As per previous threads on BP regarding authenticity of the heritage and
built-environment as portrayed in Hollywood movies the suggestion is to
be aware of the authenticity of site when viewing images of an active
Calvary scene.
Mount Calvary
The place of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htm>.
*NAME*
*Etymology and Use*
The word Calvary (Lat. /Calvaria/) means "a skull". Calvaria and the Gr.
/Kranion/ are equivalents for the original /Golgotha/. The ingenious
conjecture that Golgotha may be a contraction for /Gol Goatha/ and may
accordingly have signified "mount of execution", and been related to
Goatha in Jer., xxi, 39, has found scarcely any supporters. The
diminutive /monticulus/ (little mount) was coupled with the name A.D.
333 by the "Pilgrim of Bordeaux".
Towards the beginning of the fifth century Rufinus spoke of "the rock of
Golgotha". Since the sixth century the usage has been to designate
Calvary as a mountain. The Gospel styles it merely a "place", (Matt.
xxvii, 33; Mark xv, 22; Luke, xxiii, 33; John, xix, 17).
*Origin of the Name*
The following theories have been advanced:
* Calvary may have been a place of public execution, and so named
from the skulls strewn over it. The victims were perhaps abandoned
to become a prey to birds and beasts, as Jezabel and Pharao's
baker had been (IV K., ix, 35; Gen., xl, 19, 22).
* Its name may have been derived from a cemetery that may have stood
near. There is no reason for believing that Joseph's tomb, in
which the body of Christ was laid, was an isolated one, especially
since it was located in the district later on described by
Josephus <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm> as
containing the monument of the high-priest John. This hypothesis
has the further advantage of explaining the thinness of the
population in this quarter at so late a period as that of the
siege of Jerusalem (Jos., Bell. jud., V, vi, 2). Moreover, each of
the rival Calvaries of to-day is near a group of ancient Jewish
tombs.
* The name may have been occasioned by the physical contour of the
place. St. Luke (loc. cit.) seems to this by saying it was the
place called "a skull" (/kranion/). Moreover, Golgotha (from a
Hebrew root meaning "to roll"), which borrows its signification
from the rounded or rolling form of the skull, might also have
been applied to a skull-shaped hillock.
* There was a tradition current among the Jews that the skull of
Adam, after having been confided by Noah to his son Shem, and by
the latter to Melchisedech, was finally deposited at the place
called, for that reason, Golgotha. The Talmudists and the Fathers
of the Church were aware of this tradition, and it survives in the
skulls and bones placed at the foot of the crucifix. The
Evangelists are not opposed to it, inasmuch as they speak of one
and not of many skulls. (Luke, Mark, John, loc. cit.)
The curious origins of many Biblical names, the twofold and sometimes
disagreeing explanations offered for them by the Sacred Writers (Gen.,
/passim/) should make us pause before accepting any of the above
theories as correct. Each of them has its weak points: The first seems
to be opposed to the Jewish law, which prescribed that the crucified
should be buried before sundown (Deut., xxi, 23). Josephus
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm> intimates that this
enactment was scrupulously observed (Bell. jud., IV, v, 2). The
executions cited in support of the opinion are too few, too remote, and
too isolated to have the force of proof. Moreover, in this supposition
Calvary wold have been called more correctly a place "of skulls" but the
Evangelists nowhere use the plural. In the first tow theories no
sufficient reason is assigned for selecting the skull in reference to
any other member of the body, or the corpse itself, as a name-giver. The
third theory is plausible and more popular. Yet it may not be urged a
priori, as indicating a requisite for a Calvary otherwise
unauthenticated. The Evangelists seem to have been more intent upon
giving an intelligible equivalent for the obscure name, Golgotha, than
upon vouching for its origin. The fourth theory has been characterized
as too absurd, though it has many serious adherents. It was not absurd
to the uncritical Jew. It would not seem absurd to untaught Christians
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm>. Yet it is among the
untaught that names arise spontaneously. Indeed Christians
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm> embellished the legend, as
we shall see.
