IEJ article

VOLUME 63 • NUMBER 2 • 2013

CONTENTS

121 NAAMA SCHEFTELOWITZ, PETER FABIAN and ISAAC GILEAD: The

Clog-Shaped Vessel and the Tray: New Ghassulian Pottery Types

131 MORDECHAI COGAN: A New Cuneiform Text from Megiddo

135 YOSEF GARFINKEL and MADELEINE MUMCUOGLU: Triglyphs and Recessed

Doorframes on a Building Model from Khirbet Qeiyafa: New Light on Two

Technical Terms in the Biblical Descriptions of Solomon’s Palace and

Temple

164 DORON BEN-AMI and YANA TCHEKHANOVETS: A Roman Mansion Found in

the City of David

174 AVRAHAM FAUST: From Regional Power to Peaceful Neighbour: Philistia

in the Iron I–II Transition

205 ASHER GROSSBERG: A New Perspective on the Southern Part of Channel II

in the City of David

219 ASHER S. KAUFMAN: The Stoai of the Temple Abutted on the Staircase of

the Tower of Antonia

232 NOTES AND NEWS

235 REVIEWS

239 HEBREW BOOKS AND PAPERS

Page layout by Avraham Pladot

Typesetting by Marzel A.S. — Jerusalem

Printed by Old City Press, Jerusalem

Israel

Exploration

Journal

VOLUME 63 • NUMBER 2JERUSALEM, ISRAEL • 2013

IEJ

632

ISRAEL EXPLORATION JOURNAL

Published twice yearly by the Israel Exploration Society and the Institute of

Archaeology of the Hebrew University, with the assistance of the Nathan

Davidson Publication Fund in Archaeology, Samis Foundation, Seattle WA,

and Dorot Foundation, Providence RI

Founders

A. Reifenberg, D. Amiran

Former Editors

Michael Avi-Yonah, Dan Barag, Jonas C. Greenfield, Baruch A. Levine,

Miriam Tadmor

Editorial Board

Shmuel A¢ituv and Amihai Mazar, Editors

Tsipi Kuper-Blau, Executive Editor

Joseph Aviram, President, Israel Exploration Society

Editorial Advisory Board

Gideon Avni, Ofer Bar-Yosef, Shlomo Bunimovitz, Israel Ephªal, Baruch A.

Levine, Aren M. Maeir, Ronny Reich, Myriam Rosen-Ayalon, Zeev Weiss

IEJ is now available online on JSTOR

Email: [email protected]

Books for review: Israel Exploration Journal, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070,

Israel

Guidelines: http://israelexplorationsociety.huji.ac.il

Copyright © 2013 Israel Exploration Society

ISSN 0021-2059

The Editors are not responsible for opinions expressed by the contributors

ABBREVIATIONS

AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan

AJA American Journal of Archaeology

AfO Archiv für Orientforschung

ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament3, ed. J.B. Pritchard,

Princeton, 1969

BA The Biblical Archaeologist

BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BT Babylonian Talmud

CAD Chicago Assyrian Dictionary

CIS Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum

DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert

DSD Dead Sea Discoveries

EI Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies

ESI Excavations and Surveys in Israel

IAA Reports Israel Antiquities Authority Reports

IEJ Israel Exploration Journal

JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies

JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies

KAI W. Donner and W. Röllig: Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften 1–3,

Wiesbaden, 1962–1964; 15, 2002

NEAEHL The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land (English

Edition), Jerusalem, 1993

PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly

PT Palestinian Talmud

QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine

RA Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale

RB Revue Biblique

RE Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft

RQ Revue de Qumran

VT Vetus Testamentum

ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie

ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES

2014: $60 including postage or equivalent payable to

the Israel Exploration Society, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070, Israel.

All subscribers are entitled to a 25% reduction on the publications of the Society.

Subscribers should give full name and postal address when paying their

subscription, and should send notice of change of address at least five weeks before

it is to take effect; the old as well as the new address should be given.

Single issue: $30 or equivalent.

