from Jerusalem on the road to Gaza, identified by E.
The gates of Jerusalem were opened to him and he left the Jews in peaceful occupation.
Bliss and fully described in his Excavations in Jerusalem in 1894-1897.
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.
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 early history of Jerusalem is very obscure.
by his second marriage, and became king of Jerusalem in right of his wife in 1197.
extended the kingdom of Jerusalem to its widest limits.
from Jerusalem, on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, 2208 ft.
That Salem is Jerusalem, as in Psalm lxxvi.
I), afterwards appears as the leading prophet in Jerusalem (Zech.
This work was the Jerusalem (1783; Eng.
Jerusalem is situated in 31 ° 47' N.
He had been constable of Jerusalem, but in 1194, on the death of his brother, he became king of Cyprus, as Amalric I.
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.
(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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This foe confounding Thy land, desiring to lay waste the whole world, rises against us; these lawless men are gathered together to overthrow Thy kingdom, to destroy Thy dear Jerusalem, Thy beloved Russia; to defile Thy temples, to overthrow Thine altars, and to desecrate our holy shrines.
The story of Alexander's visit to Jerusalem rests on no better authority than a later Jewish romance.
Save for occasional pilgrimages, including one to Jerusalem in 1373, she remained in Rome till her death on the 23rd of July 1373.
2, 1 It is to be noted also that the name is of the same form as Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh.
is the ancient and common view; but even in the 15th century B.C. Jerusalem was known as Uru-salim.
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.
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.
We have no information regarding Jerusalem during the period of the captivity, but fortunately Nehemiah, who was permitted to return and rebuild the defences about 445 B.C., has given a fairly clear description of the line of the wall which enables us to obtain a good idea of the extent of the city at this period.
After the restoration of the walls of Jerusalem by Nehemiah, a considerable number of Jews returned to the city, but we know practically nothing of its history for more than a century until, in 332 B.C., Alexander the Great conquered Syria.
In 168 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanes captured Jerusalem, destroyed the walls, and devastated the Temple, reducing the city to a worse position than it had occupied since the time of the captivity.
From the 1st of April 1544, bringing with him some of his followers, he took up his abode in Basel, which was to be the New Jerusalem.
Their daughter marries Eustache, count of Boulogne, and had three sons, the eldest of whom, Godefroid (Godfrey), is the future king of Jerusalem.
Amalric was the founder of a dynasty of kings of Cyprus, which lasted till 1475, while after 1269 his descendants regularly enjoyed the title of kings of Jerusalem.
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.).
is similar to that of xvi., except that in the latter Samaria is relatively treated with favour, while in the former it (Aholah) is involved in the same condemnation as that of Jerusalem.
18, probably, but not necessarily, lay near Jerusalem.
The latter would have required that the question should have been settled by the church at Antioch instead of being referred to Jerusalem.
Some years after his accession David succeeded after some difficulty in taking Jerusalem.
In the reign of Hezekiah, the kingdom of Judah became tributary to the Assyrians, who attempted the capture of Jerusalem.
The oppression of Antiochus led to a revolt of the Jews under the leadership of the Maccabees, and Judas Maccabaeus succeeded in capturing Jerusalem after severe fighting, but could not get The sites shown on the plan are tentative, and cannot be regarded as certain; see Nehemiah ii.
In 65 B.C. Jerusalem was captured by Pompey after a difficult siege.
The Asmonean dynasty lasted a few years longer, but finally came to an end when Herod the Great, with the aid of the Romans, took possession of Jerusalem and became the first king of the Idumaean dynasty.
Archelaus, Herod's successor, had far less authority than Herod, and the real power of government at Jerusalem was assumed by the Roman procurators, in the time of one of whom, Pontius Pilate, Jesus Christ was condemned to death and crucified outside Jerusalem.
Herod Agrippa, who succeeded to the kingdom, built a third or outer wall on the north side of Jerusalem in order to enclose and defend the buildings which had gradually been constructed outside the old fortifications.
The exact line of this third wall is not known with certainty, but it probably followed approximately the same line as the existing north wall of Jerusalem.
The wall of Herod Agrippa was planned on a grand scale, but its execution was stopped by the Romans, so that it was not completed at the time of the siege of Jerusalem by Titus.
The writings of Josephus give a good idea of the fortifications and buildings of Jerusalem at the time of the siege, and his accurate personal knowledge makes his account worthy of the most careful perusal.
When Titus and his army withdrew from Jerusalem, the 10th legion was left as a permanent Roman garrison, and a fortified camp for their occupation was established on the western hill.
After a severe struggle, the revolt was suppressed by the Roman general, Julius Severus, and Jerusalem was recaptured and again destroyed.
About 130 the emperor Hadrian decided to rebuild Jerusalem, and make it a Roman colony.
The exact size of the city is not known, but it probably extended as far as the present north wall of Jerusalem and included the northern part of the western hill.
The next important epoch in building construction at Jerusalem was about 460, when the empress Eudocia visited Palestine and expended large sums on the improvement of the city.
Bliss when making his exploration of Jerusalem.
In the 6th century the emperor Justinian erected a magnificent basilica at Jerusalem, in honour of the Virgin Mary, and attached to it two hospitals, one for the reception of pilgrims and one for the accommodation of the sick poor.
In 614 Chosroes II., the king of Persia, captured Jerusalem, devastated many of the buildings, and massacred a great number of the inhabitants.
After a severe struggle the Persians were defeated by the emperor Heraclius, who entered Jerusalem in triumph in 62 9 bringing with him the holy cross, which had been carried off by Chosroes.
At this period the religion of Mahomet was spreading over the east, and in 637 the caliph Omar marched on Jerusalem, which capitulated after a siege of four months.
Jerusalem is the chief town of a sanjak, governed by a mutessarif, who reports directly to the Porte.
Prior to 1858, when the modern building period commenced, Jerusalem lay wholly within its 16th-century walls, and even as late as 1875 there were few private residences beyond their limits.
At present Jerusalem without the walls covers a larger area than that within them.
Exp. Fund Publications - Sir C. Warren, Jerusalem, Memoir (1884); Clermont-Ganneau, Archaeol.
at Jerusalem (1898); Conder, Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (1897), and The City of Jerusalem (1909), an historical survey over 4000 years; Le Strange, Pal.
under the Moslems (1890); Fergusson, Temples of the Jews (1878); Hayter Lewis, Holy Places of Jerusalem(' 888); Churches of Constantine at Jerusalem (1891); Guthe, "Ausgrabungen in Jer.," in Zeitschrift d.
Synod Of Jerusalem >>
LEVITES, or sons of Levi (son of Jacob by Leah), a sacred caste in ancient Israel, the guardians of the temple service at Jerusalem.'
All access to the Deity is restricted to the one priesthood and to the one sanctuary at Jerusalem; the worshipping subject is the nation of Israel as a unity, and the function of worship is discharged on its behalf by divinely chosen priests.
In Jerusalem itself the subordinate officers of the temple were not members of a holy gild, but of the royal body-guard, or bond-slaves who had access to the sacred courts, and might even be uncircumcised foreigners (Josh.
6-8)2 The Deuteronomic history of the monarchy actually ascribes to the Judaean king Josiah (621 B.C.) the suppression of the high-places, and states that the local priests were brought to Jerusalem and received support, but did not minister at the altar (2 Kings xxiii.
"A threefold cord is not quickly broken," and these three independent witnesses agree in describing a significant innovation which ends with the supremacy of the Zadokites of Jerusalem over their brethren.
The sequel to this phase is placed in the reign of Solomon, when David's old priest Abiathar, sole survivor of the priests of Shiloh, is expelled to Anathoth (near Jerusalem), and Zadok becomes the first chief priest contemporary with the foundation of the first temple (1 Kings ii.
