Bliss and fully described in his Excavations in Jerusalem in 1894-1897.
The gates of Jerusalem were opened to him and he left the Jews in peaceful occupation.
After the capture of Jerusalem he served for a time with Bohemund at Antioch; but when Baldwin of Edessa became king of Jerusalem, he summoned Baldwin de Burg, and left him as count in Edessa.
The kingdom of Cyprus passed to Hugh, his son by an earlier marriage, while that of Jerusalem passed to Maria, the daughter of Isabella by her previous marriage with Conrad of Montferrat.
In 1118 he was on his way to spend Easter at Jerusalem, when he received the news of the death of Baldwin I.; and when he arrived at Jerusalem, he was made king, chiefly by the influence of the patriarch Arnulf.
During his captivity Eustace Graverius became regent of Jerusalem, and succeeded, with the aid of the Venetians, in repelling an Egyptian attack, and even in capturing Tyre, 1124.
From Jerusalem, on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, 2208 ft.
By his second marriage, and became king of Jerusalem in right of his wife in 1197.
He had been constable of Jerusalem, but in 1194, on the death of his brother, he became king of Cyprus, as Amalric I.
Save for occasional pilgrimages, including one to Jerusalem in 1373, she remained in Rome till her death on the 23rd of July 1373.
About 1180 Amalric was constable of the kingdom of Jerusalem; and he is said to have brought his handsome brother Guy to the notice of Sibylla, the widowed heiress of the kingdom.
They possessed in Cyprus a kingdom, in which they had vindicated for themselves a stronger hold over their feudatories than the kings of Jerusalem had ever enjoyed, and in which trading centres like Famagusta flourished vigorously; and they used the resources of their kingdom, in conjunction with the Hospitallers of Rhodes, to check the progress of the Mahommedans.
(the Great), who was king from 1267 to 1285: to him, apparently, St Thomas dedicated his De Regimine Principum; and it is in his reign that the kingdom of Jerusalem becomes permanently connected with that of Cyprus.
He was a priest of the Jerusalem temple, probably a member of the dominant house of Zadok, and doubtless had the literary training of the cultivated priesthood of the time, including acquaintance with the national historical, legal and ritual traditions and with the contemporary history and customs of neighbouring peoples.
The exiles: as patriot and ethical teacher he deplored alike the political blindness of the Jerusalem government (King Zedekiah revolted in 588) and the immorality and religious superficiality and apostasy of the people.
I., in which Yahweh is represented as leaving Jerusalem and coming to take up his abode among them in Babylonia for a time, intending, however, to return to his own city (xliii.
This, then, was Ezekiel's political creed - destruction of Jerusalem and its inhabitants, restoration of the exiles, and meantime submission to Babylon.
Probably his judgment of the situation was correct; yet, in view of Sennacherib's failure at Jerusalem in 701 and of the admitted strength of the city, the hope of the Jewish nobles could not be considered wholly unfounded, and in any case their patriotism (like that of the national party in the Roman siege) was not unworthy of admiration.
It may be assumed that the social corruption in Jerusalem was such as is usually found in wealthy communities, made bolder in this case, perhaps, by the political unrest and the weakness of the royal government under Zedekiah.
But he conceives of him, on the other hand, as limited locally and morally - as having his special abode in the Jerusalem temple, or elsewhere in the midst of the Israelite people, and as dealing with other nations solely in the interests of Israel.
He speaks as a legislator, citing no authority; but he formulates, doubtless, the ideas and perhaps the practices of the Jerusalem priesthood.
Next follow minatory discourses (iv.-vii.) predicting the siege and capture of Jerusalem - perhaps revised after the event.
2 After a comparison of Israel to a worthless wild vine (xv.) come two allegories, one portraying idolatrous Jerusalem as the unfaithful spouse of Yahweh (xvi.), the other describing the fate of Zedekiah (xvii.).
Descent into Sheol is intensely tragic. Whether these discourses were all uttered between the investment of Jerusalem and its fall, or were here inserted by Ezekiel or by a scribe, it is not possible to say.
That Salem is Jerusalem, as in Psalm lxxvi.
Is the ancient and common view; but even in the 15th century B.C. Jerusalem was known as Uru-salim.
I), afterwards appears as the leading prophet in Jerusalem (Zech.
Is unhistorical, and that the community addressed by Haggai consisted of the remnant that had been left in Jerusalem and its neighbourhood after the majority had gone into exile or fled to Egypt (Jer.
With them were all the resources, and the only people they found at Jerusalem were hostile gentiles and Samaritans.
It was the conception of Ezekiel which permanently influenced the citizens of the new Jerusalem, and took final shape in the institutions of Ezra.
And the decision of the council at Jerusalem was evidently more than advisory; it was authoritative and meant to be binding on all the churches.
Jerusalem is situated in 31 ° 47' N.
Higher, while the Wadi Er Rababi bounds Jerusalem on the west and south, meeting the Valley of Kidron near the lower pool of Siloam.
Speaking generally, it is probable that the water supply of Jerusalem in ancient times was better than it is at present.
We do not know how the Egyptians were forced to abandon Jerusalem; but, at the time of the Israelite conquest, it was undoubtedly in the hands of the Jebusites, the native inhabitants of the country.
The latter view appears to be the most probable, as, according to the Biblical accounts, Jerusalem was partly in Judah and partly in Benjamin, the line of demarcation between the two tribes passing through the city.
According to his theory, the part of Jerusalem known as Jebus was situated on the western hill, and the outlying fort of Zion on the eastern hill.
Solomon greatly strengthened the fortifications of Jerusalem, and was probably the builder of the line of defence, called by Josephus the first or old wall, which united the cities on the eastern and western hills.
Jerusalem thus lost much of its importance, especially after it was forced to surrender to Shishak, king of Egypt, who carried off a great part of the riches which had been accumulated by Solomon.
The history of Jerusalem during the succeeding three centuries consists for the most part of a succession of wars against the kingdom of Israel, the Moabites and the Syrians.
A number of the principal inhabitants were carried captive to Babylon, and Jerusalem was reduced to the position of an insignificant town.