VOLUME 63 • NUMBER 2 • 2013

CONTENTS

121 NAAMA SCHEFTELOWITZ, PETER FABIAN and ISAAC GILEAD: The

Clog-Shaped Vessel and the Tray: New Ghassulian Pottery Types

131 MORDECHAI COGAN: A New Cuneiform Text from Megiddo

135 YOSEF GARFINKEL and MADELEINE MUMCUOGLU: Triglyphs and Recessed

Doorframes on a Building Model from Khirbet Qeiyafa: New Light on Two

Technical Terms in the Biblical Descriptions of Solomon’s Palace and

Temple

164 DORON BEN-AMI and YANA TCHEKHANOVETS: A Roman Mansion Found in

the City of David

174 AVRAHAM FAUST: From Regional Power to Peaceful Neighbour: Philistia

in the Iron I–II Transition

205 ASHER GROSSBERG: A New Perspective on the Southern Part of Channel II

in the City of David

219 ASHER S. KAUFMAN: The Stoai of the Temple Abutted on the Staircase of

the Tower of Antonia

232 NOTES AND NEWS

235 REVIEWS

239 HEBREW BOOKS AND PAPERS

Page layout by Avraham Pladot

Typesetting by Marzel A.S. — Jerusalem

Printed by Old City Press, Jerusalem

Israel

Exploration

Journal

VOLUME 63 • NUMBER 2JERUSALEM, ISRAEL • 2013

IEJ

632

ISRAEL EXPLORATION JOURNAL

Published twice yearly by the Israel Exploration Society and the Institute of

Archaeology of the Hebrew University, with the assistance of the Nathan

Davidson Publication Fund in Archaeology, Samis Foundation, Seattle WA,

and Dorot Foundation, Providence RI

Founders

A. Reifenberg, D. Amiran

Former Editors

Michael Avi-Yonah, Dan Barag, Jonas C. Greenfield, Baruch A. Levine,

Miriam Tadmor

Editorial Board

Shmuel A¢ituv and Amihai Mazar, Editors

Tsipi Kuper-Blau, Executive Editor

Joseph Aviram, President, Israel Exploration Society

Editorial Advisory Board

Gideon Avni, Ofer Bar-Yosef, Shlomo Bunimovitz, Israel Ephªal, Baruch A.

Levine, Aren M. Maeir, Ronny Reich, Myriam Rosen-Ayalon, Zeev Weiss

IEJ is now available online on JSTOR

Email: [email protected]

Books for review: Israel Exploration Journal, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070,

Israel

Guidelines: http://israelexplorationsociety.huji.ac.il

Copyright © 2013 Israel Exploration Society

ISSN 0021-2059

The Editors are not responsible for opinions expressed by the contributors

ABBREVIATIONS

AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan

AJA American Journal of Archaeology

AfO Archiv für Orientforschung

ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament3, ed. J.B. Pritchard,

Princeton, 1969

BA The Biblical Archaeologist

BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BT Babylonian Talmud

CAD Chicago Assyrian Dictionary

CIS Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum

DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert

DSD Dead Sea Discoveries

EI Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies

ESI Excavations and Surveys in Israel

IAA Reports Israel Antiquities Authority Reports

IEJ Israel Exploration Journal

JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies

JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies

KAI W. Donner and W. Röllig: Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften 1–3,

Wiesbaden, 1962–1964; 15, 2002

NEAEHL The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land (English

Edition), Jerusalem, 1993

PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly

PT Palestinian Talmud

QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine

RA Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale

RB Revue Biblique

RE Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft

RQ Revue de Qumran

VT Vetus Testamentum

ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie

ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES

2014: $60 including postage or equivalent payable to

the Israel Exploration Society, P.O.B. 7041, Jerusalem 91070, Israel.

All subscribers are entitled to a 25% reduction on the publications of the Society.

Subscribers should give full name and postal address when paying their

subscription, and should send notice of change of address at least five weeks before

it is to take effect; the old as well as the new address should be given.

Single issue: $30 or equivalent.

The Stoai of the Temple Abutted on the Staircase

of the Tower of Antonia*

ASHER S. KAUFMAN

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem —

The University of Ariel

ABSTRACT: According to Josephus and Acts of the New Testament, there was a

way down (a staircase) from the Tower of Antonia to the Temple precincts. The

reconstruction of the staircase proposed here in accordance with Herodian archi-

tecture is based upon the existence of surface-rock in the form of an arc of a circle.

If this reconstruction is correct, the Tower of Antonia would have extended into the

north-western corner of the Temple area. Of greater significance, the stoai of the

outer court of the Temple precincts would have abutted on the staircase, as indeed,

is in keeping with Josephus’ Jewish War V.243 (V.v.8).

