DOCSLIB.ORG

“WORLD of the BIBLE” Magazine Launches With

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
“WORLD of the BIBLE” Magazine Launches With Spring 1999 Volume 49, Number 1 Albright Appointees Hold “WORLD OF THE BIBLE” Magazine Colloquium at ACOR in Amman Launches with ASOR Endorsement even appointees of the W. F. Albright Institute of Ar- ORLD OF THE chaeological Research in Jerusalem presented papers BIBLE launched its S at a colloquium held at ACOR in Amman on January W premier issue in 28, 1999. The papers are featured beginning on page 7 of this March/April with an issue de- Newsletter. voted to the Temple of Jerusalem. The group was hosted by ACOR Director Pierre Bikai and An English language version of Associate Director Patricia Bikai. In attendance were ACOR the highly regarded French maga- Fellows and staff, the Director of the Department of Antiq- zine, Le Monde de la Bible, it will uities of Jordan, faculty and students of the University of continue the traditions of its illus- Jordan and Yarmouk University, and Friends of Archaeol- trious parent, capturing the ogy in Jordan. Plans are currently being discussed for ACOR beauty, mystery and excitement of five thousand years of to present a colloquium with papers by its Fellows and mem- religious history through articles written by the world’s lead- bers of the Jordanian archaeological community next year at ing biblical scholars, and superb artwork and photography. the Albright in Jerusalem. Six colorful issues each year will feature an archaeological discovery, an exceptional exhibition, or a special preview. Book reviews, exhibition schedules, archaeological reports, transcripts of conferences, and diaries of cultural journeys are also planned for every issue. ASOR’s endorsement and promotion of the magazine in the United States will help to ensure a healthy start. For its part, ASOR will have new avenues for fulfilling its mission of reaching out to the public, new opportunities for devel- oping its membership base, and a marketing outlet for ASOR’s publications and other projects. In addition, plans are underway for sym- 12345678901234567890123456789 12345678901234567890123456789 12345678901234567890123456789 posia to be held 12345678901234567890123456789 1234567890123456789012345678INSIDE: 9 12345678901234567890123456789 throughout the United 12345678901234567890123456789 12345678901234567890123456789 12345678901234567890123456789 States, and for orga- 12345678901234567890123456781999 Fellowship Poster 9 12345678901234567890123456789 12345678901234567890123456789 AIAR Appointees and their hosts at ACOR: Back, l–r: Ann Killebrew, Sy nized travel opportuni- 12345678901234567890123456789 1234567890123456789012345678Journal Sale 9 Gitin, Sandra Blakely, Laura Mazow, Shimon Gibson, Patricia Bikai; front, 12345678901234567890123456789 ties to the Middle East. 12345678901234567890123456789 l–r: Robert Schick, Robert Mullins, Justin Lev-Tov, Pierre Bikai. Committee on Archaeological Policy Reevaluates its Role CAP Reevaluates its Role uring the ASOR Meetings in Orlando, the ASOR Vision 2000 discussion group #1 focused on the D question: “What means and forms should ASOR page 2 support of field projects take and how should ASOR relate to overseas centers’ activities?” Stuart Swiny, former director of CAARI and David McCreery, former director of ACOR, served as the discussion leaders. At the beginning of the discussion it was noted that the Dorot & Lindstrom issue of ASOR’s relationship with field projects and the Fellowship Information overseas centers has been a matter of debate for decades. It was nevertheless agreed that a thorough discussion of this page 5 issue is particularly needed at this time. The following is a summary of some of the observations and points made during the course of the discussion. Over the past fifteen to twenty years, the overseas institutes have experienced phenonenal growth. New facilities have been built, purchased, and/or improved; the program— Missives including the establishment of new fellowships—has expanded and become more diverse; budgets have grown dramatically while at the same time the centers have becone page 6 less