# Mount Seir, Sinai and Western Palestine/Chapter 22

CHAPTER XXII.
SOME REMAEKABLE SITES CONNECTED WITH BIBLICAL HISTORY VISITED BY THE EXPEDITION.
Advances in the identification of most of the places connected with the Exodus, and with early Christian history, are being daily made, and I propose here to deal with a few cases which have come under my own immediate notice (with one exception), and to offer some observations upon them. They are as follows:—
1. The Passage of the Red Sea by the Israelites under Moses.
2. The Giving of the Law from Mount Sinai.
3. Kadesh Barnea and Mount Hor.
4. The Site of Calvary.
Making three illustrations from the Old Testament, and one from the New.
1. The Passage of the Red Sea by the Israelites.—From the earliest period of history Egypt was connected with Asia by a narrow neck of land occupying a position to the north of the present Great Bitter Lake. Over this neck lay the road connecting the capital of the Pharaohs at Tanis, or Zoan, with the East by way of Philistia on the one hand, or, again, by the way of Shur, or finally by the way of Elath, at the head of the Ælanitic Gulf.
By the first of these roads, leading into Philistia, the Israelites could have reached the Promised Land within the shortest time; but, enfeebled and dispirited by long captivity, they were forbidden to face the warlike inhabitants of Philistia, and on reaching the neck they were ordered by the Lord to turn southwards, and in this direction they continued their march till they found themselves confronted by the sterile mountain range of Jebel Attâkah, flanked by the waters of the Red Sea on the east, and pursued by the army of Pharoah on the north and west. That the place of the passage called "Pi-hahiroth before Baal-Zephon" was in the neighbourhood of the present town of Suez, at the head of the Gulf, ​there can be little doubt. The locality, as suggested by Dean Stanley, was probably in the vicinity of Ajrûd, the halting-place of the Mecca pilgrims. Now, to the north of the Gulf of Suez, and extending a distance of ten statute miles to the Bitter Lakes, there exists at the present day a neck of land, across which the Israelitish host might have marched into the wilderness of Etham on their way to Mount Sinai, and over which the army of Pharaoh, with its chariots, would probably have been unable to follow; at any rate (if the conditions had been the same then as now) there would have been no necessity for the performance of a miracle in dividing the waters of a sea which at the present day does not exist. Here is a difficulty; arising from the impossibility of reconciling the Scriptural narrative with observed physical phenomena.
It seems to me, however, that the explanation is sufficiently clear to any one who considers that ever since the Pliocene period down to very recent times the land has been gaining on the sea over the area which was the scene of these events. At the Pliocene period the whole of Lower Egypt and the borders of the Mediterranean were submerged to a depth of (at least) 200 feet below the present sea-level, and since that period the land has been slowly rising. It is not too much to assume that at a period of four thousand years ago the process of elevation had not been completed to its present extent; and that, in consequence, the waters of the Gulf of Suez stretched northwards into the Bitter Lakes, forming a channel, perhaps of no great depth, but requiring the exercise of Almighty Power to convert it into a causeway of dry land in order to rescue the chosen people from their impending peril. The levels taken for the Suez Canal show that a depression of about 25 feet would suffice to bring the waters of the Gulf of Suez into the Bitter Lakes; and this submergence would still leave the neck to the north of the Bitter Lakes in the position of land such as we know it to have been in the time of the Pharaohs, and which formed the line of communication between Egypt and the East. In this way, as it appears to me, we may bring the Bible narrative into harmony with physical phenomena.
2. The Giving of the Law from Mount Sinai.—The claims of the different mountains of the Sinaitic peninsula to be that from which the Law was delivered to Israel have been carefully analysed by one who knows the topographical details perhaps better than any other Englishman, Colonel Sir Charles Wilson, who gives his decision in favour of Jebel Mûsa, or ​Moses' Mount—a decision which must be accepted as final. It has been shown in detail by this author, that all the requirements of the case as described in the Bible are met in their minutest details, if we accept Jebel Mûsa as the "Mount of the Law." In this view the late Professor Palmer concurred.
This mountain rises to an elevation of 7,363 feet, and at its southern end the grand precipitous cliff of Rás Sufsàfeh, reaching an elevation of 6,937 feet, rises directly from the plain or wide valley called the Wâdy er Rahah, with a front of 2,000 feet. This plain contains 400 acres of convenient standing ground; while at its further extremity it opens out into the wide valley of Es Sheikh, which would easily afford camping ground for the people with their flocks and herds. Here then we have all the requirements for the events related during the sojoun of the Israelites. We may well suppose that Moses was called up to be with Jehovah on the higher summit of Jebel Mûsa, while the people watched his ascent from the plain and from the slopes of the mountains. Sir Charles Wilson lays special stress on the position and character of the cliff of Rás Sufsàfeh. Nothing can be more graphic than the description of this noble, precipitous mass of granite, as the mountain which "may be touched." Its almost sheer rise from the plain lends force to this description, while it afforded facilities for marking off its sacred precincts from trespassers.
