HOLY SATURDAY. See Holy Week, § 6.

HOLY SEPULCHER.

I. The Site.

The Name Golgotha, its origin and Implications (§ 1).

Eusebius concerning the Site (§ 2).

Modern Identifications (§ 3).

II. The Structures Erected There.

1. By Constantine.

The Rotunda of the Resurrection (§ 1).

The Basilica, Atrium, and Propylaeum (§ 2).

2. Later Structures.

I. The Site: The tomb of Jesus was located in a garden belonging to the Jewish councilor Joseph of Arimathas (q.v.), near or at the place of crucifixion, which. was called in Aramaic gulgulta or gulgalta (Matt. xxvii. 60; John xia. 41), corresponding to the Hebrew haggulgoleth, "the skull." The name in Greek was written golgotha which appears in Matthew (xxvii. 33), Mark (xv. 22), and John (xix. 17), with the explanation "the place of a skull," while Luke (xxiii. 33) has " the place

329

called skull" (Gk. kranion; A. V. "Calvary" from the Lat. calvaria). The location was evi-

dently well known by the current 1. The designation. There was doubtless

Name originally in the Aramaic a limiting

Golgotha, addition, as there are traces in the its Origin Pseudepigrapha (particularly in the and Im- Ethiopic Book of Adam) and in

plioatione. the Church Fathers (Epiphanius, Har., xlvi.; Basil, of Seleucia, Oratio, xxxviii.) that it was connected with the name of Adam. For the story in its Jewish form consult J. A. Fabrieius, Codex pseudepigraphuset Veris Teatamenti, i. 60, 75, 267-268, Hamburg, 1722. The form and content of the tradition imply that there was a round knoll, by its shape suggesting the form of a skull, and near it a sharp depression which was associated in legend with the name of Adam, whose skull was said to have been deposited there by Shem fu the center of the earth (cf. Ezek. v,. 5). The New Testament locates Golgotha outside the city (Heb. xiii. 12; Matt. xxvii. 32; Mark xv. 20; John xix. 17), but near the city (John xix. 20) and by the road (Matt. xxvii. 39). The marks of identification require that the place be sought to the north of Jerusalem, since only there do the exits from the city debouch upon a plain, as was remarked as early as the time of Eusebius (Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, Göttingen, 1870, p. 229, cf. 99 and 248, also 130). The place Eusebius had in mind was certainly the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher built by Constantine, but that this is the true site has in modern times been questioned.

Eusebius, in telling of the command of Conatantine to erect a stately structure over the tomb of

Jesus (Life of Constantine, iii. 25-40), 2. Eusebius says nothing of any official order to

concerning make search for the true site of the the Site. death and resurrection of Jesus. He

narrates that the place had been buried deep in rubbish, over this a pavement had been laid, and on this a temple to Venus erected. By command of the emperor this temple was destroyed and the rubbish carried away, when the tomb of Jesus was disclosed, to the great joy of the emperor (Life of Constantine, iii. 30). The story of Eusebius shows that in Jerusalem, at least among Christians, not the slightest doubt existed concerning the site of the tomb. Yet Edward Robinson and other scholars who could not feel sure of the site called attention to the fact that, according to the words of Eusebius, the place had remained forgotten, and that the words of Constantine were that the rediscovery was a miracle. On the other hand, it is to be noted that no words of Eusebius affirm that knowledge of the place had been lost, as in that case it would have been expected that Constantine would have ordered careful search for the true site. Eusebius has raised doubts in another direction by the fact that his list of the bishops of Jerusalem is not altogether trustworthy (Hist. eccl., iv. 5-6, v. 12). Still it is to be presumed that the short break (between 70 and 135 A.D.) in the continuity of the Christian community had not resulted in the total loss of knowledge of the notable site of the death and resurrection of Jesus. And, though the first

generation of Christians might place no special emphasis upon knowledge of the sacred sites; it does not follow that they forgot the location, especially since Golgotha is shown by the way the word is used in the Gospels to have been a well-known place. The covering and defiling of the site Eusebius traces to ungodly men (whom he does not name) and to the whole horde of demons. Jerome states that for 180 years, from Hadrian's time to that of Conatantine, a statue of Jupiter stood on the place of the resurrection and one of Venus on the place of the crucifixion, placed there with the design of casting scorn upon the faith. So far as Jerome controverts Eusebius, he may not receive the preference. In general, the attribution of design in the placing of rubbish on the spot and the erection of the heathen objects there may be wrong, and the results rhay have been brought about simply by the location just outside the walls. While Eusebius's identifica, tion may be correct, he mentions no mark by which the identification was assured. So long as other graves in the vicinity were unknown, his location would be unchallenged. That is no longer the case, since the graves assigned to Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea are now known and supposed to have been connected with that known as the Holy Sepulcher. Indeed, the discovery of still others has made questionable the assertion that the site of Constantine's church covered that of the tomb of Jesus.

