What is Beneath the Temple Mount?
As Israeli archaeologists recover artifacts from the religious site, ancient history inflames modern-day political tensions
- By Joshua Hammer
- Photographs by Polaris
- Smithsonian magazine, April 2011, Subscribe
My stint as an amateur archaeologist began one morning on the southern slope of Mount Scopus, a hill on the northern outskirts of Jerusalem. Inside a large hothouse covered in plastic sheets and marked “Temple Mount Salvage Operation,” a woman from Boston named Frankie Snyder—a volunteer turned staffer—led me to three rows of black plastic buckets, each half-filled with stones and pebbles, then pointed out a dozen wood-framed screens mounted on plastic stands. My job, she said, was to dump each bucket onto a screen, rinse off any soil with water from a garden hose, then pluck out anything of potential importance.
It wasn’t as easy as it sounded. A chunk of what looked like conglomerate rock turned out to be plaster used to line cisterns during the time of Herod the Great, some 2,000 years ago. When I tossed aside a shard of green glass I thought was from a soft-drink bottle, Snyder snatched it up. “Notice the bubbles,” she told me, holding it up to the light. “That indicates it’s ancient glass, because during that time, oven temperatures didn’t reach as high as they do now.”
Gradually, I got the hang of it. I spotted the handle of an ancient piece of pottery, complete with an indentation for thumb support. I retrieved a rough-edged coin minted more than 1,500 years ago and bearing the profile of a Byzantine emperor. I also found a shard of glass from what could only have been a Heineken bottle—a reminder that the Temple Mount has also been the scene of less historic activities.
The odds and ends I was gathering are the fruits of one of Israel’s most intriguing archaeological undertakings: a grain-by-grain analysis of debris trucked out of the Temple Mount, the magnificent edifice that has served the faithful as a symbol of God’s glory for 3,000 years and remains the crossroads of the three great monotheistic religions.
Jewish tradition holds that it is the site where God gathered the dust to create Adam and where Abraham nearly sacrificed his son Isaac to prove his faith. King Solomon, according to the Bible, built the First Temple of the Jews on this mountaintop circa 1000 B.C., only to have it torn down 400 years later by troops commanded by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, who sent many Jews into exile. In the first century B.C., Herod expanded and refurbished a Second Temple built by Jews who had returned after their banishment. It is here that, according to the Gospel of John, Jesus Christ lashed out against the money changers (and was later crucified a few hundred yards away). The Roman general Titus exacted revenge against Jewish rebels, sacking and burning the Temple in A.D. 70.
Among Muslims, the Temple Mount is called Haram al-Sharif (the Noble Sanctuary). They believe it was here that the Prophet Muhammad ascended to the “Divine Presence” on the back of a winged horse—the Miraculous Night Journey, commemorated by one of Islam’s architectural triumphs, the Dome of the Rock shrine. A territorial prize occupied or conquered by a long succession of peoples—including Jebusites, Israelites, Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Byzantines, early Muslims, Crusaders, Mamluks, Ottomans and the British—the Temple Mount has seen more momentous historical events than perhaps any other 35 acres in the world. Nonetheless, archaeologists have had little opportunity to search for physical evidence to sort legend from reality. For one thing, the site remains a place of active worship. The authority that controls the compound, an Islamic council called the Waqf, has long forbidden archaeological excavations, which it views as desecration. Except for some clandestine surveys of caves, cisterns and tunnels undertaken by European adventurers in the late 19th century—and some minor archaeological work conducted by the British from 1938 to 1942, when the Al-Aqsa Mosque was undergoing renovation—the layers of history beneath the Temple Mount have remained tantalizingly out of reach.
Thus the significance of those plastic buckets of debris I saw on Mount Scopus.
Today the Temple Mount, a walled compound within the Old City of Jerusalem, is the site of two magnificent structures: the Dome of the Rock to the north and the Al-Aqsa Mosque to the south. In the southwest stands the Western Wall—a remnant of the Second Temple and the holiest site in Judaism. Some 300 feet from the Al-Aqsa Mosque, in the southeast corner of the compound, a wide plaza leads to underground vaulted archways that have been known for centuries as Solomon’s Stables—probably because the Templars, an order of knights, are said to have kept their horses there when the Crusaders occupied Jerusalem. In 1996, the Waqf converted the area into a prayer hall, adding floor tiles and electric lighting. The Muslim authorities claimed the new site—named the El-Marwani Mosque—was needed to accommodate additional worshipers during Ramadan and on rain days that prevented the faithful from gathering in the open courtyard of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
Single Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (37)
+ View All Comments
I have not ever been to the "Holy" lands and it is clear that most all of monotheistic civilization holds Jerusalem as sacred ground. Would not the United Nations be better situated if it relocated to Jerusalem? New York is but sacred to the press and media. To referee a fight is it not better to be in the "ring"?