One other point may be noticed. In the vicinity of this mountain group are several perennial springs and six streams affording cool and delicious water throughout the year. They derive their sources from the snow which, for a few weeks in winter time, caps the upper heights of Jebels Mûsa and Katarina. One of these streams descending along the Wâdy Sh'reich was probably that into which Moses cast the dust of the Golden Calf.
The late eminent Astronomer Royal, in his attempt to trace the events connected with the journeys of the Israelites to purely natural causes, has advanced the view that the thunderings and lightnings of Sinai were caused by the outburst of volcanic forces. If such had been the case we might have expected some evidence of volcanic action, or of a modern volcanic mountain, in this neighbourhood. Jebel Mûsa, however, together with all the mountain groups forming the southern extremity of the ​Sinaitic peninsula, consists of granitic and metamorphic rocks of immense geological antiquity; nor are there any traces of recent volcanic products.
3. Kadesh Barnea and Mount Hor.—The position of Kadesh Barnea, a locality for ever memorable in the history of the Israelitish wanderings, has been a question of controversy amongst geographers down to the present day. According to the sacred text it was eleven days' journey from Horeb (Mount Sinai) by way of Mount Seir, and it was, also, immediately to the south of the borders of Canaan, and not far from those of Edom or Mount Seir. From this description, Kadesh Barnea might lie either along the western border of the Wâdy el Arabah, or at some distance further west amongst the valleys of the Tîh. Accordingly, the spring called Ain el Weibeh, discovered by Dr. Eobinson, at the base of the cliffs which form the bounds of the Arabah Valley, has been identified by some writers as the site of Kadesh.
A more recent determination, and one in which I am disposed to concur, is the valley and spring of 'Ain Kadeis, which lies about thirty-five miles to the west of the Arabah Valley, amongst the limestone hills of the Tîh. This identification was first made by the Rev. John Rolands, and is ably supported by an American writer. Dr. Trumbull, in a recent work, written after a personal visit to the spot. Under this identification, the camping ground of Kadesh Barnea was probably reached by the route suggested by the Rev. F. W. Holland, and which was also followed throughout a great part of its course by our own Expedition. Mr. Holland supposes that the Israelites, after leaving Jebel Mûsa (Horeb), marched northwards, and after traversing the grand gorge of the Wâdy el Watiyeh, turned to the east along the valleys of Zillegah and El Ain. Turning northwards they entered the region of the Tîh, by the Wâdy el Atiyeh; and then proceeding onwards across the great plains of limestone reached their halting-place at Kadesh Barnea. The whole distance would be about 150 miles (English), and for eleven days would be at the rate of nearly fourteen miles per day.
On leaving Kadesh the Israelites marched eastwards towards the borders of Edom, and encamped at the base of Mount Hor, while awaiting the reply of the King of Edom to the request of Moses for permission to pass through his country on the way towards the Land of Promise. This route was circuitous; but it may be presumed that the Israelites, having thirty-eight years previously been smitten before the Amalekites and Canaanites, were permitted to circumvent their enemies by the way of Edom, Moab, and the Jordan Valley. They, therefore, appear to have marched eastward to the head of the W. Kadeis, crossed the limestone plain, and descended into the great valley of the Arabah, by the W. Ghamr, or one of the other branches. Having crossed the Arabah, here about ten miles wide, they continued their course toward the base of Mount Hor, and camped at the western base of the mount, in the wide valley called W. Abu Kuseibeh, which was the site of our own camp ​while we visited Petra and Mount Hor, between the 8th and 10th of December, 1883.
In its name Jebel Haroun (Aaron's Mount), Mount Hor retains the memory of that event which forms so melancholy a chapter in Jewish history. The identification of J. Haroun with "Mount Hor, by the coast of the Land of Edom" (Numb. xx, 23), has been disputed by Dr. Trumbull, but (as it seems to me) on insufficient grounds. He suggests Jebel Madurah, an isolated hill near Ain Kadeis, as the real scene of Aaron's death. Dr. Trumbull has doubtless seen Jebel Madurah, but if he had visited Jebel Haroun he would have been aware how completely this conspicuous elevation fulfils the requirements of the narrative. The language, "that the whole congregation journeyed from Kadesh, and came unto Mount Hor," appears to indicate an interval of perhaps several days' march from the time of their departure from the one, till their arrival at the other. It may also be presumed that, as Moses was permitted to view the Land of Canaan from Mount Nebo, Aaron was permitted to do so from Mount Hor. In both these respects Jebel Haroun meets the requirements of the case. The summit of Mount Hor, rising as it does about 4,580 feet (as determined by Major Kitchener) above the Mediterranean, or 5,875 feet above the level of the Salt Sea and The Ghôr, affords a commanding prospect of the great valley of the Arabah, and the borders of Seir, of the depression of The Ghôr, itself, and of the tableland of Southern Palestine; and we may well suppose the eyes of the high priest of Israel were allowed to rest themselves upon the hills of Judea, ere he resigned his priestly robes, and prepared himself for his resting-place, perhaps in the little cave which is covered by a Mohammedan shrine, whose white walls are visible to the traveller for many a mile around.
