The True Location of the Temple of Jerusalem

The greatest flaw of science is that human beings are involved in its pursuit. Whereas, the scientific method is perfectly capable of offering objective results that lead to provable, and replicable, conclusions; human beings have egos, reputations, and an overriding desire to be right. Thus, when new information is revealed that challenges the generally accepted orthodoxy of scientific belief (that's right--this too is a human belief system, if a generally more objective one), the scientists themselves line up and close ranks to drive out the heretics. Only after significant struggle can such "heretics" rise above this pettiness to prove themselves correct. It is for this reason that countless brilliant mathematicians and astronomers beat their heads against a wall for centuries trying to prove that Aristotle's geocentric universe was correct (that the Earth was the center of the universe), when, by simply abandoning ridiculous orthodoxy, Copernicus developed a heliocentric model (sun at the center of our star system) that was much more accurate (although science still had to improve upon it).

The Einsteins (Albert and his brilliant if forgotten first wife Mileva) had to fight for years to have their theory of relativity accepted by the physics community, although it was easily proven mathematically. Many a young and promising physicist has been driven from academia for proposing various renditions of a unified field theory. It is no surprise, then, that archaeologists hold certain beliefs that they do not allow to be challenged.

One such belief is the notion that the Temple of Jerusalem was once located atop one of Mt. Moriah's higher peaks where the Dome of the Rock stands today. Never mind the fact that it was impossible to bring water to that height until very recently, never mind that every single historical source or living witness offers an account that completely contradicts that location; and never mind that the biblical accounts hint that the Temple was located over a spring. It is an absolute fact that the Temple was located there and any other suggestion is ridiculous and unworthy of attention. Period. End of story. Whenever I hear these kinds of statements I find my mind curiously drawn to a time when Europeans were convinced that the world was flat and that it was the center of the universe. Challenging these ideas could lead a man to be tortured and killed in any number of gruesome ways. When I encounter this kind of opinion I tend to believe that the opinion is wrong until proven otherwise.

Yet, I too subscribed to this belief for many years. Of course the Temple was located there, why even argue with that fact? As I read and reread the works of Josephus something didn't add up. What is more, I began to deduce from the scriptures themselves that there was running water at the Temple and that its source was near or within its walls. I began to suspect that the orthodox opinion surrounding the Temple's location may be incorrect. I looked for alternatives to this opinion, very few of which exist and many are outlandish, when I came upon the works of the late Dr. Ernest Martin. In his book The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot, he outlines the case for a different location. When I first picked up the book I was skeptical, but as the evidence mounted I realized with a growing intensity that he was right. How could it be that every source that is over one thousand years old offers a different rendition of the Temple's location than today's readily accepted theory?

Whether it is the books of the Bible itself (Jewish and Christian), the accounts of the Romans Josephus and Hadrian, the accounts of the Christian historians Jerome and Barnabas, or the accounts contained in the Mishna written by the early Rabbis. The documents contained in the Cairo Geniza (a storage room in an Egyptian synagogue where old documents were placed to decay) also suggest a location different than that of the Dome of the Rock. One or two of these could be wrong or misinterpreted, but all of them? Would it surprise you to learn that Jews have been praying at the currently subscribed to location of the Western Wall (Kotel) for less than four hundred years?

I was surprised to learn these facts and as I read deeper into Dr. Martin's work I became convinced that his theory was, in fact, correct. I will lay out some of the evidence here in this article but only by reading his book can one fully contemplate the evidence. I have found that, unfortunately, his work and his theory are very dry and academic. Some of those I have discussed this theory with have been overwhelmed by the hundreds of minute details from the historical accounts of people they may never have heard of before. When Dr. Martin references Josephus, I know exactly what he is talking about. To those who have never heard of Josephus, or have heard his name only in passing, citing his work does not make for compelling evidence.

If I succeed only in opening your mind to the possibility then I have served YHVH's purpose. For a mind that is decided and closed to new possibilities is also "stiff necked" and unwilling to accept His righteous yoke. For in Devarim (Deuteronomy) 10:16, and repeated in several places later in the Tanakh (old testament), YHVH commands the Israelites not to be "a stiff-necked people," that is like an ox that refuses to wear the yoke and draw a cart or plow as he is commanded.

I will begin with an overview of Jerusalem's geography.

The City of David as it might have appeared in David's time.