*DESCRIPTIVE DATA*
*The New Testament*
The only explicit notices are that the Crucifixion took place outside
the city (Heb., xiii, 12), but close to it; a newly-hewn tomb stood in a
garden not far away (John, xix, 20, 41); the spot was probably near a
frequented road, thus permitting the passers-by to revile the supposed
criminal. That the Cyrenian was coming from the country when he was
forced into service seems to exclude only two of the roads entering
Jerusalem, the one leading from Bethlehem and the one from Siloe (Matt.,
xxvii, 30; Mark, xv, 24, 29; Luke, xxiii, 26). Any other road entering
Jerusalem might fulfil the condition. The incidents recorded along the
sorrowful journey are so few that the distance from the praetorium is
left a matter of conjecture.
*Early Medieval Narratives*
After the Apostolic Age no more is heard of Calvary until the fourth
century. Under pagan rule an idol had been place there, and had been
later embraced within the same enclosure as the crypt of the
Resurrection <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12789a.htm> (Sozomen,
Hist. Eccl., II, 1, 2). Eustachius, Constantine's architect, separated
it from the latter by hewing away a great mass of stone. It was St.
Melania the Younger who first adorned Mount Calvary with a chapel (436).
The place is described as a "knoll of scanty size" (/deficiens loci
tumor/ -- Eucherius, 427-440), apparently natural, and in the sixth
century approached by steps. It was fifteen paces from the Holy
Sepulchre. It was encircled with silver railings and contained a cell in
which the Cross was kept, and a great altar (Theodosius, 530). Two years
after the ravages of the Persians (614), a large church replaced the
ruined chapel (Arculfus, 680). From its roof a brazen wheel adorned with
lamps was suspended over a silver cross that stood in the socket of Our
Saviour's <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htm> gibbet. This
Church was destroyed in 1010, but was restored in 1048. The rock beneath
is spoken of by Soewulf (1102) as being "much cracked near the fosse of
the Cross". In the traditions, Adam's burial and Abraham's sacrifice are
repeatedly located there.
By 1149 the Calvary chapel had been united by the crusaders
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm> with the surrounding
oratories into a vast basilica. The part of the rock believed to have
held the Cross is said to have been removed and lost in a shipwreck on
the coast of Syria while being transported to Constantinople (1809).
Another fragment is shown in the chapel of Longinus, one of many in the
basilica.
*Contemporary Sources*
Wilson, Warren, Fraas, and other eminent topographers engaged in the
interests of the English Ordinance Survey (1864-5), declare that the
lower part of this traditional Calvary is natural, and that the upper
part "may very likely be so". The knoll is of soft white limestone
(nummulitic) containing nodules, and occupies a position normally
required for such a bed in Palestine, viz. above the Missae and Malaki
strata respectively. These last beds are seen on lower levels in the
basilica. The direction taken by the rent in the rock, 96 degrees east
of north, is practically the same as that of the veining of the rocks
roundabout. Other points of similarity have been observed. The fissure
broadens eastwards. The rock has been cut away on the side of the Holy
Sepulchre, thus bearing out the architectural datum afforded by the
period of Constantine. Calvary is 140 feet south- east of the Holy
Sepulchre and 13 feet above it. The early traditions mentioned at the
beginning of this article still cling to it. The chapel of Adam beneath
that of Calvary stands for the first. A picture in it represents the
raising of Adam to life by the Precious Blood trickling down upon his
skull. An altar is there dedicated to Melchisedech. A vestige of the
second tradition subsists in a scraggy olive tree a few yards away,
religiously guarded, which the Abyssinians still claim to have been the
bush in which the ram's horns were caught when the angel
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01476d.htm> stayed the hand of Abraham.
*Calvary Chapel*
The small, low, poorly lighted oratory, built upon the traditional
Calvary, is divided into two sections by a pair of massive pillars. The
chapel of the Exaltation of the Cross comprises the section on the north
and belongs to the Orthodox Greeks. That of the Crucifixion on the south
is in possession of the Latins. At the eastern end, behind a thickly-set
row of sanctuary lamps kept constantly burning, there are three altars
of the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth stations of the Way of the
Cross. That of the twelfth station is in the Greek chapel, and marks the
position of Our Saviour's <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htm>
Cross. It is near the rent made in the rock by the earthquake. Two black
marble discs at its sides indicate the presumed positions of the
malefactors' crosses. Behind it, among numerous icons, stands a large
painted image of the Crucified Saviour.
