On the north other important indications exist which require careful consideration. Josephus tells us that a tower called Baris (probably meaning "the castleâ) was built by Hyrcanus and repaired by Herod. It was on a hill which originally joined that of Bezetha, but was severed by an artificial trench. The fortress was re-named Antonia; it stood on a rock fifty cubits high (B. J. v. 5, 8), and at the north-west corner of the Temple, which it commanded, being on the "top of the hillâ (B. J. vi. 1, 5). Now there is just such a rock-fortress in the north-west part of the Haram. It is a great scarp, with vertical faces on the south and north, standing up forty feet above the interior court, and separated from the north-eastern hill of Jerusalem by a ditch fifty yards broad, in which are now the "Twin Poolsâ--the Bethesda of St. Jerome. This block of rock is "the top of the hill,â and occupies a length of 350 feet along the course of the north wall of the Haram. No other such scarp exists in or near the enclosure of the High Sanctuary. Can we, then, hesitate to place Antonia here?
The foregoing observations knit together the various parts of the Haram enclosure, as constituting a single building of one period. The east wall, from the Golden Gate southwards, is in one piece with the south wall; the south-west corner has the remains of Herod's bridge contemporary with the wall; the west wall is all of one style with the rest; at the south-east angle the Ophel wall is found joining the east wall of the enclosure as described by Josephus, and the north-west corner is occupied by Antonia.
But we have still the north-east corner of the Haram to consider, and here we have, I think, indications that it was not originally part of the Temple enclosure. There is no rock north-east of the present platform for a great depth: a valley runs across this part of the area, and even the present surface is very low. It is also ascertained that the east wall has, near the north-east corner, a character distinct from the remainder, and much rougher, and that it runs beyond the present north-east corner of the Haram without a break.
Nor can it, I think, well be doubted, that the north wall of the Haram, east of the rock scarp, is less ancient than the other walls. In the first place, the vaults in this part, which Captain Warren explored, and which I also visited, are Crusading or Saracenic work; they are of masonry, with groined roofs and pointed arches, not of rock, like the great passages under the Platform. In the second place, the north wall consists of at least two thicknesses of rough small masonry, which was once covered with the plaster of the great pool called Birket Israîl. This masonry is certainly more modern than the time of Herod, and the pool is not clearly mentioned, in any account of Jerusalem before the twelfth century, about which period, perhaps, it was first constructed. Had a fine wall existed on the north side of the Haram, surely the cement would have been spread directly over it, and not over a facing of inferior stonework far more liable to leak. A boring through the wall would here be most valuable as an exploration, but, even without it, there is I think ample evidence that the north-east corner of the Haram, east of Antonia, north of the Golden Gate, is not a part of Herod's enclosure, as its walls and subterranean vaults are distinct in character.