Temple rose above all else. After the Akra and the mount on which it stood were destroyed. These deeds were accomplished in Simon's time.
49. Wars, V, 139
...when the Hasmoneans reigned, they filled up that valley with earth; and had a mind to join the city to the Temple. They then took off part of the height of Acra, and reduced it to be of less elevation than it was before; that the temple might be superior to it.
56. Ely Schiller, Dome of the Rock, (Jerusalem, 1967), p. 23
Jerusalem at that time was the lifelong dream of many pilgrims. They did not want to return to their native countries empty-handed [...] The Crusader priests used to cut pieces from this rock (in the Templum Domini)and sell them for their weight in gold [...]They were purchased in Europe when new churches were constructed, and were placed on the central altar.
61. Shlomit Weksler-Bdolach, When was the Herodian Temple Mount expanded, 2015,p. 72
Another faint possibility that should still be raised with proper caution is that the compound that Herod expanded on whose pinnacle he built the Temple was smaller than the present Herodian compound, and its southern border was perhaps located on the seamline about 32 m north ofthe present southern wall.
65. Antiquities, 15, 385
...but as to that undertaking which I have a mind to set about at present, and which will be a work of the greatest piety and excellence that can possibly be undertaken by us, I will now declare it to you. Our fathers, indeed, when they were returned from Babylon, built this temple to God Almighty, yet does it want sixty cubits of its largeness in altitude; for so much did that first temple which Solomon built exceed this temple
24
12. Data and basic assumptions
Measurements and elevations
The Roman cubit measured approx. 44 cm
The Roman ris was 30.48 cm long
During the Hasmonean era the elevation of the Temple Mount was 60 cubits
Height of the wall was 23 cubits (approx. 10 m). The gates were 20 cubit high, with the doorpost 3 cubits in height. Although Josephus stated that the gates were 30 x
15 cubits, it seems that the measurements determined by the Sages in Tractate Middoth are more logical. It may be that the copyists of Josephus transcribed "cubits" in place of "feet."
The suggestion in this article solves the problem of the size of the Altar, which according to Josephus was 50 x 50 cubits - which is impossible. In the area of the Priestly Courtyard, it would have been impossible to install such a large structure. If we change the cubit to a foot, the size of the Altar would equal the measurements as stated by the Sages.
Doubling the area of the Temple Mount
In Wars of the Jews (I, 401, Josephus wrote that Herod doubled the area around the building. Lisa Ullmann, who recently published a new Hebrew translation of the book from Greek, struggled with the issue of whether this referred to the area of the Temple Mount. Even if we assume that that was what he intended, we must pay
attention to Josephus having written that the Temple Mount after the doubling was "one ris by one ris." There is no description of the Temple Mount as having such large measurements as we can see today.
In Josephus's book Against Apion, {I, 201}, he wrote that Hecataeus, a contemporary of Alexander the Great, described the Temple Mount thus: "...There is about the middle of the city a wall of stone, whose length is five hundred feet, and the breadth a hundred cubits..."
Josephus described the pre-Herod Temple Mount as follows:
At first the plain at the top was hardly sufficient for the holy house and the altar, for the ground about it was very uneven, and like a precipice; but when King Solomon, who was the person that built the temple, had built a wall to it on its east side, there was then added one cloister founded on a bank cast up for it, and on the other parts the holy house stood naked. (Wars, V, 184).
We may assume that doubling of the area refers to the change that was carried out: from only one single eastern stoa on the Temple Mount to four stoas around the circumference of the Holy Temple.
Arising from all of the above sources is the conclusion that there is no connection between the Temple Mount and the Moriah Compound we see today.
Water supply to the Temple
Two aqueducts brought water from the Hebron Hills to the Jerusalem area, but only the Lower Aqueduct reached the Temple Mount area, and it seems that it was built during the Hasmonean rule. Although the Upper Aqueduct did reach a higher level, it seems that it was built during the late Roman era, after the Destruction of the Temple. It may be that the Upper Aqueduct supplied water only to the archaeological site located in Ramat Rachel of today.