The objections of Jonas Korte, who first ques tioned the identification, were based upon the relation of the site to the walls, oonsid- 8. Modern erations which are vitiated by remem-

Identiaca- bering that the present north wall dates tione. from 41 to 70 A.D., and that the "second" wall was in the time of Jesus the northern limit of the city. Recent investigations by tracing the course of the "second" wall have made it very likely that Golgotha lay outside. 0. Thenius decided for the Grotto of Jeremiah northeast from the Damascus Gate and the hill near it. James Fergusson hit upon the strange identification with Mount Moriah, that is, the site of the present Mosque of Omar. Still more recently a small hill outside the Damascus Gate and to the left of the road to Nablus has been claimed as the site-so General Gordon in 1883. E: M. Clos selected a spot for the tomb about 200 yards south of the present church. These identifications are without value.

It was the followers of Eusebius-Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret-not Eusebius himself, who brought Helena, the mother of Constantine, into connection with the finding of the grave and of the three crosses and the inscription of Pilate and with the building of the church on the site (see Cross, Invention of Tm). Eusebius places her church on the Mount of Olives, and he is to be followed. It is to be remembered that it was the custom in Christian circles to honor the sites of the burial of martyrs. Eusebius relates (Demonahatio evangelica, vi. 18) that Christian pilgrims came from all parts to Jerusalem to assure themselves by sight of the ruined state of Jerusalem of the fulfilment of prophecy and to pray in the cave of Bethlehem or on the Mount of Olives. It was in connection with

330

these pilgrimages that Constantine thought to adorn the tomb by a structure, the knowledge of which is due chiefly to Eusebius's description (Life of Constantine, iii. 25-40). Another writing of Eusebius dealing wholly with this subject is not extant. Eusebius's account is confirmed and supplemented by the account of the pilgrimage of Silvia Aquitana (380-390), and C. Mommert's investigations have shed much light on the subject. The site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is to-day shut in by streets. The rocks under the foundation slope from west to east and from north to south, so the site is not level, leading to the necessity for preparation for building by leveling the ground. That fact has led to certain investigations, and invites a description of the parts of the church.

111. The Structures Erected There.-1. By Constantine: The rocks about the grave are broken away on all sides so that it has the

1. The appearance of a monument. The lev- Sotnnda eling of the site probably produced of the changes in the relation of the tomb to Sesurreo- its entrance, though it is possible that tion. the level of the approach remained as it was. To the east of the tomb lay the stone, described by Antoninus Placentinus (c. 570) as like a millstone, which was rolled to the mouth of the grave to close it (Mark avi. 3). The interior of the tomb is said by Arculf (c. 670) to have been large enough to hold nine men standing, and the roof might be touched by raising the hand. The grave was to the north, on the right of the entrance, trough like, three spans above the floor. This, as the central point of interest, Constantine had adorned with beautiful and costly pillars. A round structure was arranged about the grave, with a circular hall, the upper part of which was open to the sky. The connection of this structure with the other buildings is shown to be possible from the fact that neither the inner circle of pillars which it contained nor the containing wall were closed toward the east.

The basilica stretched in a broad middle aisle and two smaller side aisles eastward from the rotunda, about 245 feet in length. The

2. The elevated choir, with the altar, bishop's Basilica, throne, and twelve beautiful pillars, Atrium, closed the middle aisle to the east. and Pro- Mommert locates it partly over Hel- pyleeum. ena's chapel and partly over the Chapel of the Invention of the Cross. Doubt arises as to the place meant as that where the cross was found; whether it was at or near Golgotha, or in the holy tomb, or in the so-called Chapel of Helena, or in a still deeper hole in the rock, the so called Chapel of the Invention of the Cross. The finding was first mentioned by Cyril of Jerusalem about 350 (Catecheaes, x. 19), described first by Rufinus, Socrates, and others, though the accounts differ. The place of the crucifixion was given as in the southern aisle, west of the choir. Conatan tine's builders treated this in like manner as they did the grave, breaking away the rock so that a high hexagonal platform raised itself above the sur rounding level, to which the names Mount of the Rock, Mount Golgotha, and Mount Calvary became

attached. Three doors in the east- wall of the basilica. connected the latter with the atrium. That this was to the east of the basilica is confirmed by the Madeba map, by investigations on the spot, and by the fact that to the east lay the market-place. The architect thus departed from custom in the construction of the building, constrained partly by the circumstance that the tomb would not be suitably located in the court of the church. The atrium was a hall of pillars provided with lavers. From this three doors led into the propylaeum. As early as 1844-46 Dr. SchultzandProfessorKrafft, of Bonn, found traces of this structure, which were confirmed by Mommert and supplemented by later discoveries. The whole building was begun in 326 and consecrated in 336.