financially dependent on ASOR. The overseas institutes have developed into relatively independent “young adults” and the relationship with ASOR, the “parent” organization, is clearly different than it was some twenty years ago. Likewise, the number and nature of field projects are quite different than they were ten to twenty years ago. Today’s AIAR Fellows field projects tend to be larger, more interdisciplinary and at ACOR in Amman more expensive than they used to be. There are also many Papers more projects focusing on the non-biblical (prehistoric and late Classical/Islamic) periods than was the case in the past. page 7 The development of local universities with strong archaeological programs has produced a number of highly qualified local archaeologists, reducing the necessity and/ or desirability of inviting foreign scholars to initiate new archaeological projects. All of these developments, as well as the unpredictable political situation, are forcing foreign News&Notices project directors to reexamine and redefine their relationship with the host country, with ASOR’s overseas institutes, and page 23 with ASOR itself. In light of these changing circumstances, what is ASOR’s role in supporting field projects? The ASOR fellowship program was seen as being extremely important for both field projects and the overseas centers and should certainly be Annual Meeting continued and expanded if possible. Access to accommo- Information dations, excavation and survey equipment, work space and, above all, library resources were noted as major contributions page 26 the overseas institutes make to field projects and thus worthy of special support by ASOR. The ASOR Journal Exchange was singled out as having been a particularly important program in the past. ASOR’s publication programs were also pointed out as a major means of supporting the centers and Meeting Calendar field projects as was the annual meeting. The role of ASOR’s Committee on Archaeological Policy page 27 (CAP) was the focus of a fair amount of discussion. Although there was universal agreement that CAP performs a vital function in providing peer review for field projects, it was also felt that CAP could and should do more to encourage, 2 assist, and ensure high academic standards of the projects it The CAP inspection trip for 1999 is still in the initial oversees. Some questioned the value of CAP affiliation since planning stages but will take place from approximately June the host countries do not insist on it and there is often 6 to July 15, 1999. An attempt will be made to visit all 24 minimal interaction between the project directors and the affiliated field projects in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Syria, and CAP Committee. A number of suggestions were made that the West Bank. I am hopeful that a number of CAP members would call for a more proactive approach by CAP, for will be able to participate in the inspection trip this year. We example: 1. Holding consultations with project directors anticipate visiting fewer “unaffiliated” projects than in the during the annual meetings; 2. Assisting Project Directors in past and spending more time visiting “affiliated” projects. identifying and recruiting specialists; 3. Spending more time Special emphasis will be placed on new projects and young visiting ASOR-affiliated projects (especially new projects), project directors. and discussing strategy with project directors during the annual CAP inspection trip; 4. Simplifying the application process and making electronic applications available (which Chair of the Committee on Archaeology Policy would cut down on paper as well as speeding up the distribution of proposals and the review process); and 5. Organizing inter-regional, problem-oriented research projects that would encourage international scholarly CAP GRANT RECIPIENTS -- 1999 cooperation, spawn new projects, and provide new topics for presentation at ASOR Annual Meetings. The discussion regarding a rethinking of CAP’s mission and modus operandi continued at the CAP meeting in Orlando. The Committee was unanimous regarding the need for 1. Edward F. Campbell, $1,200 significant reforms. Throughout the winter the Committee Publication expenses for the Joint has continued the discussion begun in Orlando and will meet Expedition to Tell Balatah-Shechem in New York on April 30, 1999 in order to discuss, vote on, and begin implementing new procedures. 