The late specific tendency in favour of Jerusalem agrees with the Deuteronomic editor of Kings who condemns the sanctuaries of Dan and Bethel for -, calf-worship (1 Kings xii.
1) encamped here on his way to Jerusalem.
In 1309 it was conquered by the Knights Hospitallers of St John of Jerusalem at the instigation of the pope and the Genoese, and converted into a great fortress for the protection of the southern seas against the Turks.
Godfrey of Bouillon, the leader of the expedition and the first king of Jerusalem, was duke of Lower Lorraine, and the names of his brothers Baldwin of Edessa and Eustace of Boulogne, and of Count Robert II.
On his arrival he reinstated Hyrcanus in the high-priesthood at Jerusalem, suppressed revolts, introduced important changes in the government of Judaea, and rebuilt several towns.
This history begins at the time of the council of Clermont, deals with the fortunes of the first crusade and the earlier history of the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem, and ends somewhat abruptly in 11 21.
pero~ In his single person he combined the prestige of empire with the crowns of Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Germany and Burgundy; and in 1225, by marriage with Yolande de Brienne, he added that of Jerusalem.
In 1587 the see of Moscow was raised to patriarchal rank with the consent of Constantinople, and the subsequent concurrence of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem (ib.
In Rome and Alexandria, and even in Jerusalem, Holy Week was included in Lent and the whole fast lasted but six weeks, Saturdays, however, not being exempt.
ISAAC BEN SOLOMON LURIA (1534-1572), Jewish mystic, was born in Jerusalem.
From Alexandria we get Athanasius, Didymus and Cyril; from Cyrene, Synesius; from Antioch, Theodore of Mopsuestia, John Chrysostom and Theodoret; from Palestine, Eusebius of Caesarea and Cyril of Jerusalem; from Cappadocia, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzus.
of Jerusalem, standing on an isolated hill above a flat corn valley.
Early in the next century Jerusalem was taken by Nebuchadrezzar, and the prophet Ezekiel was among the exiles with Jehoiachin.
The man, however, who shares with Ibn Gabirol the first place in Jewish poetry is Judah Ha-levi, of Toledo, who died in Jerusalem about 1140.
He was born at Cordova in 1135, fled with his parents from persecution in 1148, settled at Fez in i 160, passing P g there for a Moslem, fled again to Jerusalem in 1165, and finally went to Cairo where he died in 1204.
In the East, Tanhum ben Joseph of Jerusalem was the author of commentaries (not to be confounded with the Midrash Tanhuma) on many books of the Bible, and of an extensive lexicon (Kitab al-Murshid) to the Mishnah, all in Arabic.
2), better perhaps Bethzatha Or Bethsaida, a pool or public bath in Jerusalem, where miraculous cures were believed to be performed.
(2) Leper Home near Jerusalem (1867).
He came home in the following spring, but next year went again to Prussia, whence he journeyed by way of Venice to Cyprus and Jerusalem.
On the 20th of March 1413, whilst praying in Westminster Abbey he was seized with a fainting fit, and died that same evening in the Jerusalem Chamber.
(3) Where there was an appointed place of sacrifice - the Temple at Jerusalem, according to later Jewish prescription - there was.
Just as we have in Assyria an Ishtar of Arbela and an Ishtar of Nineveh (treated in Assur-bani-pal's (Rassam) cylinder 2 like two distinct deities), as we have local Madonnas in Roman Catholic countries, so must it have been with the cults of Yahweh in the regal period carried on in the numerous high places, Bethel, Shechem, Shiloh (till its destruction in the days of Eli) and Jerusalem.
What `Ophrah became on a small scale in the days of Gideon, Jerusalem became on a larger scale in the days of David and his successors.
In the more important shrines, as at Jerusalem or Samaria, there would be an altar of stone or of bronze.
Rabshakeh's appeal to the besieged inhabitants of Jerusalem was based on these same considerations.
9-10) in the dark days of Ahaz (735-734 B.C.) were among the oracles which God commanded Isaiah " to seal up among his disciples " (verse 16), and that they were quoted once more with effect as the armies of Sennacherib closed around Jerusalem.
The strange contrast between the succession of dynasties and kings cut off by assassination in the northern kingdom, ending in the tragic overthrow of 721 B.C., and the persistent succession through three centuries of the seed of David on the throne of Jerusalem, as well as the marvellous escape of Jerusalem in 701 B.C. from the fate of Samaria, must have invested the seed of David in the eyes of all thoughtful observers with a mysterious and divine significance.
If Jerusalem has been chosen as His sanctuary and Israel as His own people, it is only that Israel may diffuse God's blessings in the world even at the cost of Israel's own humiliation, exile and dispersion.
Jerusalem) which Yahweh your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put His name there " (xii.
By this positive enactment all the high places outside the one sanctuary in Jerusalem became illegitimate.
Doubtless such a reform met with strong resistance from the disestablished and vested interests, but it was firmly supported by royal influence and by the Jerusalem priesthood as well as by the true prophets of Yahweh who had protested against the idolatrous usages and corruptions of the high places.
Unlike the old temple and city, the ideal temple of Ezekiel is entirely separate from the city of Jerusalem.
But this term (literally the chief priest) was already in use during the regal period to designate the head priest of an important sanctuary such as Jerusalem (2 Kings xii.
This element of public confession for sin became more prominent in the days when synagogal worship developed, and prayer took the place of the sacrificial offerings which could only be offered in the Jerusalem temple.
Pre-existence is also asserted of Moses and of sacred institutions such as the New Jerusalem, the Temple, Paradise, the Torah, &c. (Apocal.
In that year William Longsword, eldest of the five sons of Count William III., came to the kingdom of Jerusalem, on the invitation of Baldwin IV.
He established himself firmly in Tyre (refusing admission to Guy, the king of Jerusalem); and from it he both sent appeals for aid to Europe - which largely contributed to cause the Third Crusade - and despatched reinforcements to the crusaders, who, from 1188 onwards, were engaged in the siege of Acre.
But he was the one man of ability who could hope to rule the debris of the kingdom of Jerusalem with success; he was the master of an Italian statecraft which gave him the advantage over his ingenuous rival; and Richard was finally forced to recognize him as king (April 11 9 2).
Their history may be divided into three great periods: (1) That covered by the Old Testament to the foundation of Judaism in the Persian age, (2) that of the Greek and Roman domination to the destruction of Jerusalem, and (3) that of the Diaspora or Dispersion to the present day.
of that small district which, with Jerusalem as its capital, became the centre of Judaism.
- Certain traditions of Judah and Jerusalem appear to have looked back upon a movement from the south, traces of which underlie the present account of the " exodus."
David and his followers are found in the south of Hebron, and as they advanced northwards they encountered wondrous heroes between Gath and Jerusalem (2 Sam.
After strenuous fighting the district was cleared, and Jerusalem, taken by the sword, became the capital.
The prominence of Jerusalem, the centre of post-exilic Judaism, necessarily invited reflection.
Israelite tradition had ascribed the conquest of Jerusalem, Hebron and other cities of Judah to the Ephraimite Joshua; Judaean tradition, on the other hand, relates the capture of the sacred city from a strange and hostile people (2 Sam.
Judaean tradition dated the sanctity of Jerusalem from the installation of the ark, a sacred movable object which symbolized the presence of Yahweh.
David, the conqueror, was followed by his son Solomon, famous for his wealth, wisdom and piety, above all for the magnificent Temple which he built at Jerusalem.
The era of the Temple of Jerusalem starts with a new regime, another captain of the army L EWS [OLD Testament History and another priest.
In the approaching disruption writers saw the punishment for the king's apostasy, and they condemn the sanctuaries in Jerusalem which he erected to the gods of his heathen wives.
The 480 years from the foundation of the temple of Jerusalem back to the date of the exodus (I Kings vi.
Only the Temple records recall the spoliation of the sanctuary of Jerusalem, and traditions of Jeroboam I.