INTRODUCTION

IT is generally accepted that the Tower of Antonia, built by Herod, is situated on

the rock precipice at the north-western corner of the Temple area in Jerusalem. In

the same corner, rock to the south of the precipice was visible until recently at

ground level. When I first examined aerial photographs of the Temple area many

years ago, it seemed that this surface-rock had been hewn in the shape of circular

arcs (Kaufman 1977: 72). Geologist Dr. Israel Roth, who accompanied me on my

visit to the Temple area on 11 September 1975, also saw the surface-rock

(Kaufman 2006: 5th visit). According to an entry that I made in my log-book for

27 January 1976, he thought that the arc-shaped rock may have served as the basis

of a staircase. On 16 December 1975, Prof. Ehud Netzer saw the surface-rock and

emphasized its circular nature (Kaufman 2006: 16th visit). It was covered with

earth, partially in June 1981 and completely in June 1982, and later planted with a

garden (Elon, Barak and Bach 1996: 897, 913). The topic remained dormant, and I

forgot the comments of Roth and Netzer until after I started this investigation.

IEJ 63 (2013): 219–231 219

* The chief alignment in Temple times was east–west, with the Holy of Holies of the

Temple in the west as a negation of the sun cult. The figures are presented in this way

with west at the top of each figure, although the conventional direction north is shown.

The numbering system of objects seen in the Temple area was fixed in 1977 begin-

ning with no. 31. Nos. 1–30 were reserved for parts of the Temple and its precincts.

I am most grateful to Mr. J.-M. Hamou for the excellent art work, especially for his

effort to draw the staircase (fig. 5). My thanks are extended to the Editors of IEJ for

suggestions in making this article more reader-friendly.

The object of this article is to investigate one of these arcs without knowing in

advance if anything significant could be the result.

It is suggested that a circular staircase originally led from the Temple area to

the Tower of Antonia (hereafter: Antonia); such a staircase, consistent with

Herodian architecture, is reconstructed here in detail. In consequence, as is shown

here, the stoai of the outer court of the Temple precincts abutted on Antonia — or,

to be more precise, on the staircase — a conclusion that is in keeping with

Josephus’ Jewish War V.243 (V.v.8) [Thackeray 1928].

TEMPLE TERMINOLOGY

The noun hieron with no adjectival qualification in Josephus’ writings in Greek

denotes the Temple precincts, i.e., the House and the sanctified courts, as distinct

from Jerusalem within the ancient walls (Büchler 1899: 59; Taylor 1999: 551).

The relationship between the terminology of the Jewish Sages of Temple times

and that of Josephus can be understood by comparing M. Kélim 1:8 with

Josephus’ Contra Apion II.103–104 (II.8). The former reads:

[The court] Har HaBayit is more holy than it [within the wall of Jeru-

salem], for men and women that have a flux, menstruant women, and

women after childbirth, may not enter therein (my translation).

The latter states:

For it [the House] had four surrounding courts, and each of these had

its own protection in accordance with the law. Thus, anyone was

allowed to enter the outer court, even foreigners; only menstruant

women were prohibited entry. To the second court all Jews were

admitted, … (Barclay 2007: 222 with slight alteration).

The outer court is the first court, which is the equivalent of Har HaBayit (M.

Middot 2:1), also known as the Court of the Gentiles. The choice of the word

‘porticus’ (in the extant Latin text of Contra Apion II), translated as ‘court’, indi-

cates that the courts were lined with stoai, as also stated in War V.190–192 (V.v.2)

(see Lewis and Short 1879: 1401). It would seem that Josephus simplified matters

by mentioning the most prevalent case — that of menstruant women — whereas

the Mishna expresses the legal authority.

HERODIAN ARCHITECTURE

According to Netzer (2006: 318), who outlined planning aspects of Herodian

architecture, dimensions in round numbers, such as 100 cubits, were favoured.

The Herodian builders were not pedantic in measurement or in the proportioning

of buildings.

220 ASHER S. KAUFMAN

The circle featured prominently in the geometrical design of structures, e.g., in

Herodium (Jacobson 1984: 127), Masada (Jacobson 2006: 110) and the Temple

area (Hanauer 1891: 206; Kaufman 2002: 438; 2006: 17th visit). In the Temple

itself, the staircase leading from the Court of the Women to the Court of Israel (M.

Middot 2:5) was semi-circular, although this design may have been from an earlier

period than the Herodian.

Symmetry is noted in Herodian building projects (Jacobson 2006: 110), no doubt

influenced by Roman planning principles (Vitruvius III.1; Granger 1931: 159).