2. A. Bernard Knapp, $600 The Vision 2000 discussions did not produce consensus regarding the role of ASOR with field projects and the Publication expenses for the Sydney overseas institutes but they did provide a useful beginning Cyprus Survey Project (SCSP) for a more careful examination of these issues. I trust that this discussion will continue and culminate in meaningful 3. Paul F. Jacobs, $1,289 changes within the ASOR organization. Travel expenses for the Computer Programmer for the Lahav Research CAP Report Project, Phase III At the November 1998 ASOR Meetings in Orlando, Florida, CAP reviewed a total of 48 proposals and approved 24 field 4. Danielle A. Parks, $1,305 projects and 23 publication projects (see page 4). Virtually all field projects also have publication aspects associated with Field expenses for the Kourion the proposals. One project was denied affiliation but invited Amathus Gate Cemetery Excavation to resubmit a proposal. A summary of affiliated projects by geographical regions 5. Megan A. Perry, $1,000 is as follows: Travel expenses for Remote Sensing Carthage — 1 publication
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Where Did Solomon Build the Temple? by Dr
    Post Office Box 345, San Antonio, Texas 78292-0345 Kislev –Tevet– Shevat–Adar 5777 / December– January– February 2016–2017 A Publication of CJF Ministries and Messianic Perspectives Radio Network MessianicPerspectives ® God has not forgotten the Jewish people, and neither have we. e are living in tumultuous times. Many things that Historical Background Wwe’ve always taken for granted are being called into question. The people of Israel had three central places of worship in ancient times: the Tabernacle, the First Temple, and the One hotly-disputed question these days is, “Were the an- Second Temple. Around 538 BC, the Jewish captives were cient Temples really on the Temple Mount?” You’d think released by King Cyrus of Persia to return from exile to the fact that Mount Moriah (and the manmade plat- their Land. Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest led the ef- form around it) has been known for many centuries as fort to rebuild the Second Temple, and work commenced “the Temple Mount”1 would provide an important clue, around 536 BC on the site of the First Temple, which the wouldn’t you? Babylonians had destroyed. The new Temple was simpler and more modest than its impressive predecessor had It’s a bit like the facetious query about who’s buried in been.2 Centuries later, when Yeshua sat contemplatively Grant’s tomb. Who else would be in that tomb but Mr. on the Mount of Olives with His disciples (Matt. 24), they Grant and what else would have been on the Temple looked down on the Temple Mount as King Herod’s work- Mount but the Temple? ers were busily at work remodeling and expanding the But not everyone agrees.
    [Show full text]
  • Canaan Or Gaza?
    Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections Pa-Canaan in the Egyptian New Kingdom: Canaan or Gaza? Michael G. Hasel Institute of Archaeology, Southern Adventist University A&564%'6 e identification of the geographical name “Canaan” continues to be widely debated in the scholarly literature. Cuneiform sources om Mari, Amarna, Ugarit, Aššur, and Hattusha have been discussed, as have Egyptian sources. Renewed excavations in North Sinai along the “Ways of Horus” have, along with recent scholarly reconstructions, refocused attention on the toponyms leading toward and culminating in the arrival to Canaan. is has led to two interpretations of the Egyptian name Pa-Canaan: it is either identified as the territory of Canaan or the city of Gaza. is article offers a renewed analysis of the terms Canaan, Pa-Canaan, and Canaanite in key documents of the New Kingdom, with limited attention to parallels of other geographical names, including Kharu, Retenu, and Djahy. It is suggested that the name Pa-Canaan in Egyptian New Kingdom sources consistently refers to the larger geographical territory occupied by the Egyptians in Asia. y the 1960s, a general consensus had emerged regarding of Canaan varied: that it was a territory in Asia, that its bound - the extent of the land of Canaan, its boundaries and aries were fluid, and that it also referred to Gaza itself. 