However, Baasha at length seized Ramah about five miles north of Jerusalem, and the very existence of Judah was threatened.
The cult of the Baal of Tyre followed Jezebel to the royal city Samaria and even found its way into Jerusalem.
Edomites), an attack upon Jerusalem, the removal of the palace treasures and of all the royal sons with the sole exception of Jehoahaz, i.e.
The Judaean annals then relate Hazael's advance to Gath; the city was captured and Jerusalem was saved only by using the Temple and palace treasure as a bribe.
Jehoash, it is said, turned away from Yahweh after the death of Jehoiada and gave heed to the Judaean nobles, " wrath came upon Judah and Jerusalem for their guilt," prophets were sent to bring them back but they turned a deaf ear.
The result was the route of Judah, the capture of Amaziah, the destruction of the northern wall of Jerusalem, the sacking of the temple and palace, and the removal of hostages to Samaria (2 Kings xiv.
Moab was probably tributary; the position of Judah and Edom is involved with the chronological problems. According to the Judaean annals, the " people of Judah " set Azariah (Uzziah) upon his father's throne; and to his long reign of fifty-two years are ascribed conquests over Philistia and Edom, the fortification of Jerusalem and the reorganization of the army.
It is at least probable that when Israel was supreme an independent Judah would centre around a more southerly site than Jerusalem.
Although no evidence is at hand, it is probable that Ahaz of Judah rendered service to Assyria by keeping the allies in check; possible, also, that the former enemies of Jerusalem had now been induced to turn against Samaria.
At Sennacherib's approach, Ashdod, Ammon, Moab and Edom submitted; Ekron, Ascalon, Lachish and Jerusalem held out strenuously.
The fall of Samaria, Sennacherib's devastation of Judah, and the growth of Jerusalem as the capital, had tended to raise the position of the Temple, although Israel itself, as also Judah, had famous sanctuaries of its own.
He died just as Nebuchadrezzar, seeing his warnings disregarded, was preparing to lay siege to Jerusalem.
of Jerusalem; and here Gedaliah issued an appeal to the people to 3 But see N.
Only the second is specifically said to be from Jerusalem (the remaining are of Judaeans), and the last has been plausibly connected with the murder of Gedaliah, an interval of five years being assumed.
But the destruction of Jerusalem is not quite unique, and somewhat later we meet with indirect evidence for at least one similar disaster upon which the records are silent.
The two sections of the Hebrews who had had so much in common were scarcely severed by a border-line only a few miles to the north of Jerusalem.
But there are facts which support it " (Jerusalem, ii.
Scarcely 40 years after the destruction of Jerusalem, a new power appeared in the east in the person of Cyrus the Great.
Some took root in the strange lands, and, as later popular stories indicate, evidently reached high positions; others, retaining a more vivid tradition of the land of their fathers, cherished the ideal of a restored Jerusalem.
After a brief description of the fall of Jerusalem the " seventy years " of the exile are passed over, and we are plunged into a history of the return (2 Chron.
Settled in and around Jerusalem, they look upon themselves as the sole community, the true Israel, even as it was believed that once before Israel entered and developed independently in the land of its ancestors.
An immense body of exiles is said to have returned at this time to Jerusalem under Zerubbabel, who was of Davidic descent, and the priest Jeshua or Joshua, the grandson of the murdered Seraiah (Ezra i.
His main object is to make the new Israel, the post-exilic community at Jerusalem, continuous, as a society, with the old Israel.'
The new temple heralded a new future; the mournful fasts commemorative of Jerusalem's disasters would become feasts; Yahweh had left the Temple at the fall of Jerusalem, but had now returned to sanctify it with his presence; the city had purged its iniquity and was fit once more to become the central sanctuary.
14-26), and the evidence for the conclusion that traditions originally of (north) Israelite interest were taken over and adapted to the later standpoint of Judah and Jerusalem (viz.
represent a Judah composed mainly of groups which had moved up from the south (Hebron) to the vicinity of Jerusalem.
I 1-24); Caleb's overthrow of the Hebronite giants finds a parallel in David's conflicts before the capture of Jerusalem, and may be associated with the belief that these primitive giants once filled the land (Josh.
Although Judah was always closely connected with the south, these " southern " features (once clearly more extensive and complete) are found in the Deuteronomic and priestly compilations, and their presence in the historical records can hardly be severed from the prominence of " southern " families in the vicinity of Jerusalem, some time after the fall of Jerusalem.
In obscure circumstances the enthusiastic hopes have melted away, the Davidic scion has disappeared, and Jerusalem has been the victim of another disaster.
It is the work of rebuilding and reorganization, of social and of religious reforms, which we encounter in the last pages of biblical history, and in the records of Ezra and Nehemiah we stand in Jerusalem in the very centre of epoch-making events.
Nehemiah, the cup-bearer of Artaxerxes at Susa, plunged in grief at the news of the desolation of Jerusalem, obtained permission from the king to rebuild the ruins.
Moreover, the maintenance of the Temple servants called for supervision; the customary allowances had not been paid to the Levites who had come to Jerusalem after the smaller shrines had been put down, and they had now forsaken the city.
There was a poor and weak Jerusalem, its Temple stood in need of renovation, its temple-service was mean, its priests unworthy of their office.
It is related that Ezra, the scribe and priest, returned to Jerusalem with priests and Levites, lay exiles, and a store of vessels for the Temple.
The disaster which aroused Nehemiah's grief was scarcely the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., but a more recent one, and it has been conjectured that it followed the work of Ezra (in b above).
Jerusalem had suffered some serious catastrophe before Nehemiah's return; a body of exiles returned, and in spite of interference the work of rebuilding was completed; through their influence the Judaean community underwent reorganization, and separated itself from its so-called heathen neighbours.
The canonical history has allowed only one great destruction of Jerusalem, and the disaster of 586 B.C. became the type for similar disasters, but how many there were criticism can scarcely decide.'
The Chaldeans alone destroyed Jerusalem (2 Kings xxv.); Edom was friendly or at least neutral (Jer.
and iv.) from a subsequent stage when the first inhabitants of Jerusalem correspond in the main to the new population after Nehemiah had repaired the ruins (I Chron.
Judah was now a religious community whose representative was the high priest of Jerusalem.
Whatever the predominant party might think of foreign marriages, the tradition of the half-Moabite origin of David serves, in the beautiful idyll of Ruth (q.v.), to suggest the debt which Judah and Jerusalem owed to one at least of its neighbours.
Again, although some may have desired a self-contained community opposed to the heathen neighbours of Jerusalem, the story of Jonah implicitly contends against the attempt of Judaism to close its doors.
5 sqq.); or in the late insertion of local tradition encircling Jerusalem; or in the perplexing attitude of the histories towards the district of Benjamin and its famous sanctuary of Bethel (only about 10 m.
north of Jerusalem).
- Thus the Old Testament, the history of the Jews during the first great period, describes the relation of the Hebrews to surrounding peoples, the superiority of Judah over the faithless (north) Israelite tribes, and the reorganization of the Jewish community in and around Jerusalem at the arrival of Ezra with the Book of the Law.
It ends with the destruction of Jerusalem by the armies of the Roman Empire, which was, like Alexander, at once the masterful pupil and the docile patron of Hellenism.
The destruction of Jerusalem might be regarded as an event of merely domestic importance; for the Roman cosmopolitan it was only the removal of the titular metropolis of a national and an Oriental religion.
The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.
The reforms of Nehemiah were directed towards the establishment of a religious community at Jerusalem, in which the rigour of the law should be observed.
In connexion with Alexander's march through Palestine Josephus gives a tradition of his visit to Jerusalem.
According to the tradition which Josephus has preserved the high priest refused to transfer his allegiance, and Alexander marched against Jerusalem after the capture of Gaza.
But it is not clear that he had such need of the Jews or such regard for the Temple of Jerusalem that he should turn aside on his way to Egypt for such a purpose.
