The Site Of Solomon's Temple Discovered.

proration Fund , has done him good service , and might have been made to suit his purpose . The western wall of the Haram is therefore a reliable base line , and a line of 250 cubits = 369-26 ft ., drawn from the middle

of the Sahkra to this base , is a first standard offset , to which all others are reduced , forming north ancl south sides to the court and walls of the Temple Area . According to the Talmud , " The greatest space was on the south , the next on the east , next on the

north ancl least on the west . " ( Lightfoot , "Descr . Temple Hieros . " c . 3 . ) In other words , the Temple and Courts were on the north-west part of its own inclosure , as seen on Mr . Beswick ' s plan and as they were placed against the western wall of the inclosure , the space enclosed was " least on the west . "

ANOTHER NUMERICAL TEST . A casual and seemingly unimportant remark is made by Josephus in relation to the enlargement of the Temple Area by Herod . The old south wall of the inclosure was extended by Heroduntil its south-west

, angle was in line with the old western wall ; it was now 625 cubits = 923-153 ft . according to Mr . Beswick ' s measurement . Herod now carried the eastern front forward , so as to make the entire length of the whole Temple Area equal in width .

Its northern and southern sides were alike ancl equal , being 923-153 ft . And as the northern Court of Gentiles limited the Temple Area on the north , the eastern and wertern walls of the inclosure , not including the Antonia branch , measured by the

distance of the north and south walls , were both of equal length , namely : 1 , 220-039 ft . including the width of walls , north and south . But as the north aud south walls were each 8 cubits = 11-816359 feet thick , ( "Wars" vi . 51 ) and the east and west

, , , , walls were each only 4 cubits = 5-903179 ft . thick , the length of space inclosed was only 911-33 by 1 , 196-4 ft . The Old Temple Area was a quadrangle of 500 cubits = 738-522 ft . therefore the old area was as follows :

500 by 500 , or 250 , 000 cubits . The Temple Area enclosed by Herod was as follows : S 10 by 617 , or 500 , 000 cubits . 1196-4 by 911 . 38 , or 1090830 . 67 ft .

Its half would be : 500 by 500 , or 250 , 000 cubits . 738-52 by 738-52 , or 545415-33 ft . The newly inclosed space was exactl y twice as large as that before inclosed . Josephus says that such was the fact .

" Herod rebuilt the Temple , ancl encompassed a piece of land about it with a wall , which was twice as lao'ge as that before inclosed . " ( "Wars , " i ., 21 ., 1 . ) This proof , like the former one is numerical in characterand is wholly based on the

, discovery that the Sakhra is that Mount Moriah , whose apex or crown was in the centre of the Temple Area , for the outer Court of Gentiles on the north fixes the limit of the eastern walls , and the extent of the area northward .

COURT OF GENTILES HAD NO WESTER" * SIDE . This result of Mr . Beswick's researches is one of the most valuable and important of all his discoveries , growing out of the fundamental determination which fixes the site of Solomon ' s Temple wher the Sakhra

occupies the central spot in the area . It is also one of the most unexpected of his discoveries . He asks the pertinent question , " If the Temple Area inclosed by Solomon ancl Nehemiah was placed against the western wall , would you not either

have to pull down this wall , or else have no western cloister to the Court of Gentiles 1 " On the other hand , Mr . Beswick claims that Josephus distinctly affirms that the Court of Gentiles had only three sides .

while he also says that the Court of Israel was quadrangular or four-sided . Josephus declares that the Inclosure wall of Herod was built up on three sides only . The western wall remained as before ; the three sides round about were only northeastand southancl the cloisters

, , , built upon them could only be three in number . The cloisters and their walls were only three in number . This passage is simple and clear . A western cloister to the Court of Gentiles is never referred to by Josephus .

On the other hand , Mr . Beswick claims that in the same passage Josephus speaks of the Court of Israel as being four-square in such a way as to imply that the Court of Gentiles he had just described was not four-sided . He says :