THE TOWER OF ANTONIA

Although the exact shape of Antonia is unknown, it was presumably quadrilateral

because War V.242 (V.v.8) states that it had four corners.

There are two rock escarpments in the north-western corner of the Temple area

today, one running north–south and the other running east–west (part of the pres-

ent northern boundary of the Temple area) (fig. 1). In the nineteenth century,

Turkish barracks (Serai) were seated on the latter; today it is the location of the

ªUmariyya school. Warren (1881: 16) wrote that ‘the rock scarp of the Antonia …

[is] perpendicular to the eastern wall’ of the Temple area. This statement is only

approximately correct. It is, in fact, aligned 5.4° south of due west, according to

measurements on two large-scale maps derived from aerial survey; the general

alignment of the eastern wall is 6.0° west of due north.

The western wall of the Temple area, which is a continuation of the

north–south escarpment, is aligned 79.7° north of due west (Kaufman 2004: 109).

Hence, the angle between the two escarpments should be 85.1°, rather than a right

angle. This is in excellent agreement with the value of 85.2°, as measured on the

original of fig. 1.

The height of the east–west escarpment is important for the discussion. Its high-

est point, in the north-western corner of the Temple area is 2,462 feet, or 750.4 m

above the Mediterranean Sea (Warren and Conder 1884: 277). Object 37 is a

Herodian pavement of large flagstones set among the surface-rock in the north-

western corner (fig. 2). Before being covered with earth in 1981 (Elon, Barak and

Bach 1996: 897), it was flush with the ground, and in 1975, its height was 739.15

m, as determined by aerial survey (taking an average of seven measurements).1 It

THE STAIRCASE OF THE TOWER OF ANTONIA 221

1 About a hundred years elapsed between Schick’s measurement of the height of the

east–west escarpment (Warren and Conder 1884: 277) and measurement of the height

of the Herodian pavement (object 37) via aerial survey. The estimated rise in sea-level

during this period was 15–20 cm (e.g., Miller and Douglas 2004). The uncertainty in

measurement of the height of the escarpment can be judged from the fact that Warren

and Conder (above) quote 2,462 feet, while Schick’s drawing (Wilson 1880) shows

2,460 feet. It would seem that the rise in sea-level can be neglected in the present case.

is regarded here as the base level in the north-western corner of the Temple area;

consequently, the drop in height from the highest point of the east–west escarp-

ment is 11.3 m. According to Josephus (War V.238 [V.v.8]), Antonia was built

upon a rock 50 cubits high. This is equivalent to 22.3 m for the Hebrew cubit

(äîà) of 44.65 cm or to 22.2 m for the Roman cubit (cubitum) of 44.4 cm (see

Appendix). Josephus’ figure is approximately double that given above for the

east–west escarpment. Note, however, that Josephus did not specify on which side

the height was 50 cubits.


Fig. 1. Map of the north-western corner of the Temple area (based on the original map of

Warren 1884: pl. xxxvii)

The north–south escarpment falls abruptly at a distance of 32.3 m away from

the southern edge of the minaret in the north-western corner of the Temple area

(fig. 1). Since Josephus wrote that Antonia was precipitous on all sides (War

V.238 [V.v.8], it is possible that it extended into the Temple area to the extent as

given by this sharp fall.


Fig. 2. Map of the north-western corner of the Temple area, drawn on the basis of aerial

survey to show the surface-rock

37 = Herodian pavement; 45 = circular hole in surface-rock (Hanauer 1891: 206;

Kaufman 2006: 17th visit)

THE STAIRCASE IN THE LITERATURE

A staircase (way down) leading from Antonia to the Temple precincts is

mentioned in Josephus’ War V.243 (V.v.8) and in Acts XXI, 35 and 40. The

passage from War reads:

‘Where it [Antonia] abutted on the stoai of the Temple precincts

[hieron], there was a way down to both [stoai], by which the guards

descended’ (my translation)

The stoai are referred to in War V.238 (V.v.8) as the western and northern stoai of

the first sanctified [court]. The two stoai are also mentioned, this time separately,

in War VI.151 (VI.ii.7). Some translators of V.243 render ‘a way down’ as ‘steps’,

undoubtedly influenced by Acts 33–35:

‘The commander came up and arrested him [Paul] … ordered that

Paul be taken into the barracks. … When Paul reached the steps’

[leading to the barracks] (NIV 1978: 1084 with slight modification)

It would appear that Paul was taken from the Temple precincts (Acts XXI, 30)

through the Kiponos gate on the western side of the first (outer) court (Middot 1:3)

to Antonia (the barracks) by way of the steps leading to it (see below, fig. 4 for the

approximate location of the Kiponos gate).