11 He Bgeographical area. 1 The primary sources for the recon - concludes, “No wonder that Lemche’s review of the evidence struction of this area include: (1) the Mari letters, (2) the uncovered so many difficulties and finally led him to conclude Amarna letters, (3) Ugaritic texts, (4) texts from Aššur and that Canaan was a vague term.” 12 Hattusha, and (5) Egyptian texts and reliefs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hashemite Custodianship of Jerusalem's Islamic and Christian
    THE HASHEMITE CUSTODIANSHIP OF JERUSALEM’S ISLAMIC AND CHRISTIAN HOLY SITES 1917–2020 CE White Paper The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought THE HASHEMITE CUSTODIANSHIP OF JERUSALEM’S ISLAMIC AND CHRISTIAN HOLY SITES 1917–2020 CE White Paper The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought THE HASHEMITE CUSTODIANSHIP OF JERUSALEM’S ISLAMIC AND CHRISTIAN HOLY SITES 1917–2020 CE Copyright © 2020 by The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought All rights reserved. No part of this document may be used or reproduced in any manner wthout the prior consent of the publisher. Cover Image: Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem © Shutterstock Title Page Image: Dome of the Rock and Jerusalem © Shutterstock isbn 978–9957–635–47–3 Printed in Jordan by The National Press Third print run CONTENTS ABSTRACT 5 INTRODUCTION: THE HASHEMITE CUSTODIANSHIP OF THE HOLY SITES IN JERUSALEM 7 PART ONE: THE ARAB, JEWISH, CHRISTIAN AND ISLAMIC HISTORY OF JERUSALEM IN BRIEF 9 PART TWO: THE CUSTODIANSHIP OF THE ISLAMIC HOLY SITES IN JERUSALEM 23 I. The Religious Significance of Jerusalem and its Holy Sites to Muslims 25 II. What is Meant by the ‘Islamic Holy Sites’ of Jerusalem? 30 III. The Significance of the Custodianship of Jerusalem’s Islamic Holy Sites 32 IV. The History of the Hashemite Custodianship of Jerusalem’s Islamic Holy Sites 33 V. The Functions of the Custodianship of Jerusalem’s Islamic Holy Sites 44 VI. Termination of the Islamic Custodianship 53 PART THREE: THE CUSTODIANSHIP OF THE CHRISTIAN HOLY SITES IN JERUSALEM 55 I. The Religious Significance of Jerusalem and its Holy Sites to Christians 57 II.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Conquests of Canaan
    ÅA Wars in the Middle East are almost an every day part of Eero Junkkaala:of Three Canaan Conquests our lives, and undeniably the history of war in this area is very long indeed. This study examines three such wars, all of which were directed against the Land of Canaan. Two campaigns were conducted by Egyptian Pharaohs and one by the Israelites. The question considered being Eero Junkkaala whether or not these wars really took place. This study gives one methodological viewpoint to answer this ques- tion. The author studies the archaeology of all the geo- Three Conquests of Canaan graphical sites mentioned in the lists of Thutmosis III and A Comparative Study of Two Egyptian Military Campaigns and Shishak and compares them with the cities mentioned in Joshua 10-12 in the Light of Recent Archaeological Evidence the Conquest stories in the Book of Joshua. Altogether 116 sites were studied, and the com- parison between the texts and the archaeological results offered a possibility of establishing whether the cities mentioned, in the sources in question, were inhabited, and, furthermore, might have been destroyed during the time of the Pharaohs and the biblical settlement pe- riod. Despite the nature of the two written sources being so very different it was possible to make a comparative study. This study gives a fresh view on the fierce discus- sion concerning the emergence of the Israelites. It also challenges both Egyptological and biblical studies to use the written texts and the archaeological material togeth- er so that they are not so separated from each other, as is often the case.