Posted by Talisman_real on October 25,2012 | 05:42 PM
The article gives a very good explaination of the subject, but some posters miss the point. Whether there is evidence of first temple period or not doesn't change the fact that there is a large amount of evidence proving that artifacts found and other evidence do correlate with the second temple period and as the article documents corelates with other sites of that period of Herodian origin.
For example, the Herodian stones that make up the foundations of the Western and Southern supporting walls do match in style and size other Herodian building projects such as those that surround the "Cave of the Patriarchs" in Hebron. The Eastern part of the "foundation" seems more ancient, smaller and older stones of colored pink and white stones (possibly marble) were used and fits Josephus' description of how Herod extended the size of the temple mount to the south (with Herodion stones). The previous structure was smaller (possibly dating from the time of Ezra) and may well have been reused from the ruins of the first temple. Therefore, regardless of where the first temple might have been, what is more important is where the second temple was situated and much evidence has already been found (besides what I mention) to support that the temple mount was the site of the second temple. This includes a stone that contained a warning in Greek for non Jews not to enter the temple mount, to writings in Hebrew on stones declaring "the place of trumpeting" (possibly the ancestor to Christian Church bells and the Moslem call to prayer).
Posted by Steven on March 30,2012 | 11:35 AM
The Temple was destroyed in AD 70 when the general Titus and Roman soldiers entered into Jerusalem and completely destroyed it. They rode their horses inside the Temple and threw lit torches into the buildings and rooms and the lime pitch of the walls melted.
All was destroyed except for what we now call the wailing wall.
"And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to ashew him the buildings of the temple.
"And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
Many priests, high priest, and members of the Sanhedrin were killed. Some of these men were the very ones that put Jesus on the cross less than 40 years earlier.
Posted by Lucille on March 30,2012 | 06:54 AM
Muslim supersessionists claim every important historic site in every country they conquered as a Muslim “shrine” of some sort (Hagia Sophia; the Temple of Rama in Ayodhya; the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron and countless other religious sites). And the pliant – and supine – Europeans and Americans are always eager to “Accommodate”. It is time to correct the error of Dayan in 1967 when he allowed the Muslim “waqf” to keep control of the Temple Mount to maintain peace - and to thus perpetuate Muslim fantasies about its origin and ownership.
When secular Israelis have full control of the Mount, they should open it up for exploration, at which time it will immediately become the world’s most important archeological site.
Posted by yahudie on March 29,2012 | 02:55 AM
When Yeshu'a returns; the place should be cleaned up pretty well.
Posted by benjamin on March 29,2012 | 02:10 AM
I visited the Temple Mount in 2003 and 2004 and was shocked to discover the excavating that was going on, and the piles of rubble that contained smashed artifacts on the east side of the Mount. I used a small digital camera and took many pictures of the smashed items. At one one point, I was acosted by Muslim men who accused me of praying (which is forbidden to non-Muslims on the Mount), which I was not doing at the time. They asked why I was by the rubble and I told them that I was curious about what it was, whereupon they told me I was not allowed in that area and should leave immediately. I moved to the other side of the rubble and continued taking pictures.
I also took pictures of the outploding of the south retaining wall, demonstrating that the Muslim construction on the Mount was causing an obvious and dangerous "bulge" that could lead to the Mount collapsing southward. (It is my understanding that Jordanian engineers were subsequently summoned, reviewed the situation, agreed that the excavations and construction by the Waqf was causing this, and succeeded in stopping it. Evidently, there was no way the Waqf would listen to Israeli engineers, even Israeli Arab engineers, who had previously warned about the dangers of the excavation on one hand the the expansion of the existing buildings on the Mount on the other.)
For the record, I offered these photos to the NY Times, MSNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, FoxNews and others, but there were not takers. One respondent told me "off the record, what you're offering is simply to 'hot' for anyone to go with..."
Although the article mentions some Brit doing work on the Mount between 1938-42, prior to that there was a British explorer/archeologist in the 1920s who excavated on the Mount during the day. At night, the Muslims filled it back in, and eventually threatened to kill him if he did not leave. He decided that life was worth living, and moved on to other tasks.
Posted by Nathan Salant on March 29,2012 | 01:14 AM
As mentioned by Bob Ramar, the temple and its foundations were destroyed, as predicted by Christ. According to the Bible, it was located in the City of David, above the Gihon Spring (in the "midst" of Jerusalem, according to the Bible and other eye witness accounts). According to the most detailed eye witness (Josephus), the temple plaza was 600 feet by 600 feet, which are not the dimensions of the Haram. According to Josephus, the foundations began in the foot of the Kidron Valley, which is not true of the Haram. According to Josephus, both the north and south corners of the temple stood out over the Kidron Valley, which is not true of the Haram. According to Josephus, the height of the foundations was 300 cubits, which is not true of the Haram. Instead, the Haram fits the dimensions of a typical Roman camp (like Fort Antonia)and was, in fact, given to Antony by Herod. Josephus equates it to a city (like a typical Roman camp), which actually dominated the temple. For this reason and for the reason of housing the 10th legion, it was not destroyed and does not nullify the prophecy of Christ. Josephus says it was connected to the temple by two 600 foot road passages, which fact never indicated in current illustrations. If archaelogists would stick with the eye witness accounts and stop working with the assumption that the Haram is the Temple Mount, a host of questions would be answered. Please consult Dr. Ernest Martin's book "The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot" for the multitude of proofs which corroborate what Josephus so clearly described.