A RECONSTRUCTION OF THE STAIRCASE

The southern edge of the surface-rock in the north-western corner is shaped as a

circular arc, as seen in fig. 3 (no. 1). Assume that this is the base of a circular stair-

case connecting the Temple precincts with Antonia. A circle with a radius of

36.2 m fits this arc in three parts of the rock. Now draw a perpendicular (no. 2) to

the Western Wall of the Temple area through the centre of the circle and a line (no.

3) at right angles to this perpendicular through the centre, as shown. Since there

are no indications of staircase remains on object 37 nor of exposed rock further

south, the southern edge of the arc might be the southern limit of the staircase.

Draw a line (no. 4) from this edge to the centre. By symmetry the western edge

(no. 5) of the staircase can now be defined as shown. The angle subtended by these

two limits (nos. 4 and 5) is found to be 90°. The radius of 36.2 m is nearly equiva-

lent to 80 cubits, a round number (Hebrew: 35.7 m; Roman: 35.6 m). These results

suggest that the reconstruction of a staircase is consistent with Herodian and

Roman architecture, notably because of the round-number dimension and

symmetry.

It is logical to assume that Antonia and the Herodian Western Wall of the

Temple area would have been aligned. As previously mentioned, the north–south

escarpment falls sharply at a distance of 32.3 m from the southern edge of the


minaret in the north-western corner. Consequently, a line (no. 6) at this distance,

as shown, perpendicular to the Western Wall, could have defined the southern

border of Antonia. This would be consistent with Josephus’ account.

The width of the top of the staircase can be estimated on the understanding that

the staircase should not impinge on the flagstone floor (object 37). So set a line

(no. 7) from the southern edge of the arc to the supposed southern border of

Antonia (no. 6), with a corresponding symmetrical line (no. 8) on the western


Fig. 3. Plan of the north-western corner of the Temple area, showing the various stages of

reconstruction of the staircase from the Temple area to Antonia; stages are marked 1–8; a

north–south grid line, as shown on the aerial survey, indicates the conventional direction

north

side, as shown. The width of the staircase at the top (part of line no. 6) is 21.8 m,

and the distance between the circumference of the arc and the top of the staircase

is 45.1 m. These two measurements are very close to round numbers in cubits:

21.8 m nearly equals 50 cubits (Hebrew cubit: 22.3 m; Roman cubit: 22.2 m; see

Appendix), and 45.1 m nearly equals 100 cubits (Hebrew cubit: 44.65 m; Roman

cubit: 44.4 m). The differences can be accounted for in terms of the uncertainty in

mapping and in the assumptions.

As previously shown, there is a drop of approximately 25 cubits from the top

of the Antonia rock to the flooring (object 37). If the riser of the steps leading to

Antonia was 1/2 cubit, there would have been 50 steps over a horizontal distance

of 100 cubits. A convenient arrangement, which would not have necessitated

breaking step, could have been a module consisting of five steps with a riser of 1/2

cubit, a tread length of 1 cubit and a landing of 6 cubits along the central line no. 3.

The module would have been repeated nine times (as reconstructed in fig. 5).


Fig. 4. The Temple precincts (in bold lines) superimposed on a map of the Temple area

25 = Kiponos Gate (exact position on the western side not known); 26 = Lamb Gate of Har

HaBayit; 28 = protruding corner tower; 43 = Dome of the Spirits or of the Tablets (my

placement of the Holy of Holies); 96 = Western Wall plaza; A = Dome of the Rock; B =

platform of the Dome of the Rock

THE STOAI OF THE TEMPLE ABUTTED ON THE STAIRCASE

Fig. 4 depicts the plan view of the Second Temple precincts superimposed on a

map of the Temple area (Kaufman 1991: 40), following my suggestion for the

location of the Temple. It shows the House, the two principal courts with adjoin-

ing chambers surrounded by Har HaBayit. The superimposition of fig. 5 shows an

enlargement of the north-western corner of fig. 4.

According to Josephus, War V.238 (V.v.8):

‘Antonia lay at the angle [formed by] two stoai, the western and the

northern, of the first sanctified’ [court] (my translation).