In Jerusalem there were partisans of both the combatants.
After the defeat of Scopas, Antiochus gained Batanaea and Samaria and Abila and Gadara, and a little later those of the Jews who live round the Temple called Jerusalem adhered to him."
Josephus adds that an Egyptian garrison was left in Jerusalem.
The pro-Syrian faction of the Palestinian Jews found their opportunity in this emergency and informed the governor of Coele-Syria that the treasury in Jerusalem contained untold sums of money.
Heliodorus, prime minister of Seleucus Philopator, who succeeded Antiochus, arrived at Jerusalem in his progress through Coele-Syria and Phoenicia and declared the treasure confiscate to the royal exchequer.
The priests deserted the Temple for the palaestra and the young nobles wore the Greek cap. The Jews of Jerusalem were enrolled as citizens of Antioch.
This outrage, coupled with his appropriation of temple vessels, which he used as bribes, raised against Menelaus the senate and the people of Jerusalem.
Antiochus required peace in Jerusalem and probably regarded Onias as the representative of the pro-Egyptian faction, the allies of his enemy.
During his second Egyptian campaign a rumour came that Antiochus was dead, and Jason made a raid upon Jerusalem.
The Temple of Jerusalem was made over to Zeus Olympius: the temple of Gerizim to Zeus Xenius.
Jerusalem was occupied by an army which took advantage of the Sabbath and proceeded to suppress its observance.
- Jerusalem and Gerizim were purged and converted to the state religion with some ease.
Apollonius, the commander of the Syrian garrison in Jerusalem, and Seron the commander of the army in Syria, came in turn against Judas and his bands and were defeated.
Judas entered Jerusalem, the citadel of which was still occupied by a Syrian garrison, and the Temple was re-dedicated on the 25th of Kislev (164 B.e.).
He had already made Jerusalem his capital and fortified the Temple mount: the Syrian garrisons had already been withdrawn with the exception of those of the Akra and Bethzur.
The Jewish forces were driven back upon Jerusalem and the city was closely invested.
In subsequent negotiations he accepted the disarmament of the besieged and a tribute as conditions of peace, and in response to their entreaty left Jerusalem without a garrison.
In Jerusalem and in the country, in Alexandria, Egypt and Cyprus, the Jews were prosperous (Jos.
The queen interposed to prevent the execution of those who had counselled the crucifixion of the rebels and permitted them to withdraw with her younger son Aristobulus to the fortresses outside Jerusalem.
Aristobulus could not withstand the army of Aretas: he was driven back upon Jerusalem and there besieged.
When he repented of his attempted resistance and treated with Pompey for peace, his followers threw themselves into Jerusalem, and, when the faction of Hyrcanus resolved to open the gates, into the Temple.
When Aretas intervened in the interest of Hyrcanus and defeated Aristobulus, the usurper of his brother's inheritance, the people accepted the verdict of battle, sided with the victor's client, and joined in the siege of Jerusalem.
Galilee was pacified, Jerusalem taken and Antigonus beheaded by the Romans.
This was so even in Palestine - the land which the Jews hoped to possess - and in Jerusalem itself, the holy city, in which the Temple stood.
Pollio the Pharisee and Sameas his disciple were in special honour with him, Josephus says, when he re-entered Jerusalem and put to death the leaders of the faction of Antigonus.
Herod's nominees were not the men to extend the prestige of the high-priesthood at the expense of these rabbis: even in Jerusalem the synagogue became of more importance than the Temple.
But that ability was largely due to his whole-hearted Hellenism, which was shown by the Greek cities which he founded in Palestine and the buildings he erected in Jerusalem.
Before he departed to Rome on this errand, which was itself an insult to the nation, there were riots in Jerusalem at the Passover which he needed all his soldiery to put down.
The result of this alliance between a revolutionary and a Pharisee was the formation of the party of Zealots, whose influence - according to Josephus - brought about the great revolt and so led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70.
Pilate inaugurated his term of office by ordering his troops to enter Jerusalem at night and to take their standards with them.
Pilate came up to Jerusalem and dispersed the petitioners by means of disguised soldiers armed with clubs.
At the passover of 36 Vitellius came to Jerusalem and pacified the Jews by two concessions: he remitted the taxes on fruit sold in the city, and he restored to their custody the high priest's vestments, which Herod Archelaus and the Romans had kept in the tower Antonia.
When he marched against Aretas, his army with their standards did not enter Judaea at all; but he himself went up to Jerusalem for the feast and, on receipt of the news that Tiberius was dead, administered to the Jews the oath of allegiance to Caligula.
While the matter was still pending, news arrived that the emperor had commanded Publius Petronius, the governor of Syria, to set up his statue in the temple of Jerusalem.
The fact that he began to build a wall round Jerusalem may be taken as further proof of his patriotism.
A squadron of cavalry despatched by Fadus took them alive, cut off the head of Theudas and brought it to Jerusalem.
Finally, the Samaritans attacked certain Galileans who were (as the custom was) travelling through Samaria to Jerusalem for the passover.
The leading men of Jerusalem prevailed upon the rebels who survived the defeat to disperse.
Wizards and impostors persuaded the multitude to follow them into the desert, and an Egyptian, claiming to be a prophet, led his followers to the Mount of Olives to see the walls of Jerusalem fall at his command.
With the apparent intention of restoring order in Jerusalem, he assembled the Sanhedrin, and being, as a Sadducee, cruel in the matter of penalties, secured the condemnation of certain lawbreakers to death by stoning.
When the news of the troubles at Caesarea reached Jerusalem, it became known also that Florus had seized seventeen talents of the temple treasure (66).
Stung by this insult, he neglected the fire of war which had been lighted at Caesarea, and hastened to Jerusalem.
Agrippa, who had hurried from Alexandria, entered Jerusalem with the governor's emissary.
At length the governor of Syria approached the centre of the disturbance in Jerusalem, but retreated after burning down a suburb.
Some prominent Jews fled from Jerusalem - as from a sinking ship - to join him and carried the news to the emperor.
Ananus the high priest, their leader, remained in command at Jerusalem; Galilee, where the first attack was to be expected, was entrusted to Josephus, the historian of the war.
The people, whom he had tried to conciliate, were roused against him; John sent assassins and finally procured an order from Jerusalem for his recall.
Josephus with a few stalwarts took refuge in Tiberias, and sent a letter to Jerusalem asking that he should be relieved of his command or supplied with an adequate force to continue the war.
In accordance with ancient custom Jerusalem welcomed the fugitive Zealots.
The Idumaeans left, but John of Giscala remained master of Jerusalem.
The Fall of Jerusalem.
But, before Vespasian took action to stop his raids, Simon had been invited to Jerusalem in the hope that he would act as a counterpoise to the tyrant John.
And so, when Vespasian was proclaimed emperor in fulfilment of Josephus' prophecy, and deputed the command to Titus, there were three rivals at war in Jerusalem - Eleazar, Simon and John.
A few days before the passover of 70 Titus advanced upon Jerusalem, but the civil war went on.
In spite of their desperate sallies, Jerusalem was surrounded by a wall, and its people, whose numbers were increased by those who had come up for the passover, were hemmed in to starve.
The priests existed to offer sacrifices, and by the Law no sacrifice could be offered except at the Temple of Jerusalem.
Already the Jews of the Dispersion had learned to supplement the Temple by the synagogue, and even the Jews of Jerusalem had not been free to spend their lives in the worship of the Temple.
When Jerusalem was taken, the Sicarii still continued to hold three strongholds: one - Masada - for three years.
Hadrian had forbidden circumcision as illegal mutilation: he had also replaced Jerusalem by a city of his own, Aelia Capitolina, and the temple of Yahweh by a temple of Jupiter.
For three years and a half he held his own and issued coins in the name of Simon, which commemorate the liberation of Jerusalem.