Posted by Researcher on August 31,2011 | 03:02 PM
The question that is put in the title has been left unanswered. This is not the author's fault but a sad political reality.
The Temple Mount contimues to hide its various secrets which belong to different traditions. The archeological dig on the site could be beneficial but since it is impossible, the Waqf has no right to violate history. Including Muslim history.
The Temple Mount Sifting project is a salvaging operation and the only one that can be done under the circumstances. One may criticise it as much as he wants but you can't deny the hard evidence. What we need now is a regular exposure of the finds and an academic argument about how to solve this puzzle.
Posted by Michael Baizerman on July 23,2011 | 12:36 PM
Solomon and Herod's temples were located about 1/4 mile south of the southern wall of the Haram. They were built over the Gihon Spring, which exists today. Find the Gihon and you have the location of both temples. In the history of the Jewish War by Josephus, the author states that the Roman soldiers dismantled the temple foundation down to bedrock looking for gold and silver. The furnishings in the temple melting during the fire that destroyed the temple complex and ran through cracks in the pavement stones into the rubble that filled the foundation. Jesus himself stated that "no stone would be left on top of another" when viewing the temple complex shortly before his arrest. The Haram is actually the remnants of the Antonia Fortress.
Posted by Bob Ramar on March 28,2011 | 07:30 AM
Bob, you're a funny man: did the Romans do this dismantling "to bedrock" (like you were there taking videos of it back then and can prove that lie)looking for gold in ONE DAY??? Bwahahaha maybe they brought their Roman Ditchwitches to excavate? I wonder if you realize how ludicrous you really are. The "Treasure of Solomon" was found, where Hezekiah, an AMUN PRIEST of Akhenation's reign, hid them....and said so in the Jewish book called the "Mishnayot": see Emeq Ha Melekh. He hid it in Tut's tomb, from Nebuchadresser...aka AKHENATON.
"Solomon's temple" is at Luxor, were Amenhotep III's temple building buddy from Tyre put it: Horem Heb.
Have a nice day.
Posted by farang on May 13,2011 | 11:06 PM
"I once had a archaeology professor tell me that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." grg1967
Except the abundance of evidence pointing to 8th century B.C. usurpation of Egyptian royalty history as "Israels" shouts otherwise. Compared to NO evidence to the contrary that there simply was no "great kingdom" of Solomon, none, zilch, zero. None.
We all know the lies, give it up already.
Posted by farang on May 13,2011 | 10:57 PM
I have a authentic pottery fragment incased in hard clear plastic that says authentic pottery fragment first temple period excavated in tel amal israel museum,jerusalem...I want to know if its something of value or something someone bought at the museum as a souvenier please advise as to what this item I have might be...ithank you
Posted by nic on May 7,2011 | 11:52 AM
When I first arrived in Jerusalem in 1965 I stayed at the Franciscan Monastery, which was then a youth hostel with a window facing the golden dome Mosque.There were only two residents in the youth hostel at the time, the son of a wealthy Swedish Jew and I.Every time we wanted to go from the dormitory to the entranceway we had to crawl down on our hands and knees. A few weeks earlier a Jordanian guard (the guardhouse was 10 meters from the window) had taken potshots into the youth hostel. When the Pope visited Jerusalem in the mid 60s, the Israelis had paved a road for the occasion. The road was later used to gain Jerusalem in the 1967 war, according to news reports. Regarding shards in Jerusalem, the paving stones were so hard they tore holes in the soles of my shoes in the Mea Shaarim district. Mr. Sol Biderman
Posted by Sol Biderman on May 1,2011 | 08:10 PM
Judith,
You might be correct about the origin of the name Palestine, but it doesn't really matter what they were called. The fact is there were Muslims in that area, and they were in the majority before the Jews started arriving in increasing numbers in the late 19th century. The Al-Aqsa Mosque built there more than 1300 years ago is a testament of the significant amount of Muslim history and occupation of the region. So while you try to marginalize their current name, you can't marginalize what's really important.
Just like the Muslims can't minimize the Jewish claim to the land. What has to be done is what every one refuses, learn a little respect for each other, and get over it.
Posted by Tobin on April 29,2011 | 09:49 PM
*sigh*. Is any one else like me? Sick and tired of fanatics of all stripes wanting to start WW III over this tiny piece of real estate? I really wish there was a way to ban all humans from that area until they can figure out a way to share it.
When you have two kids fighting over a toy, you take the toy away. We need to take the toy away.
Posted by Ron on April 29,2011 | 09:45 AM
+ View All Comments