Stoai in general are referred to in War V.190–192 (V.v.2). The first sanctified court

and Har HaBayit are one and the same (see above, ‘Temple Terminology’). On the

understanding that the staircase is part of the Antonia building, fig. 5 shows the

north-western corner of Har HaBayit abutting on the staircase, in precise confir-

mation of the statement by Josephus.

It would seem that fig. 4 should be corrected by deleting the corner tower (28)

protruding beyond the north-western corner of Har HaBayit. The correction is

shown in fig. 5. Otherwise, a protruding corner tower would overlap the staircase.

In fig. 5, the lower western side of the staircase overlaps the cloister of the

Western Wall. This does not present a problem for the reconstruction, since the

cloister was built in the fourteenth century (Burgoyne 1987: 384).

DISCUSSION

As the literature on Antonia is extensive, I shall concentrate on references to its

extension into the Temple area.

Clermont-Ganneau (1899: 137) mentioned ‘great quadrangular holes [in the

east–west escarpment], which evidently are joist-holes meant to receive the ends

of beams’. They are indicative of building extension into the Temple area. Dalman

(1935: 286, 308) stated that Antonia ‘jutted into the Sanctuary [Temple precincts]

with a part of its quadrangle’, but did not elaborate. Netzer (2009) presented a

detailed reconstruction of Antonia, which extends into the Temple area and is

aligned with the Western Wall of the Temple area. He fixed its southern boundary

65 m from the north-western corner of the area, on the supposition that this was

indicated by an offset to the east of the Western Wall (2009: 50). It would seem,

however, that he did not consider the precipitous nature of the north–south escarp-

ment at a distance of 32 m from the north-western corner (see above).

The length of the western wall of Har HaBayit requires reassessment in view

of the proposed deletion of the protruding north-western corner tower overlapping

the staircase. The arc of surface-rock under discussion and the possible arc to the

north-west of object 37 (fig. 2) are not concentric. It is not clear how the latter fits

into the reconstruction of the staircase, if at all.


Fig. 5. The north-western corner of the first court (Har HaBayit) of the Temple precincts

(in bold lines) and the reconstructed staircase superimposed upon the north-western

corner of the Temple area; the protruding corner tower (28) has been deleted; the southern

edge of Antonia is shown by two straight lines (no. 6 in the reconstruction) bracketing the

curved landing at the top of the staircase

26 = Lamb Gate of Har HaBayit

APPENDIX: METROLOGY

Josephus wrote that Antonia was built on a rock 50 cubits high (see above, ‘The

Tower of Antonia’), but he did not specify which cubit. On the one hand, it would

have been in keeping with Herodian architecture for the tower to have been

planned and built using the Roman foot; see, e.g., the Cave of Makhpela (Jacob-

son 1981). On the other hand, the Hebrew cubit may have been employed in view

of the proximity of Antonia to the Temple precincts, although it was not part of it.

Fernie (1978), Skinner (1967: 67) and McDonald (1992: 140) summarised

data on the length of the Roman foot and all came up with 29.6 cm to three signifi-

cant figures. The resultant Roman cubit (cubitum) is 44.4 cm in length, since a

foot is two thirds of a cubit.

The Hebrew cubit (äîà) of six handbreadths existed in three different lengths

(M. Kélim 17:9). The Antonia staircase was beyond the Temple precincts; conse-

quently, the usual (profane) cubit at the time of Herod, equal to 44.65 cm, would

have been in use (Kaufman 1984). The subscript 5 is used to denote the uncer-

tainty between 44.6 and 44.7.

Fortunately, there is little difference in length between the Roman and Hebrew

cubits, and in view of the uncertainty in measurement, it may not be possible in

practice to distinguish between the two in reconstructing the Antonia staircase.

The Hebrew cubit of six handbreadths of length 45 cm to two significant

figures is well attested in buildings, burial caves and wine presses in Israel; see,

e.g., Barkay, Fantalkin and Tal (2002); Barkay and Kloner (1986: 37); Eshel

(1987: 17); Kloner and Stark (1991–92: 7); and Walsh and Zorn (1998: table 1).

REFERENCES

Barclay, J.M.G.

2007 Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary. Against Apion 10, Leiden

Barkay, G., Fantalkin, A. and Tal, O.

2002 A Late Iron Age Fortress North of Jerusalem, BASOR 328: 49–71

Barkay, G. and Kloner, A.