Bibliography Primary sources Letter of Aristeas I Maccabees
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews
,War of the Jews Against the Romans
--- Against Apion Tosefta, Zuckermandel ed., 1877
Secondary sources HEBREW
Avi-Yonah, M. The Madaba Map with Introduction, Translation, Interpretation, and Comments. Jerusalem, 1953.
Bachrach, N. The Book of the Valley of the King. Amsterdam, 1648.
Bahat, D. Selected blueprints of historical buildings and sites. Jerusalem, 1980.
The Temple Mount: The Holy Precinct in Jerusalem. Jerusalem, 2020.
Bar-Cochba, B. Wars of the Hasmoneans: The Time of Judah Maccabee, Jerusalem, 1980.
Barkay, G. and Z. Zweig Dvira, "The Temple Mount Sifting Project in EmekTzurim,"
Studies in the City of David and Jerusalem, 7 (2012), pp. 47-95.
Ben Ami, D., Tchekhanovets, Y., Dan-Gur, S. "Jerusalem: The Givati Parking Lot,"
Hadshot Haarcheologia (Archaeology News}, 133 {2021).
Brauer, M. The Foundation Stone, or the Depository Stone, Jerusalem, 1910. Dilman, G. Haim Yeshiva Yearbook, Jerusalem, 1913.
Goren, S. The Temple Mount Fights Back, Part 4, Jerusalem, 1992.
Koren, Z. "'Courtyard of the House of God': Determining the borders of the Temple Mount, the Heyl, and the Courtyard," Hebron, 1977.
."And make for me a temple," Jerusalem, 2007
. "Borders ofthe Heyl and its form," Ma'alin Bakodesh, 32, {2016}, pp. 45- 69.
Mazar, B. Excavations and Discoveries, Jerusalem, 1986.
Mazar, A. "A survey of the aqueducts to Jerusalem," in Amit, D. (ed.), Ancient Aqueducts in Eretz Israel, Jerusalem, 1989, pp. 169-195.
Reich, R. Excavating the City of David: The place where Jerusalem's history began.
Jerusalem, 2011.
Rofeh, Y. "The location of our Temple: Location of the Temple in the southern part of the Temple Mount Plaza," Niv Hamidrashia, 13 (1978-79).
Sagiv Shekarka, T. "The Temple was placed in the south," Tehumin, 14 (1994).
."Secrets of the Temple Mount in algebraic equations," in Studies in the Sages' Thought Processes, Mertzbach, A. and Kopel, M. (eds.), 2001.
."Entry into the Temple Mount according to the responsa by the RaDBaz," Tehumin, 23, (1963), pp. 517-543.
. "Rocks and water for the identification of the site of the Holy Temple on the Temple Mount," Tehumin, 28 (2008), pp. 471-501.
Schiller, Ely, Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem, 1967.
Shukrun, E. 11Secret s of the Western Wall: Did Herod build it?", Studies in City of David and Ancient Jerusalem, 7, (2012), pp. 15-29.
Sllvetzky, A. Eretz Israel: 7he House of God Shall be Established': A halakhic inquiry into the issue of Jews going up to the Temple Mount in modern times, Jerusalem, 2017.
Tsafrir, Y. "The Akra: Hypotheses as to the location of the Akra in Jerusalem," in
Jerusalem throughout the Ages, Open University, p. 124.
.The Source of the Seleucid Akra in Jerusalem,
Cathedra, 14 (1980), pp. 17-40.
Wechsler-Bdolach, S. "When was the Herodian Temple Mount expanded? An archaeological point of view," in Ben-Arieh, Y., Halamish, A., Limor, 0., and Reich,
R. (eds.), Studies of Jerusalem Throughout the Ages: Material and Knowledge,
Jerusalem, 2015, pp. 19-72.