Hadrian sent his best generals against the rebels, and at length they were driven from Jerusalem to Bethar (135).
The Jews were forbidden to enter the new city of Jerusalem on pain of death.
Jerusalem was rebuilt by Hadrian, orders to this effect being given during the emperor's first journey through Syria in 130, the date of his foundations at.
on the east of the Euphrates, from Nehardea in the north to Sura in the south, became a new Palestine with Nehardea for its Jerusalem.
Modern schools have been set up in many places, and Palestine has been the scene of a notable educational and agricultural revival, while technical schools - such as the agricultural college near Jaffa and the schools of the alliance and the more recent Bezalel in Jerusalem - have been established.
The restored state of Jerusalem lived for about six centuries in partial independence under Persian, Egyptian, Syrian and Roman rule, often showing an aggressively heroic attachment to its national customs, which brought it into collision with its suzerains, until the temple was destroyed by Titus in A.D.
DAVID (a Hebrew name meaning probably beloved 1), in the Bible, the son of Jesse, king of Judah and Israel, and founder of the royal Judaean dynasty at Jerusalem.
south of Jerusalem; the polite deprecation in I Sam.
War broke out between the two parties at Gibeon a few miles north of Jerusalem.
If Jerusalem and its immediate neighbourhood were first conquered by David (2 Sam.
We hear of two great battles with the " Philistines " in the valley of Rephaim, near Jerusalem, at a time when David's base was Adullam (v.
3 Not until the district was cleared could Jerusalem be taken, and the capture of the almost impregnable Jebusite fortress furnished a centre for future action.
A few great officers of state were appointed at the court of Jerusalem (viii.
The choice of Jerusalem, standing on neutral ground, may be regarded as a stroke of genius, and there is nothing to show that the king exercised that rigour which was to be the cause of his grandson's undoing.
The surprise was complete, and David was compelled to evacuate Jerusalem, where he might have been crushed before he had time to rally his faithful subjects.
The removal of the court to Jerusalem provided a suitable opportunity, and an element of jealousy even may not have been wanting.
Again (b) the primitive stories of conflicts with " Philistine " giants between Hebron and Jerusalem (2 Sam.
This was followed by the outbreak of the dispute between France and Turkey over the guardianship of the holy places at Jerusalem, which, after the original cause of quarrel had been forgotten, developed into the Crimean war.
Muswell Hill took name from a holy well, of high repute for curative powers, over which an oratory was erected early in the 12th century, attached to the priory of St John of Jerusalem in Clerkenwell.
While his patroness lived in a convent of her own in Jerusalem, Rufinus, at her expense, gathered together a number of monks in a monastery on the Mount of Olives, devoting himself at the same time to the study of Greek theology.
Another of the intimates of Rufinus was John, bishop of Jerusalem, and formerly a Nitrian monk, by whom he was ordained to the priesthood in 39 0.
THE TEUTONIC ORDER, or Teutonic Knights of St Mary's Hospital at Jerusalem (Der deutsche Orden, Deutsche Ritter) was one of the three great military and religious orders which sprang from the Crusades.
Already, indeed, in 1143 we hear of a hospital of Germans at Jerusalem, which Celestine II.
(fn1) Rohricht, Geschichte des Konigreichs Jerusalem, p. 242.
(fn2) Rohricht, Geschichte des Konigreichs Jerusalem, p. 542.
Jerusalem, near the Egyptian frontier, was an important point, and in one of its internal revolutions Antiochus saw, perhaps not without reason, a defection to the Egyptian side.
There the bishops of Jerusalem and Caesarea received him in the most friendly manner, and got him to deli;per public lectures in the churches.
In the church library at Jerusalem (founded by the bishop Alexander) there were also numerous letters of this father (Euseb.
GERARD (c. 1040-1120), variously surnamed TUM, Tunc, Tenque or Thom, founder of the order of the knights of St John of Jerusalem, was born at Amalfi about the year 1040.
Either as a soldier or a merchant, he found his way to Jerusalem, where a hospice had for some time existed for the convenience of those who wished to visit the holy places.
He preached the true religion, destroyed Jerusalem ("Urashlam," i.e.
The ass had been introduced into the ritual of the church in the 9th century, representing either Balaam's ass, that which stood with the ox beside the manger at Bethlehem, that which carried the Holy Family into Egypt, or that on which Christ rode in triumph into Jerusalem.
of Jerusalem and nearly 2900 ft.
The result of his arrival was that John, bishop of Jerusalem, was.
Under the influence of the Cluniac revival, which began in the 10th century, pilgrimages became increasingly frequent; and the goal of pilgrimage was often Jerusalem.
Pilgrims who were travelling to Jerusalem joined themselves in companies for security, and marched under arms; the pilgrims of 1064, who were headed by the archbishop of Mainz, numbered some 7000 men.
The Latin kingdom of Jerusalem was the meeting-place of two civilizations: on its soil the East learned from the West, and - perhaps still more - the West learned from the East.
Sicily was still more the meeting-place of East and West than the kingdom of Jerusalem; and the Arabs of Spain gave more to the culture of Europe than the Arabs of Syria.
- Within fifteen years of the Hegira Jerusalem fell before the arms of Omar (637), and it continued to remain in the hands of Mahommedan rulers till the end of the First Crusade.
For centuries, however, a lively intercourse was maintained between the Latin Church in Jerusalem, which the clemency of the Arab conquerors tolerated, and the Christians of the West.
The connexion lasted during the 9th century; kings like Alfred of England and Louis of Germany sent contributions to Jerusalem, while the Church of Jerusalem acquired estates in the West.
But still worse for the Latins was the capture of Jerusalem by the Seljukian Turks in 1071.
As early as 970 the recovery of the territories lost to Mahommedanism in the East had been begun by emperors like Nicephoras Phocas and John Zimisces: they had pushed their conquests, if only for a time, as far as Antioch and Edessa, and the temporary occupation of Jerusalem is attributed to the East Roman arms. At the opposite end of the Mediterranean, in Spain, the Omayyad caliphate was verging to its fall: the long Spanish crusade against the Moor had begun; and in 1018 Roger de Toeni was already leading Normans into Catalonia to the aid of the native Spaniard.
While they wrested Jerusalem from the former (1071), in the same year they inflicted a crushing defeat on the Eastern emperor at Manzikert.
is said to have preached a general expedition for the recovery of Jerusalem; and the same preaching is attributed to Sergius IV.
But the supposed letter of Silvester is a later forgery; and in moo the way of the Christian to Jerusalem was still free and open.
He had appealed for reinforcements to recover Asia Minor; he received hundreds of thousands of troops, independent of him, and intending to conquer Jerusalem for themselves, though they might incidentally recover Asia Minor for the Eastern empire on their way.
It is the Church which creates the First Crusade, because the clergy believes in penitentiary pilgrimages, and the war against the Seljuks can be turned into a pilgrimage to the Sepulchre; because, again, it wishes to direct the fighting instinct of the laity, and the consecrating name of Jerusalem provides an unimpeachable channel; above all, because the papacy desires a perfect and universal Church, and a perfect and universal Church must rule in the Holy Land.
to create the kingdom of Jerusalem.
c. i.); but the gist of his speech was the need of Jerusalem.
Let the truce of God be observed at home; and let the arms of Christians be directed to the winning of Jerusalem in an expedition which should count for full and complete penance.
Like Gregory, Urban had thus sought for aid for the Eastern empire; unlike Gregory, who had only mentioned the Holy Sepulchre in a single letter, and then casually, he had struck the note of Jerusalem.
They appealed to the old Norse instinct for wandering - an instinct which, as it had long before sent the Norseman eastward to find his El Dorado of Micklegarth, could now find a natural outlet in the expedition to Jerusalem: they appealed to the Norman religiosity, which had made them a people of pilgrims, the allies of the papacy, and, in England and Sicily, crusaders before the Crusades: finally, they appealed to that desire to gain fresh territory, upon which Malaterra remarks as characteristic of Norman princes.