1986 Jerusalem Tombs from the Days of the First Temple, Biblical Archaeology Review

12(2): 22–39

Büchler, A.

1899 The Nicanor Gate and the Brass Gate, Jewish Quarterly Review XI: 46–63

Burgoyne, M.H.

1987 Mamluk Jerusalem. An Architectural Study, London

Clermont-Ganneau, M.

1899 Archaeological Researches in Palestine during the Years 1873–1874 1, London


Dalman, G.

1935 Sacred Sites and Ways, London

Elon, M., Barak, A. and Bach, G.

1996 Temple Mount Faithful-Amutah et al. v. Attorney-General Inspector-General of the

Police Mayor of Jerusalem Minister of Education and Culture Director of the Antiq-

uities Division Muslam Waqf, In the Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of

Justice [September 23, 1993], Catholic University Law Review 45: 861–941

(English translation)

Eshel, H.

1987 The Late Iron Age Cemetery of Gibeon, IEJ 37: 3–17

Fernie, E.

1978 Historical Metrology and Architectural History, Art History 1: 383–399

Granger, F.

1931 Vitruvius on Architecture 1, Cambridge MA — London

Hanauer, J.E.

1891 Cuttings in the Rock in the Haram-Area, Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly

Statement

Jacobson, D.M.

1981 The Plan of the Ancient Haram el-Khalil in Hebron, PEQ 113: 73–80

1984 The Design of the Fortress of Herodium, ZDPV 100: 127–136

2006 The Northern Palace at Masada — Herod’s Ship of the Desert? PEQ 138: 99–117

Kaufman, A.S.

1977 New Light upon Zion: The Plan and Precise Location of the Second Temple, Ariel, a

Review of Arts and Letters in Israel 43: 63–99

1984 Determining the Length of the Medium Cubit, PEQ 116: 120–132

1991 The Temple of Jerusalem Part I. Tractate Middot an Ancient Version, Jerusalem

2002 Identifying Stone Remains: The Second Temple at Jerusalem as a Case Study, in

Lazzarini, L. (ed.), ASMOSIA VI Proc. Sixth International Conference, Venice 2000,

Padova: 437–442

2004 The Temple of Jerusalem Part III. The Temple Mount: Where Is The Holy of Holies?

Jerusalem

2006 Reports on Visits to the Temple Area. Archival Copy and Map, Jerusalem, The

National Library of Israel, Dept. of Manuscripts and Archives, V. 3281

Kloner, A. and Stark, H.

1991–92 A Burial Cave on Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel Archaeo-

logical Society 11: 7–17

Lewis, C.T. and Short, C.

1879 A Latin Dictionary, impression of 1969, Oxford

McDonald, D.Mc.

1992 Scarve, C.J. (ed.), The Origins of Metrology Collected Papers of Dr Daniel McLean

McDonald, Cambridge, U.K.


Miller, L. and Douglas, B.C.

2004 Mass and Volume Contributions to Twentieth-Century Global Sea Level Rise,

Nature 428: 406–409

Netzer, E.

2006 The Architecture of Herod, the Great Builder, Tübingen

2009 Herod’s Antonia Fortress: A New Reconstruction of Paul’s Prison, Biblical Archae-

ology Review 35(1): 44–51, 71

New International Version: NIV Pictorial Bible

1978 Grand Rapids MI

Skinner, F.G.

1967 Weights and Measures: Their Ancient Origins and Their Development in Great Brit-

ain up to AD 1855, London

Taylor, J.

1999 The Gate of the Temple Called ‘the Beautiful’ (Acts 3:2,10), RB 106: 549–562

Thackeray, H.St.J.

1928 Josephus III. The Jewish War, Books IV–VII, Cambridge MA — London

Walsh, C. and Zorn, J.R.

1998 New Insights from Old Wine Presses, PEQ 130: 154–161

Warren, C.

1881 The Site of the Temple of the Jews, Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeol-

ogy 7/2

1884 Plans, Elevations, Sections, &c. shewing the results of the Excavations at Jeru-

salem, 1867–70, executed for the Committee of the Palestine Exploration Fund,

London

Warren, C. and Conder, C.R.

1884 The Survey of Western Palestine. Jerusalem, London

Wilson, C.W.

1880 The Masonry of the Haram Wall, Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement:

9–65, with accompanying drawing by C. Schick


IEJ article

Documents

Transcript of IEJ article