    [Show full text]
  • Temple in Jerusalem Coordinates: 31.77765, 35.23547 from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Log in / create account article discussion edit this page history Temple in Jerusalem Coordinates: 31.77765, 35.23547 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Bet HaMikdash ; "The Holy House"), refers to Part of a series of articles on ,שדקמה תיב :The Temple in Jerusalem or Holy Temple (Hebrew a series of structures located on the Temple Mount (Har HaBayit) in the old city of Jerusalem. Historically, two Jews and Judaism navigation temples were built at this location, and a future Temple features in Jewish eschatology. According to classical Main page Jewish belief, the Temple (or the Temple Mount) acts as the figurative "footstool" of God's presence (Heb. Contents "shechina") in the physical world. Featured content Current events The First Temple was built by King Solomon in seven years during the 10th century BCE, culminating in 960 [1] [2] Who is a Jew? ∙ Etymology ∙ Culture Random article BCE. It was the center of ancient Judaism. The Temple replaced the Tabernacle of Moses and the Tabernacles at Shiloh, Nov, and Givon as the central focus of Jewish faith. This First Temple was destroyed by Religion search the Babylonians in 587 BCE. Construction of a new temple was begun in 537 BCE; after a hiatus, work resumed Texts 520 BCE, with completion occurring in 516 BCE and dedication in 515. As described in the Book of Ezra, Ethnicities Go Search rebuilding of the Temple was authorized by Cyrus the Great and ratified by Darius the Great. Five centuries later, Population this Second Temple was renovated by Herod the Great in about 20 BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • Amarna Period Down to the Opening of Sety I's Reign
    oi.uchicago.edu STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION * NO.42 THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO Thomas A. Holland * Editor with the assistance of Thomas G. Urban oi.uchicago.edu oi.uchicago.edu Internet publication of this work was made possible with the generous support of Misty and Lewis Gruber THE ROAD TO KADESH A HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE BATTLE RELIEFS OF KING SETY I AT KARNAK SECOND EDITION REVISED WILLIAM J. MURNANE THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION . NO.42 CHICAGO * ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 90-63725 ISBN: 0-918986-67-2 ISSN: 0081-7554 The Oriental Institute, Chicago © 1985, 1990 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 1990. Printed in the United States of America. oi.uchicago.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS List of M aps ................................ ................................. ................................. vi Preface to the Second Edition ................................................................................................. vii Preface to the First Edition ................................................................................................. ix List of Bibliographic Abbreviations ..................................... ....................... xi Chapter 1. Egypt's Relations with Hatti From the Amarna Period Down to the Opening of Sety I's Reign ...................................................................... ......................... 1 The Clash of Empires
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec
    Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912 Author(s): Lewis Bayles Paton Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Apr., 1913), pp. 1-53 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259319 . Accessed: 09/04/2012 16:53 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature. http://www.jstor.org JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE Volume XXXII Part I 1913 Israel's Conquest of Canaan Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912 LEWIS BAYLES PATON HARTFORD THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY problem of Old Testament history is more fundamental NO than that of the manner in which the conquest of Canaan was effected by the Hebrew tribes. If they came unitedly, there is a possibility that they were united in the desert and in Egypt. If their invasions were separated by wide intervals of time, there is no probability that they were united in their earlier history. Our estimate of the Patriarchal and the Mosaic traditions is thus conditioned upon the answer that we give to this question.
    [Show full text]
  • BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr
    1918.] ,The Exodus in the Light of Archteology. 543 ARTICLE III. THE EXODUS IN THE LIGHT OF ARCH2EOLOGY. BY THE REVEREND A. E. WHATHAM, LOUISVILlE, KY. IN the BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr. Harold M. Wiener published an article entitled "The Date of the Ex­ odus," and in October, 1917, one on " The Date of the Exo­ dus and the Chronology of Judges." Now Mr. Wiener claims to have shown in his first artkle that the Israelites were defeated by the Egyptian Pharaoh, Merneptah, in the fifth year of his reign, being overthrown outside of Egypt somewhere between its eastern border and the southern border of Canaan. In his second article Mr. Wiener claims to have shown that the Exodus of Israel from Egypt took place in the second year of Merneptah's reign. In other words, Mr. Wiener claims to have shown that the defeat of Israel which is mentioned on the celebrated Mer­ neptah stele took place after the Exodus, and while the Israelites were yet in the wilderness. In opposition to Mr. Wiener's assertions stands a previous statement by the well-known scholars Professors Harris and Chapman, that "a recently-deciphered Egyptian inscription ... shows that the Beqe-Israel were already in Palestine at the time of the Exodus, so that the migration must have been partial and not national" (" Exodus and Journey to Ca­ naan." HDB, vol. i. p. 802). The discoverer of this Egyptian stele, Professor Petrie, Digitized by Google 544 The Exodus in the Light of ArcMology. [Oct. views the defeat of "Israel," to which reference is made on 'this stele, as an overthrow which took place in Palestine while the histork Israel had not yet fled from Egypt (Cont.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early History of Syria and Palestine
    THE GIFT OF MAY TREAT MORRISON IN MEMORY OF ALEXANDER F MORRISON Gbe Semitic Series THE EARLY HISTORY OF SYRIA AND PALESTINE By LEWIS BAYLES PATON : SERIES OF HAND-BOOKS IN SEM1T1CS EDITED BY JAMES ALEXANDER CRAIG PROFESSOR OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES AND HELLENISTIC GREEK, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Recent scientific research has stimulated an increasing interest in Semitic studies among scholars, students, and the serious read- ing public generally. It has provided us with a picture of a hitherto unknown civilization, and a history of one of the great branches of the human family. The object of the present Series is to state its results in popu- larly scientific form. Each work is complete in itself, and the Series, taken as a whole, neglects no phase of the general subject. Each contributor is a specialist in the subject assigned him, and has been chosen from the body of eminent Semitic scholars both in Europe and in this country. The Series will be composed of the following volumes I. Hebrews. History and Government. By Professor J. F. McCurdy, University of Toronto, Canada. II. Hebrews. Ethics arid Religion. By Professor Archibald Duff, Airedale College, Bradford, England. [/« Press. III. Hebrews. The Social Lije. By the Rev. Edward Day, Springfield, Mass. [No7i> Ready. IV. Babylonians and Assyrians, with introductory chapter on the Sumerians. History to the Fall of Babylon. V. Babylonians and Assyrians. Religion. By Professor J. A. Craig, University of Michigan. VI. Babylonians and Assyrians. Life and Customs. By Professor A. H. Sayce, University of Oxford, England. \Noiv Ready. VII. Babylonians and Assyrians.
    [Show full text]
  • Temple Mount
    ISRAEL Galyn Wiemers Generation Word www.generationword.com JERUSALEM City Map – 73 Olives (Mount of Olives) - 120 Christian Quarter - 74 Ophel (South of Temple) – 121 Muslim Quarter - 75 Pharoah’s Daughter’s Tomb - 122 Jewish Quarter - 76 Phasael Tower - 123 Armenian Quarter - 77 Robinson’s Arch - 124 Absolom’s Pillar - 78 Roman Pillar - 125 Acra - 79 Saint Anne’s Church – 126 Al Aqsa Mosque - 80 SE Corner of Temple - 127 Antonia (Fort Antonia) - 81 Siloam Channel - 128 Aqueduct - 82 Siloam Pool - 129 Ashlar Stones - 83 Siloam Road - 130 Barclay’s Gate - 84 Silwan - 131 Bethesda (Pool of Bethesda) - 85 Solomon’s Quarries - 132 Broad Wall - 86 South City Wall - 133 Cardo East - 87 South Temple Wall - 134 Cardo West Maximus - 88 Struthion Pool - 135 Citadel - 89 Straight Joint - 136 David’s Palace - 90 Sultan’s Pool - 137 David’s Tomb - 91 Temple Mount - 138 Dome of Ascension - 92 Tombs in Jerusalem - 139 Dome of the Chain - 93 Triple Gate - 140 Dome of the Rock - 94 Trumpet Inscription - 141 Dome of the Spirits - 95 Walls of Jerusalem - 142 Double Gate - 96 Warren’s Gate - 143 Ecce Homo - 97 West City Wall - 144 East Citiy Wall - 98 Western Wall - 145 Garden Tomb - 99 Western Wall Shops - 146 Gates Today - 100 Western Wall Street - 147 Gethsemane - 101 Western Wall Tunnels - 148 Gihon Springs - 102 Wilson’s Arch - 149 Hezekiah’s Pool - 103 70 AD Destruction - 150 Hezekiah’s Tunnel - 104 Burnt House - 151 Hinnom Valley - 105 West Wall of Solomon - 152 Holy Sepulcher - 106 Holy Sepulcher Floor Plans - 107 Jason’s Tomb - 108 Jebusite Wall (Millo) - 109 Kidron Valley - 110 Lazarus’ Tomb - 111 Madaba Map - 112 Medieval Tower - 113 Middle Gate - 114 Mikvah - 115 Morocco Gate - 116 Mount Moriah - 117 Nehemiah’s Wall - 118 Nea Church - 119 3 Jerusalem Sites and Locations in Jerusalem 72 73 The Christian Quarter is the most visited quarter of the Old City because it includes the site of Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection - the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.