4. The Site of Calvary.— One of the most recent identifications in or about Jerusalem is the site of Calvary, the topographical details of which have been very clearly elucidated by Captain Conder. Attention has up till recent times been diverted from this determination by the assumption that the site of our Lord's Crucifixion is beneath the roof of "The Church of the Holy Sepulchre," which occupies a position nearly in the centre of the modern city. The labours of the officers of the Palestine Survey, and others, have not only succeeded in exploding the ​claims of this locality, but also in fixing the real site, as it seems to me, beyond the pale of controversy.
If there is any fact clearer than another, in reference to the place of the Crucifixion, it is that the spot was outside the walls of Jerusalem. As the Apostle puts it, both figuratively and actually, "Jesus suffered without the gate," and as there was a garden at the place of the Crucifixion containing a tomb, it is tolerably certain the spot was beyond the suburbs of the city. The traditional site, on which the church of the Crusaders stands, was either inside the second wall, as may be inferred from the description of Josephus, who says that it stretched from the Gate of Gennath in a circuit to the angle of Fort Antonia, or it must have been in close proximity thereto; and, consequently, fails in either case to answer to the language of St. John xix, 20, that the place was "nigh unto the city." As has been pointedly remarked, the language of the Evangelists seems to imply that the procession, on leaving the Prætorium, passed, not through the city, but outside it. Now from the relative positions of the Prætorium and the traditional site, the procession would have had to wind its way along the side of the second wall, instead of outwards towards the country.
But beyond the second wall stretched at that time the populous suburb of Bezetha, which was enclosed about ten years after the Crucifixion by Agrippa's third wall, and it is extremely unlikely that the Crucifixion and entombment would have been permitted in the midst of suburban residences.
We are obliged, therefore, to look outside, and beyond, those limits for a position which would answer the requirements of the several narratives, which are all quite consistent with each other. Calvary was clearly an elevated site, affording space for a large assemblage of spectators; it was some distance from the city walls, and from ordinary habitations; it was by the wayside leading into the country; and was within easy reach of the Prætorium, or Herod's Judgment Hall, which occupied the north-west angle of the Temple area. All these requirements are met by ​the site described by Captain Conder, which is one accepted by (I believe) the intelligent European residents of Jerusalem, and it is one which, after having visited and carefully considered it, has satisfied my own mind.
On passing through the Damascus Gate, which leads out from the north side of the city, we turn to the right by the road which follows the course of Agrippa's wall; and at a distance of about one-fourth of an English mile we find ourselves in front of a platform of limestone, breaking off with a slight scarp in the direction of the city. The face of the scarp is perforated by a cave, known as "Jeremiah's Grotto," and seen in a certain direction this prominent knoll has an appearance not unlike that of a skull; hence, possibly, the name "Golgotha." More probably, however, the locality was a place of interment; for it is known that the great cemetery of Jewish times lay to the north side of the city, and therefore in the neighbourhood of the Grotto of Jeremiah. A Mohammedan cemetery occupies a portion of the platform, and an Arab Sheikh has pitched his tent at its base. Here, undesecrated by any building, sacred or profane, stands in its naked simplicity the natural platform on which was erected the cross of the Saviour. From this position, with outstretched arms. He embraced the city over which He had wept when first He had viewed it from the Mount of Olives. The position of the first and last view are almost exactly opposite each other. And, as if to place the identification of the spot beyond controversy an ancient Roman causeway has been discovered stretching in the direction of Herod's Gate, which, passing through Agrippa's wall, opens out almost in front of the platform; we can scarcely doubt it was that along which the procession moved after leaving the Prætorium towards the place of Crucifixion. Amongst all the objects referable to the time of our Lord, none seems to me more clearly genuine than that I have now described as the site of Calvary.
Such is a brief account of some of the localities (with the exception of Ain Kadeis) visited by the members of our Expedition.
* ↑ "Ordnance Survey of Sinai," p. 140.
* ↑ "The Desert of the Exodus," pp. 55, 99, and 102. I cannot by any means accept Mr. Baker Greene's views of the identity of Mount Sinai with Mount Hor.
* ↑ It is too much to suppose that Moses was exposed during forty days to the fury of a volcano in active eruption!
* ↑ Deut. i, 2.
* ↑ Numb, xxxiv, 4.
* ↑ "Kadesh Barnea" (1884).
* ↑ The spot had also been visited by the Rev. F. W. Holland.
* ↑ Numb. XX, 8.
* ↑ Quarterly Statement, January, 1884.
* ↑ Numb. xiv, 44.
* ↑ "Tent Work in Palestine," p. 195, &c.
* ↑ Heb. xiii, 12.
* ↑ John xix, 41.
* ↑ Matt, xxvii, 31; Mark xv, 20; Luke xxiii, 26; John xix, 17.
* ↑ In the excellent Map of Ancient Jerusalem in the Biblical Atlas and Gazetteer the plans are well shown, but the position of the spot now identified is better shown in the map of the modern city.
* ↑ Amongst whom may be mentioned the British and American Consuls and Dr. Chaplin. General Gordon, in his notes on Palestine, takes the same view, and Canon Tristram has reminded me that he has also for some time held this view.