The City of David is a ridge that runs from just south of Mt. Moriah in a semi-crescent shape. It is bordered to the east by the Kidron Valley and to the west by the Tyropean Valley (later known as the lower city); to the south it is bordered by the Hinnom Valley. The location of the City of David is not very contentious. Most scholars agree as to its location. The precise boundaries of the city are a matter of some debate. This map shows the layout of the City of David with the outline of the present "Old City" of Jerusalem.

Biblical Jerusalem is shown here as compared with today's Old City.

Note that almost nothing of today's Old City was within

Jerusalem during the Biblical period.

The Western City is located on a ridge across the Tyropean Valley to the west of the City of David. This is where Mt. Zion is now located. The Western City, Lower City, and City of David can also be referred to collectively a the Hasmonean City. The Hasmonean Dynasty began with the Maccabees and ended shortly before Herod the Great took power. The Hasmonean City extends north to a point just north of the Kotel (Western Wall) along Mt. Moriah; which I refer to interchangeably as the Haram es Sharrif, Baris (the Hasmonean name for it), or Fortress [of Antonia]. From there it extends south and westward to enclose the the Western City.

Now some background on the history of Jerusalem.

Antiquity to ~1000 BCE

The Jebusites, who occupied the city before David conquered it, naturally chose the city for its obvious strategic position. It is at high enough elevation that it is neither as hot nor as dry as the coastal plains. It is located on the center of a north/south trade route that ran through the central highlands of Canaan, and it is a natural fortress. The Spring of Gihon, the only spring within a five mile radius, provided an abundant supply of fresh water for the city (until 1077 CE). The ridge rises very steeply on three sides and is protected by a mountain peak to the north, one of Mt. Moriah's four peaks. The city also boasts not one but two acropoli (high places within a city): the Ophel to the north and Mt. Zion to the south (its original location). Solomon actually brought in fill to create a high place between these peaks to build his palace. Please refer to the map above.

The walls of the city provided ample defense against foreign armies that occasionally marauded through Canaan. The citizens of the surrounding regions could flee to the city for protection. As long as the city stockpiled food it was virtually impenetrable. David himself conquered the city by entering through a sewer.

~1000 BCE to 167 BCE

The crescent (or finger) shaped City of David is the city referred to in the Tanakh (Old Testament). There is debate about whether the third peak of Mt. Moriah (where the Dome of the Rock is located today) was located within the city, naturally the archaeological proponents of the Mt. Moriah temple mount connection would argue yes, but it does not seem reasonable for the Jebusites or David for that matter, to extend the walls around a mountain peak when their city was well defended from the north. What is more, it was impossible to bring water to this mountain peak except by hand (more on this in part 3) so it could not be easily inhabited.

167 BCE - 30 BCE

The City changed radically under the Maccabees and the Hasmonean Dynasty, more so than is commonly known. In his book The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot (available through the Amazon widget to the left) Dr. Ernest Martin, a renown Biblical archaeologist and scholar, details the changes made by the Maccabees. I will include a less detailed overview here.

The Seleucids, ruled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, were able to prevent the Maccabees from securing Jerusalem for several years because they held the fortress on Mt. Zion. Simon Maccabeus finally drove them from it in 167 BCE after Antiochus lost a campaign against Persia and died. Simon sought to prevent the same thing from happening again. He had Mt. Zion relocated to the west across the Tyropean Valley and extended the wall around the Western City and the Lower CIty (these may already have existed for sometime outside the walls). He also rebuilt the altar because it had been desecrated with pigs blood. The Temple was reconsecrated and sacrifices resumed. The Book of Daniel tells us that the sacrifices had been suspended for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11) and that they resumed after 1355 days (Daniel 12:12).

The Macabees also built a fortress on Mt. Moriah called the Baris. In the image below the internal schematic of the Haram es Sharrif (mistakenly called the Temple Mount) where the smaller rectangular form inside the Haram is the Hasmonean Fortress. Note that the foundation that is the suggested location of the Fortress of Antonia is placed to the north of the Haram, although no foundation for this fortress has ever been discovered.

The interior of the Fortress of Antonia or Haram esh-Sharrif (incorrectly identified as the Temple Mount).

30 BCE - 4 CE

When King Herod finally solidified his hold on the Judean throne he began a series of projects to improve Jerusalem. He expanded the Temple, and the Fortress on Mt. Moriah, which he renamed Antonia, and he added the New City (Bezetha) to the north of the Hasmonean City.

For more information please read The Location of the Temple part 2.