The altars of the Crucifixion and Mater Dolorosa (eleventh and
thirteenth stations) belong to the Latins. The image on the latter, or
middle, altar is screened, and incased with a profusion of votive
offerings. The floor of the chapel, which is on a level with the top of
the rock, is covered with coarse mosaics. A round stone in the pavement
on the Latin side, near the eleventh station, marks the place of the
tenth. In the roof, there is a mosaic representation of Christ. Entrance
to the chapel is obtained by the stairways. The two most frequently used
are at the west end. The eighteen steps in each stairway, which are
narrow, steep and much worn, are mostly of pink /Santa Croce/ marble
commonly quarried in Palestine.
*AUTHENTICITY*
It is beyond doubt that the Calvary we have been considering is the same
as that of the Middle Ages <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10285c.htm>,
but is it correct to identify it with that of the Gospels? It has long
been far within the city walls. But did the city wall which has enclosed
it for so many centuries enclose it when Christ was crucified? That is,
did the present city wall exist when the Saviour was put to death? If
so, this could not have been the place of the crucifixion; for Christ
was crucified outside the walls (Heb., xiii, 12), St. Willibald (eighth
century), Soewulf (twelfth century), and many others asked themselves
this question. But it was not until two centuries ago that an
affirmative answer was ventured by Korte, a German bookseller (see
below). Not, however, until the last century did the new opinion obtain
supporters. Then a school sprang up which first rejected the old side
and eventually set about seeking new ones. Catholics, as a class, with
many leading Anglicans <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01498a.htm>
support the traditional claims.
The authenticity of Calvary is intimately bound up with that of the Holy
Sepulchre. Relative to the authenticity of the sites of both, the
ecclesiastical writers who are the first to break silence after the
Evangelists seem to leave no room for doubt. Now it is not easy to see
how these, the chief representatives of an apologetical age, could have
overlooked the above difficulty advanced by modern writers, especially
since simple pilgrims are known to have advanced it. The spirit of
investigation had awakened in the Church long years previous to them;
and the accredited custodians of the tradition, the Jerusalem community,
had been ruled by a continuous succession of bishops since Apostolic
times. Under these circumstances, our first available witnesses tell us
that a remembrance of the site had actually been transmitted. As a
telling testimony to the confidence they merit herein, it need only be
remarked that of sixteen modern charts of the Holy City collated by
Zimmermann (Basle, 1876) only four place Golgotha within the second or
outermost wall in the time of Christ. Moreover, Dr. Schick, the author
of one of these, accepted the traditional view before his death. Dr.
Reiss, in his "Bibel-Atlas" (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1895), also agrees
with the majority. (See JERUSALEM; HOLY SEPULCHRE.)
*MODERN CALVARIES*
The most popular of several sites proposed is that of Otto Thenius
(1849), better known as Gordon's Calvary, and styled by the latter,
"Skull Hill", because of its shape. Conder is the chief supporter of
this view. This site is the elevation over Jeremiah's Grotto, not far
from the Damascus Gate. In default of an historic basis, and owing to
the insufficiency of the Gospel data -- which may be verified equally
well on any side of the city -- the upholders of the new theories
usually take for granted one or other of the following statements, viz:
that Christ should have been immolated north of the altar, like the
typical victims (Lev., i, 10, 11); that Calvary was a place of public
execution; that the place reserved for crucifixion, if there was one,
was identical with a presumed stoning-place; that a modern Jewish
tradition as to a fixed stoning-place could be substantiated in the time
of Christ; and that the violent mob to which Christ was delivered would
have conformed to whatever custom prescribed for the occasion. These
affirmations all bear the mark of fitness; but until documents are
produced to confirm them, they must inevitably fall short as proof of facts.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03191a.htm
--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
|