28
ENGLISH
Ferguson, J. The Temple of the Jews and other Buildings in the Harem area of Jerusalem, London 1878.
Gibson, S., and Jacobson, D. M., Below the Temple Mount: A Sourcebook on the Cisterns, Subterranean Chambers and Conduits of the Haram al-Sharif, Oxford 1996.
Kaufman, A. S., 'Where the Ancient Temple of Jerusalem Stood', B.A.R, 9 (1983), pp.
40-59.
Ritmeyer, L., Locating the Original Temple Mount. B.A.R, 18 (1992), pp. 23-45. Schick C., Der Temple un Jerusalem, 1890
Warren, C., Underground Jerusalem, London 1876. Wilson C., Ordnances Survey of Jerusalem, London 1865.
29
list of figures with sources
Fig. 1
The Byzantine Madaba Map mosaic. It has no mention at all of the Temple Mount and the Jewish Temple.
Michael Avi-Yonah, The Madaba Map.
Fig. 2
Suggested location of the site of the Holy Temple south of the Dome of the Rock (Ashtori HaParchi; Fergusson/Fergusson; Brauer; Rofeh; Sagiv)
Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
Fig. 3
Suggested location of the Holy Temple north of the Dome of the Rock (Kaufman) Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
Fig. 4
Suggested location of the Holy of Holies on the Dome of the Rock (Rittmeyer; Koren) Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
Fig. S
Suggested location of the Altar on the Dome of the Rock (Delman; Goren) Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
Fig. 6
The Haram el-Sharif compound to be referred to as the Moriah Compound, is located in the southeast of the Old City
Fig. 7
Scholars hypothesized that the al-Omariya School is the site of the Antonia Fortress.
Fig. 8
The moat linked Nahal Beizeita and the Tyropoeon Valley, completing the defense line around the Temple Mount.
Fig. 9
The walls of the Temple Mount were completed before the Destruction of the Holy Temple, and 18,000 laborers remained jobless. The Western Wall was not complete before it was destroyed. Example of a stone which the stonedressers did not complete.
The Western Wall is not the wall of the Holy Temple.
Fig.10
Various options suggested as to the identity of the site of the Akra which would allow a view to the Temple Mount
Y. Tsafrir, "Site of the Seleucid Akra in Jerusalem," Kadmoniot, 1973, pp. 125-126. Fig.11
Remnants from the Hasmonean period unearthed in the Givati Parking Lot, comprising a tower, wall, and glacis
The Givati Parking Lot, Hadshot Haarcheologia, 133 (2021)
Fig.12
Sling stones and arrows made of metal bearing seals of the kings of Greece from the Seleucid period discovered near the wall and glads
The Givati Parking Lot, Hadshot Haarcheologia, 133 (2021)
Fig. 13
Location of the Akra, as proposed by archaeologists
The Givati Parking Lot, Hadshot Haarcheologia,133 (2021)
Fig.14
If we assume that the Holy Temple stood on the Dome of the Rock, it would not have been possible to sight it from the City of David, even if there were no Citadel and hill
Sagiv Shekarka
Fig. 15
We may hypothesize that the Holy Temple stood south of the Dome of the Rock in the area of the al-Kas fountain
Fig.16
Hypothesis: The rock on the Dome of the Rock, before parts of it were hewn out and sold for their weight in gold throughout Europe. The shape of the protrusions of the rock are reminiscent of the Golgotha Rock in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
Background plan: Dan Bahat, 1981
Fig.17
A typical siege tower from the Seleucid period could be as high as 40 m
Fig.18
If we assume that the elevation of the Holy temple was low and close to the City of David, then it would have been possible to sight the Holy Temple from the Akra fortress.
Sagiv Shekarka
Fig.19
Placing the Holy Temple south of the Dome of the Rock on a lower elevation enables a sight line from the City of David towards the Holy Temple.
Sagiv Shekarka
Frontispiece
Gustave Dore, Mattathias the Hasmonean, engraving
32