The influence of the Italian towns did not make itself greatly felt till after the end of the First Crusade, when it made possible the foundation of a kingdom in Jerusalem, in addition to the three principalities established by Bohemund, Baldwin and Raymond; but during the course of the Crusade itself the Italian ships which hugged the shores of Syria were able to supply the crusaders with provisions and munition of war, and to render help in the sieges of Antioch and Jerusalem.4 Sea-power had thus some influence in determining the victory of the crusaders.
Always hostile to the principality, which Bohemund established in spite of his oath, they helped by their hostility to cause the loss of Edessa in 1144, and thus to hasten the disintegration of the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem.
The crusading princes were well enough aware of the gulf which divided the caliph of Cairo from the Sunnite princes of Syria; and they sought by envoys to put themselves into connexion with him, hoping by his aid to gain Jerusalem (which was then ruled for the Turks by Sokman, the son of the amir Ortok).
On the Third himself, and took advantage of the wars of the Syrian princes, and of the terror inspired by the advance of the crusaders to conquer Jerusalem (August 1098).
It was the disunion of the Syrian amirs, and the division between the Abbasids and the Fatimites, that made possible the conquest of the Holy City and the foundation of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
Here Godfrey of Bouillon finally came to the front, and placing himself at the head of the discontented pilgrims, he forced Raymund to accept the offers of the amir of Tripoli, to desist from the siege, and to march to Jerusalem (in the middle of May 1099).
Bohemund remained in Antioch: the other leaders pressed forward, and following the coast route, arrived before Jerusalem in the beginning of June.
It remained to determine the future government of Jerusalem; and here the eternal problem of the relations of Church and State emerged.
At the end of August the other crusaders returned,' and Godfrey was left with a small army of 2000 men, and the support of Tancred, now prince of Galilee, to rule in some four isolated districts - Jaffa, Jerusalem, Ramlah and Haifa.
At the end of the year came Bohemund and Godfrey's brother Baldwin (now count of Edessa) on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.
When Godfrey died in July 1100 (after successful forays against the Mahommedans which took him as far as Damascus), it might seem as if a theocracy were after all to be established in Jerusalem, in spite of the events of 1099.
The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem under the First Three Kings, 2 1100-1143.
3 But a party in Jerusalem, headed by the late "vicar" Arnulf, opposed itself to the hierarchical pretensions of Dagobert and the Norman influence by which they were backed; and this party, representing the Lotharingian laity, carried the day.
Thus was founded, on Christmas day 1 ioo, the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem; and thus was the possibility of a theocracy finally annihilated.
The establishment of a kingdom in Jerusalem in i ioo was a blow, not only to the Church but to the Normans of Antioch.
Antioch lay in one of the most fertile regions of the East; Bohemund was almost, if not quite, the greatest genius of his generation; and when he visited Jerusalem at the end of 1099, he led an army of 25,000 men - and those men, at any rate in large part, Normans.
Jerusalem, like Rome, had the shadow of a mighty name to lend prestige to its ruler; and as residence in Rome was one great reason of the strength of the medieval papacy, so was 1 Before he left, Raymund had played in Jerusalem the same part of dog in the manger which he had also played at Antioch, and had given Godfrey considerable trouble.
2 For an account of the kings of Jerusalem see the articles on the five Baldwins,On the two Amalrics,on Fulk and John Of Brienne and on the Lusignan (family).
iesidence in Jerusalem a reason for the ultimate supremacy of the Lotharingian kings.
Jerusalem attracted the flow of pilgrims from the West as Antioch never could; and though the great majority of the pilgrims were only birds of passage, there were always many who stayed in the East.
While Jerusalem possessed these advantages, Antioch was not without its defects.
In 1100, indeed, it might appear that a new Crusade from the West, which the capture of Antioch in 1098 had begun, and the conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 had finally set in motion, was destined to achieve great things for the nascent kingdom.
Thousands had joined this new Crusade, which should deal the final blow to Mahommedanism: among the rest came the first of the troubadours, William IX., Count of Poitiers, to gather copy for his muse, and even some, like Stephen of Blois and Hugh of Vermandois, who had joined the First Crusade, but had failed to reach Jerusalem.
But the Genoese, who had helped with provisions and siege-tackle in the capture of Antioch and of Jerusalem, had both a stronger claim on the crusaders, and a greater interest in acquiring an eastern emporium.
At a later date, in the reign of Baldwin II., Venice also gave her aid to the kings of Jerusalem.
A Venetian fleet of 1 20 sail came in 1123, and after aiding in the repulse of an attack, which the Egyptians had taken advantage of Baldwin II.'s captivity to deliver, they helped the regent Eustace to capture Tyre (1124), in return for considerable privileges - freedom from toils throughout the kingdom, a quarter in Jerusalem, baths and ovens in Acre, and in Tyre onethird of the city and its suburbs, with their own court of justice and their own church.
To the east of the Dead Sea, again, lay a second strip of territory, in which the great fortress was Krak (Kerak) of the Desert, planted somewhere about 1140 by the royal butler, Paganus, in the reign of Fulk of Jerusalem.
Thus, it would appear, the whole of the expansion of the Latin kingdom (which may be said to have attained its height in 1131, at the death of Baldwin II.) may be shown to have been dictated, at any rate in large part, by economic motives; and thus, too, it would seem that two of the most powerful motives which sway the mind of man - the religious motive and the desire for gain - conspired to elevate the kingdom of Jerusalem (at once the country of Christ, and a natural centre of trade) to a position of supremacy in Latin Syria.
himself, was a natural fief of Jerusalem.
The county of Tripoli, the second of these principalities, had also come under the aegis of Jerusalem at an early date.
of Jerusalem, until 1126, when Bohemund II.
From his reign therefore Antioch may be regarded as a dependency of Jerusalem; and thus the end of Baldwin's reign (1131) may be said to mark the time when the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem stands complete, with its own boundaries stretching from Beirut in the north to el-Arish and Aila in the south, and with the three Frankish powers of the north admitting its suzerainty.
The plan of conquering Egypt had indeed presented itself to the Franks from the first, as it continued to attract them to the end; and it is significant that Godfrey himself, in 1100, promised Jerusalem to the patriarch, "as soon as he should have conquered some other great city, and especially Cairo."
But the real menace to the Latin kingdom lay in northern Syria; and here a power was eventually destined to rise, which outstripped the kings of Jerusalem in the race for Cairo, and then - with the northern and southern boundaries of Jerusalem in its control - was able to crush the kingdom as it were between the two arms of a vice.
The constant pressure of Tancred of Antioch and Baldwin de Burgh of Edessa led to a series of retaliations between 11 io and 1115; Edessa was attacked in 1110, 1111, 1112 and 1114; and in 1113 Maudud of Mosul had even penetrated as far as the vicinity of Acre and Jerusalem.
In the beginning of the reign of Fulk of Jerusalem (1131-1143) the progress of Zengi was steady.
If Fulk had been left alone to wage the struggle against Zengi, and if Zengi had enjoyed a clear field against the Franks, the fall of the kingdom of Jerusalem might have come far sooner than it did.
Lying between Mosul and Jerusalem, and important both strategically 1 Ilghazi died in 1122.
4 Stevenson, however, believes that Zengi was not animated by the idea of recovering Jerusalem.
The natural ally was Jerusalem.
The alliance of the emperors of Constantinople was of far more dubious value to the kings of Jerusalem.
The people of Antioch refused to submit; a projected visit to Jerusalem, during which John was to unite with Fulk in a great alliance against the Moslem, fell through; and in the spring of 1143 the emperor died in Cilicia, with nothing accomplished.