2. Later Structures: These buildings were destroyed by fire under Chosroes II. in 614. In 616 Modestus, abbot of the monastery of Theodosius, began the erection of new structures which, finished in 626, differed from those erected by Constantine. He supplied the rotunda with three new niches on the south, east, and north, and installed altars. To the southeast he built a Church of St. Mary; over Golgotha, a special chapel; and over the place of the invention of the cross he erected a basilica called the Martyrium, between which and the rotunda was a square, entered from the south. The situation of Christians and their possessions after the taking of the. city by the Arabs under Omar in 637 became constantly more precarious. From an old Arabic inscription on stone, found July 31, 1897, it appears that the Arabs possessed in the first half of the tenth century a mosque on the site of Constantine's atrium, commemorating the fact that Omar had prayed there. In the same century the buildings of Modestus were burned, and about 1010 special orders directed the destruction of the tomb. In 1048 new structures were erected under the auspices of the Byzantine emperor which embraced the rotunda, chapels over Golgotha and over the stone on which Jesus was said to have been laid for his anointing, and the Chapel of the Invention of the Cross. These coincided in general with those of Modestus, and were entered by the Crusaders in 1099. Under the Crusaders new structures were begun in 1140 and completed about 1168, among them a church with three aisles, in the French style of the twelfth century. The tomb itself was also subjected to change. After the destruction in 1244, the church of the Crusaders was restored in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The chapel of the tomb was newly erected by Boniface of Ragusa, also the Chapel of the Angels: On Oct. 12, 1808, the larger part of the church over the tomb was destroyed by fire. Restoration began in 1809 under the auspices of Greeks and Armenians upon the plans of Komnenus Kalfa, a Greek. The present dome was erected in 1868 under the joint auspices of France and Russia.

Light is thrown on the form of these varied structures by models in Europe copied from the originals. These are the holy tomb in San Stefano in Bologna (430), the Chapel of the Tomb in Constance (tenth century), and that in Görlitz (1480).

(H. Gums.)

331

Bibliography: In general: G. William, The Holy City and the Architecture of the Holy Sepulchre, vol. ii., London, 1849; R. Willis, The Architectural Hut. of the Holy City, ib. 1849; T. Tobler, Golgotha, seine Kirchen and K16eter, Bern, 1851; M. de Vogild, Les LR'alises de la terre sainte, Paris, 1860; P. Schegg, Die Bauten Constantine über dem heiligen Grab, Freising, 1867; C. Warren and C. Wilson, Recovery of Jerusalem, London, 1876; C. Schick, in ZDPY, viii (1885), 245 sqq., 259 sqq., ui (1889), 1 sqq.; H. Lewis, The Holy Places of Jerusalem, London, 1888; G. Jeffery, The Buildings of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, ib. 1895; Publications of the Pilgrims' Text Society, 13 vols., ib. 1897 (vol. i. is very important, contains excerpts from the writings of Eusebius pertinent to the subject, also the " Pilgrimage of St. Sylvia "); J. Germer-Durand La Basilique de Constantin, in Echos d'orient, April, 1898; C. Mommert, Die Wigs Grabeskirche zu Jerusalem in ihrem urspranglichen Zustande, Leipsic, 1898; Golgotha und das heilige Grab zu Jerusalem, ib. 1900.

On the location: J. Korte, Reiss nach dem pelobten Lande, Halle, 1743-51; F. A. de Chatesubriand, Itin6raire de Paris h Jerusalem, Paris, 1811; Robinson, Researches and Newer Researches, Passim; A. Schaffter, Die echte Laps des heiligen Grabes, Bern, 1849; J. N. Sepp, Jerusalem und das heilige Land, i. 263 sqq., 418 sqq., Schaffhausen, 1873; C. Clermont-Gannesu, L'AuthenticitM du Saint-Sbpulae, Paris, 1877; C. Warren and C. Wilson, The Temple or the Tomb, London, 1880; C. Wilson, Goh gotha and the Holy Sepulchre, ib. 1906; K. Baedeker, Palestine and Syria, pp. 35 sqq., New York, 1906; PEF, Quarterly Report, Jan. - Apr., 1907.

Consult further: O. Thenius, in ZHT, 1842, part iv., pp. 3 sqq.; J. Fergusson, The Holy Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem, London, 1865; F. W. Unger, Die Bauten Constantine am heiligen Grabezu Jerusalem, Göttingen, 1863; C. R. Conder, in the Survey of Western Palestine, pp. 429 sqq., London, 1884; S. Merrill, in Andover Review, 1885, 483-488; PEF Quarterly Statements, particularly for 1892; E. M. Clos, Krenz and Grab Jesu, Kempten, 1898. On the story of Adam referred to in the text consult Das christliche Adamburh des Morgenlandes, in Jahrbücher der biblischen Wissenschaft, v. 111 sqq., Göttingen, 1853. Plans and reproductions are given in vol. i. of the Publications of the Pilgrims' Text Society, ut sup.