    [Show full text]
  • Temple Location -7SOUTHERN CONJECTURE-JB
    SOUTHERN CONJECTURE Al Kas Fountain Theory Tuvia Sagiv Tuvia Sagiv Already in 1878, James Ferguson, in his The Temples of the Jews and the Other Buildings in the Haram Area at Jerusalem, suggested that the Temple stood in the southern part of today’s Temple Mount. The major proponent of this view today is architect Tuvia Sagiv. Sagiv’s Southern Theory Major Points Baalbek, Lebanon Temple of Jupiter overlay with Temple Mount Location of the Threshing Floor purchased by King David The Temple was built over Vaults Herod Arippa’s View of the Temple from his Palace The Aqueduct System for bringing in water to the Temple The Temple was located between Robinson’s Gate and Wilson’s Gate Al Kas Fountain Al Kas Fountain Western Wall Al Kas Dome of Dome of the Fountain the Rock Spirits/Tablets Northern Theory Southern Theory Central Theory Al Kas Fountain Al Kas Fountain Women’s Courtyard Altar Sagiv’s Southern Theory Major Points Baalbek, Lebanon Temple of Jupiter overlay with Temple Mount Location of the Threshing Floor purchased by King David The Temple was built over Vaults Herod Arippa’s View of the Temple from his Palace The Aqueduct System for bringing in water to the Temple The Temple was located between Robinson’s Gate and Wilson’s Gate 2 Chronicles 3:1 Then Solomon began to build the house of the LORD (Temple) at Jerusalem in mount Moriah, where the LORD appeared unto David his father, in the place (makhom) that David had prepared in threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite (KJV) Solomon built the temple on the threshing floor David purchased.
    [Show full text]
  • Temple Mount Faithful – Amutah Et Al V
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 45 Issue 3 Spring 1996 Article 18 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 Antiquities Division, Muslim WAQF - In the Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of Justice [September 23, 1993] Menachem Elon Aharon Barak Gavriel Bach Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Menachem Elon, Aharon Barak & Gavriel Bach, 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 Antiquities Division, Muslim WAQF - In the Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of Justice [September 23, 1993], 45 Cath. U. L. Rev. 866 (1996). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol45/iss3/18 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Catholic University Law Review [Vol. 45:861 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 ANTIQUITIES DIVISION MUSLIM WAQF In the Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of Justice [September 23, 1993] Justice Menachem Elon, Deputy President, Justice Aharon Barak, Justice Gavriel Bach V. THE PARTIES Petitioners Petitioner 1: Temple Mount Faithful Amutah Petitioner 2: Chairman, Temple Mount Faithful Amutah Petitioners 3, 4, 5, 6: Members of Temple Mount Faithful Amutah Respondents Respondent 1: Attorney-General Respondent 2: Inspector-General of the Jerusalem Police Respondent 3: Mayor of Jerusalem Respondent 4: Minister of Education and Culture Respondent 5: Director of the Antiquities Division Respondent 6: Muslim Waqf Petition for an order nisi.
    [Show full text]