On the whole, the interference of the Comneni, if it checked Zengi for the moment in 1138, may be said to have ultimately weakened and distracted the Franks, and to have helped to cause the loss of Edessa (1144), which marks the turning-point in the history of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
The first question which arises is that of the relation of the kingdom of Jerusalem to the three counties or principalities of Antioch, Tripoli and Edessa, which acknowledged their dependence upon it.
The rights of the king of Jerusalem chiefly appear when there is a vacancy or a minority in one of the principalities, or when there is dissension either inside one of the principalities or between two of the princes.
On the death of one of the princes without heirs of full age, the kings of Jerusalem were entitled to act as regents, as Baldwin II.
The relation of the king to his own barons within his immediate kingdom of Jerusalem is not unlike the relation of the king to the three princes.
In Norman England the king insisted on his rights; in Frankish Jerusalem the barons insisted on his duties.
As the crusaders advanced to Jerusalem, says Raymund of Agiles (c. xxxiii.), it was their rule that the first-corner had the right to each castle or town, provided that he hoisted his standard and planted a garrison there.
The predominance of the nobility in this way became as characteristic of feudalism in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem as the supremacy of the crown was of contemporary feudalism in England; and that predominance expressed itself in the position and powers of the high court, in which the ultimate sovereignty resided.
The kingdom of Jerusalem consisted of a society of peers, in which the king might be Primus, but in which he was none the less subject to a punctilious law, regulating his position equally with that of every member of the society.
Two great central courts sat in Jerusalem to do justice - the high court of the nobles, and the court of burgesses for the rest of the Franks.
(2) The court of 1 There are certain connexions and analogies between the kingdom of Sicily and that of Jerusalem during the twelfth century.
For the history of the orders see the articles on the Templars; ST John Of Jerusalem, Knights Of; Knights, and the Teutonic Order.
The Templars were founded about the year 1118 by a Burgundian knight, Hugh de Paganis; the Hospitallers sprang from a foundation in Jerusalem erected by merchants of Amalfi before the First Crusade, and were reorganized under Gerard le Puy, master until 1120.
These laws (progressively modified, it is admitted) were kept in Jerusalem, under the name of "Letters of the Sepulchre," until 1187.
In the 13th century it became necessary for the legists to codify, as it were, the unwritten law, because the upheavals of the times necessitated the fixing of some rules in writing, and especially because it was necessary to oppose a definite custom of the kingdom to Frederick II., who sought, as king of Jerusalem, to take advantage of the want of a written law, to substitute his own conceptions of law in the teeth of the high court.
The text of Ibelin became a textus receptus - but it also became overlaid by glosses, for it was used as authoritative in the kingdom of Cyprus after the loss of the kingdom of Jerusalem, and it needed expounding.
The date of the redaction (which was probably made by some learned burgess) may well have been the reign of Baldwin III., as Kugler suggests: he was the first native king, and a king learned in the law; but Beugnot would refer the assizes to the years immediately preceding Saladin's capture of Jerusalem.
The independent position of the burgesses, who thus assumed a position of equality by the side of the feudal class, is one of the peculiarities of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
There were some thirty-seven cours de bourgeoisie (several of the fiefs having more than one), each of which was under the presidency of a vicomte, while all were independent of the court of burgesses at Jerusalem.
in the status of the arrierevassaux, which made them members of the high court, allowed them to carry their cases to Jerusalem in the first instance, if they desired.
Perhaps the supreme defect of the kingdom of Jerusalem was its want of any financial basis.
The assizes may speak of patriarch and king as conjoint seigneurs in Jerusalem; but as a matter of fact the king could secure the nomination of his own patriarch, and after Dagobert the patriarchs are, with the temporary exception of Stephen in 1128, the confidants and supporters of the kings.
The hardships of war and the excesses of peace shortened the lives of the men; the kingdom of Jerusalem had eleven kings within a century.
There was hardly any regular succession to the throne; and Jerusalem, as Stubbs writes, "suffered from the weakness of hereditary right and the jealousies of the elective system" at one and the same time.
The History of the Kingdom and the Crusades from the Loss of Edessa in 1144 to the Fall of Jerusalem in 1187.
To the crusading king of I The manorial system in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem was a continuation of the village system as it had existed under the Arabs.
2 Among the great army of crusaders who actually marched to Jerusalem there was little real unity.
Crusades appear to have been dignified by numbers when they followed some crushing disaster - the loss of Edessa in 1144, or the fall of Jerusalem in 1187 - and were led by kings and emperors; or when, like the Fourth and Fifth Crusades, they achieved some conspicuous success or failure.
For the next twenty years, during the reigns of Baldwin and his brother Amalric I., there is indeed a close connexion between the kingdom of Jerusalem and the East Roman empire.
3 The patronage of Constantinople, to which Jerusalem was thus practically surrendered, contributed to some slight extent in maintaining the kingdom against Nureddin.
But nevertheless the kingdom of Jerusalem continued almost unmenaced, and practically undiminished, for the next sixteen years.
Repeated appeals had been sent to the West from the beginning of the Egyptian affair (1163) onwards; while in 1184-1185 a great mission, on which the patriarch of Jerusalem and the masters of the Templars and the Hospitallers were all present, came to France and England, and offered the crown of Jerusalem to Philip Augustus and Henry II.
2 Henry II., as an Angevin, was the natural heir of the kingdom of Jerusalem on the extinction of the line descended from Fulk of Anjou.
3 The taxation levied in the West was also attempted in the East, and in 1183 a universal tax was levied in the kingdom of Jerusalem, at the rate of 1% on movables and 2% on rents and revenues.
The Crusade was now at last answered by the counter-Crusade - the jihad; for though for many years past Saladin had, in his attempt to acquire all the inheritance of Nureddin, left Palestine unmenaced and intact, his ultimate aim was always the holy war and the recovery of Jerusalem.
At Tiberias a little squadron of the brethren of the two Orders went down before Saladin's cavalry in May; at Hattin the levy masse of the kingdom, some 20,000 strong, foolishly marching over a sandy plain under the heat of a July sun, was utterly defeated; and after a fortnight's siege Jerusalem capitulated (October 2nd, 1187).
The fingers of the clock had been pushed back; once more things were as they had been at the time of the First Crusade; once more the West must arm itself for the holy war and the recovery of Jerusalem - but now it must face a united Mahommedan world, where in 1096 it had found political and religious dissension, and it must attempt its vastly heavier task without the morning freshness of a new religious impulse, and with something of the weariness of a hundred years of struggle upon its shoulders.
Europe had sinned in the face of God; otherwise Jerusalem would never have fallen; and the idea of a spiritual reform from within, as the necessary corollary and accompaniment of the expedition of Christianity without, breathes in some of the papal letters, just as, during the conciliar movement, the causa reformationis was blended with the causa unionis.
The army which was besieging Acre was soon joined by various contingents; for Acre, after all, was the vital point, and its capture would open the way to Jerusalem.
In any case, he is the founder of the Latin kingdom of Cyprus (for he afterwards sold his new acquisition to Guy de Lusignan, who established a dynasty in the island); and thereby he made possible the survival of the institutions and assizes of Jerusalem, which were continued in Cyprus until it was conquered by the Ottoman Turks.
Nothing is more striking in these respects than Richard's proposal that Saladin's brother should marry his own sister Johanna and receive Jerusalem and the contiguous towns on the coast.
Meanwhile Conrad of Montferrat, at the very instant when his superior ability had finally forced Richard to recognize him as king, had been assassinated (April 1192): Guy de Lusignan had bought Cyprus from Richard, and had sailed away to establish himself there; I and Henry of Champagne, Richard's nephew, had been called to the throne of Jerusalem, and had given himself a title by marrying Conrad's widow, Isabella.
On the 1 The Crusades in their course established a number of new states or kingdoms. The First Crusade established the kingdom of Jerusalem (I too); the Third, the kingdom of Cyprus (1195); the Fourth, the Latin empire of Constantinople (1204); while the long Crusade of the Teutonic knights on the coast of the Baltic led to the rise of a new state east of the Vistula.
The history of the kingdom of Jerusalem is part of the history of the Crusades: the history of the other kingdoms or states touches the history of the Crusades less vitally.
In the second place, as the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem fell, its institutions and assizes were transplanted bodily to Cyprus, where they survived until the island was conquered by the Ottoman Turks.
But the monarchy was stronger in Cyprus than in Jerusalem: the fiefs were distributed by the monarch, and were smaller in extent; while the feudatories had neither the collective powers of the haute cour of Jerusalem, nor the individual privileges (such as jurisdiction over the bourgeoisie), which had been enjoyed by the feudatories of the old kingdom.
Till 1489 the kingdom of Cyprus survived as an independent monarchy, and its capital, Famagusta, was an important centre of trade after the loss of the coast-towns in the kingdom of Jerusalem.
2 The kingdom of Jerusalem is thus from 1192 to its final fall a strip of coast, to which it is the object of kings and crusaders to annex Jerusalem and a line of communication connecting it with the coast.
Some results were, however, achieved by a body of German crusaders which had sailed in advance of Henry; by its influence Amalric of Cyprus succeeded Henry of Champagne, who died in 1197, as king of Jerusalem, and a vassal of the emperor thus became ruler in the Holy Land; while the Teutonic order, which had begun as a hospital during the siege of Acre (1190-1191), now received its organization.
had been advised by his counsellors that Cairo and not Jerusalem was the true point of attack; while in 1200 there was the additional reason for preferring an attack on Egypt, that the truce in the Holy Land between Amalric II.
It owed its origin to his feverish zeal for the recovery of Jerusalem, rather than to any pressing need in the Holy Land.
Here there reigned, during the forty years of the loss of Jerusalem, an almost unbroken peace.
While the Holy Land was thus at peace, crusaders were also being drawn elsewhere by the needs of the Latin empire of Constantinople, or the attractions of the Albigensian Crusade.2 But Innocent could never consent to forget Jerusalem, as long as his right hand retained its cunning.
The original leader of the Crusade was John of Brienne, king of Jerusalem (who had succeeded Amalric II., marrying Maria, the daughter of Amalric's wife Isabella by her former husband, Conrad of Montferrat); but after the end of 1218 the cardinal legate Pelagius, fortified by papal letters, claimed the command.
Here the sultan reiterated terms which he had already offered several times before - the cession of most of the kingdom of Jerusalem, the surrender of the cross (captured by Saladin in 1187), and the restoration of all prisoners.
talked amicably with all unbelievers, if one may trust Arabic accounts, and he achieved by mere negotiation the recovery of Jerusalem, for which men had vainly striven with the sword for the forty years since 1187.
had attempted to bind him more intimately to the Holy Land by arranging a marriage with Isabella, the daughter of John of Brienne, and the heiress of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
It was thus as king of Jerusalem that Frederick began his Crusade in the autumn of 1227.
By the treaty of the 18th of February 1229, which was to last for ten years, the sultan conceded to Frederick, in addition to the coast towns already in the possession of the Christians, Nazareth, Bethlehem and Jerusalem, with a strip of territory connecting Jerusalem with the port of Acre.
As king of Jerusalem Frederick was now able 1 Joinville, ch.
By his treaty with the sultan he had secured for Christianity the last fifteen years of its possession of Jerusalem (1229-1244): no man since Frederick II.
It was indeed in the spirit of a king of Sicily, and not in the spirit - though it was in the role - of a king of Jerusalem, that Frederick had acted.
Forty years of struggle ended in fifteen years' possession of Jerusalem.
During those fifteen years the kingdom of Jerusalem was agitated by a struggle between the native barons, championing the principle that sovereignty resided in the collective baronage, and taking their stand on the assizes, and Frederick II., claiming sovereignty for himself, and opposing to the assizes the feudal law of Sicily.
John of Beirut, like many of the Cypriot barons, was also a baron of the kingdom of Jerusalem; and resistance in the one kingdom could only produce difficulties in the other.
The opposition was successful: by 1233 Frederick had lost all hold on Cyprus, and only retained Tyre in his own kingdom of Jerusalem.
Till 1243 the party of Frederick had been successful in retaining Tyre, and the baronial demand for a regency had remained without effect; but in that year the opposition, headed by the great family of Ibelin, succeeded, under cover of asserting the rights of Alice of Cyprus to the regency, in securing possession of Tyre, and the kingdom of Jerusalem thus fell back into the power of the baronage.
The very next year (1244) Jerusalem was finally and for ever lost.
Theobald of Champagne had taken the cross as early as 1230, and 1239 he sailed to Acre in spite of the express prohibition of the pope, who, having quarrelled with Frederick II., was eager to divert any succour from Jerusalem itself, so long as Jerusalem belonged to his enemy.
It was, however, by their own folly that the Franks lost Jerusalem in 1244.
Jerusalem, which had already been plundered and destroyed earlier in the year by Chorasmians (Khwarizmians), was the prize of victory, and Ascalon also fell in 1247.
- As the loss of Jerusalem in 1187 produced the Third Crusade, so its loss in 1244 produced the Seventh: as the preaching of the Fifth Crusade had taken place in the Lateran council of 1215, so that of the Seventh Crusade began in the council of Lyons of 1245.
It was at the end of the year in which Jerusalem had fallen that St Louis had taken the cross, and by all the means in his power he attempted to ensure the success of his projected Crusade.
For the next four years he stayed in the Holy Land, seeking to do what he could for the establishing of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
The final collapse of the kingdom of Jerusalem had been really determined by the battle of Gaza in 124 4, and by the deposition of the Ayyubite dynasty by the Mamelukes.
The kingdom of Jerusalem, as we have seen, had profited by the alliance of Damascus as early as 1130, when the fear of the atabegs of Mosul had first drawn the two together; and when Damascus had been acquired by the rule of Mosul, the hostility between the house of Nureddin in Damascus and Saladin in Egypt had still for a time preserved the kingdom (from 1171 onwards).
This last fact in particular caused western Europe to dream of an alliance with the great khan "Prester John," who should aid in the reconquest of Jerusalem and the final conversion to Christianity of the whole continent of Asia.
About 1220 James of Vitry was already hoping that 4000 knights would, with the assistance of the Mongols, recover Jerusalem; but it is in 1245 that the first definite sign of an alliance with the Mongols appears.
While these things were taking place around them, the Christians of the kingdom of Jerusalem only hastened their own fall by internal dissensions which repeated the history of the period preceding 1187.
On the other hand, like Frederick II., he aimed at uniting the kingdom of Jerusalem with that of Sicily; and here, too, he was able to provide himself with a title.
On the death of Conradin, Hugh of Cyprus had been recognized in the East as king of Jerusalem (1269); but his pretensions were opposed by Mary of Antioch, a granddaughter of Amalric II., who was prepared to bequeath her claims to Charles of Anjou, and was therefore naturally supported by him.
St Louis had barely landed in Tunis when he sickened and died, murmuring "Jerusalem, Jerusalem" (August 1270); but Charles, who appeared immediately after his brother's death, was able to conduct the Crusade to a successful conclusion.
This was the last serious attempt at a Crusade on behalf of the dying kingdom of Jerusalem which was made in the West; and its collapse was quickly followed by the final extinction of the kingdom.
Thus the kingdom of Jerusalem came to an end.
Peter founded the order of the Sword for the delivery of Jerusalem; and instigated by his chancellor, P. de Mezieres (one of the last of VII.
An army of cosmopolitan adventurers, led by the Cardinal Caesarini, joined the 1 The dream of a Crusade to Jerusalem survived de Mezieres; a society which read "romaunts" of the Crusades, could not but dream the dream.