In obedience to an angelic revelation, he returned to
Treves and rescued his father from his enemies,
but was soon obliged to seek the Holy Land to fight
for the Holy Sepulcher. At the command of an
angel, he left the Holy Coat at Treves. Another
version of this type of the legend makes the Emperor
Constantine take the place of Orendel, while the Jew
is represented by Pilate until Veronica reveals to
the emperor the means of gaining the Holy Coat.
In the second recension of the legend of the Holy
Coat, which gradually became the one officially
held at Treves, the knightly element is replaced by
clerical figures. To this cycle, which is probably
of later origin than the one described above and
apparently developed after the eleventh or twelfth
century, belongs the tradition that the Holy Coat
was brought to Treves by a Christian maiden who
had received it from a Jew in payment for a year's
wages. In another recension the Empress Helena sends or gives the Coat to Treves, and a bishop, Agricius, receives or transmits it. Yet as late as the beginning of the twelfth century Abbot Theofried of Echternach, when writing to Archbishop Bruno of Treves, though mentioning a Holy Coat, describes it as having been brought from Safed, in Palestine, to Jerusalem, where it had remained. After 1132, however, the Holy Coat of Treves was frequently mentioned as a genuine relic.
Besides Treves and Safed, other places are said to contain the Holy Coat, as Galathea, near Conatantinople, San Iago de Compostella, St. John Lateran at Rome, and a Franciscan monastery in Friuli. There are, indeed, no less than twenty rivals to the HolyCoatof Treves,the most formidable being that at Argenteuil, near Paris, which can boast in its favor a brief of Gregory XVI. (Aug. 22,1843). The Holy Coat of Treves is described as five feet one and one half inches long, and reddish brown in color, consisting, according to some, of fine linen, and according to others, of fine muslin. It was first made an object of public veneration and pilgrimage in 1512. It was then exhibited frequently, especially in 1515 (when Leo X. issued a bull defending its authenticity), 1531, 1545, etc., evoking the anger of Luther. It was again exhibited in the seventeenth century, particularly in 1653, but the French invasions of the eighteenth century forced it to be taken for a considerable time to Ehrenbreitstein and in 1792 to Augsburg, where it remained until 1810, when it was brought back to Treves and venerated by more than 200,000 pilgrims. In 1844 it was exhibitedby Bishop Arnoldi and venerated by 1,100,000, many miraculous cures being reported. Opposition to this led to the German Catholic movement of Ronge and Czerski (see GERMAN CATHolicIsM). Despite attacks on the authenticity of the relic, including more or less skepticism from Roman Catholics, Bishop Korum, with the sanction of Leo XIII., exhibited the Holy Coat in 1891, when it was venerated by nearly 2,000,000 pilgrims.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The two works in English are: E. A. Plater,
The Holy Coat of Treoea, London, 1891; and R. F. Clarke, Pilgrimaps to the Holy Coat of Treves, ib. 1892, In German, from the Catholic standpoint are: J. Marx, Geschichts do* heiligen Rocks, Treves, 1844; F. J. Clemens, Der heilige Rock and die protestantiache Kritik Coblens, 1845; A. J. Binterim ZoWnisae fur die Ech"t des heiligen Rocks, Doeseldorf, 1845; J. N. von Wilmovsky, Der heiIiQ6 Rock sins arcA9olopiache Prafung, Treves, 1878; C. Willems, Der Wigs Rock su Trier, ib. 1891; idem, Der Wigs Rock . . . and seine Gepner, ib. 1892; F. Korum, Wunder and gbttliche Gnadenerweise bei der Auaatellung des Wigen Rocks, ib. 1891; J. Hulley, Kurze GeackicAts der Walifahrt sum hsiligen Rock, ib. 1891. From the Protestant standpoint: J. Gildemeister and H. von Sybel, Der heilige Rock su Trier and die 80 anderen heiligen ungenahten Racks, Dilseeldorf, 1844; F. Jaskowski, Der Wigs Rock won Trier gerichtet von semen sigenen Freunden, &arbrileken, 1891; J. Risks, Der Trierer Rock, Hadereleben, 1891; T. Fbrster, Der heilige Rock son Trier im . . . 184,4 and 1891, Halle, 1891; 13. Benecke, Der Wigs Rock zu Trier im . . . 1891, Berlin, 1891; M. Lindner, Der heilige Rock vu Trier and die Wunderhsilungen, Leipsic, 1891; G. Kaufmann, Die Lends room heiligen ungenahten Rock und'das Verbot der .j Lateransynode, Berlin, 1892;
H. Kurtz, Trier and der heilige Rock, Zurich, 1892.
HOLY FAMILY, SISTERS or DAUGHTERS OF THE. See GENEViAVE, SAINT, ORDERS oF, 2.
Holy Roman Empire
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG
HOLY FIRE. See EASTER, I., 4, § 3.
HOLY GHOST. See HOLY SPIRIT.
HOLY GHOST, ORDERS AND CONGREGATIONS OF THE: I. Hospitalers of the Holy Ghost: The oldest of the religious associations named after the Holy Spirit was founded at Montpellier about 1198 and confirmed on May 23, 1198, by Innocent III. In 1204 the order was placed in control of one of the most important hospitals in Rome, and after the pontificate of Honorius III. this became the mother house of the Italian, English, and Hungarian branches of the order, while Montpellier remained the center for France and the neighboring countries. The brothers added to the usual three monastic vows that of voluntary service to the poor. They were distinguished by a white linen cross with twelve points, worn on the left side of their black habit, which resembled that of the Augustinian canons. The order began to decline during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries; and in France, where Cardinal Archbishop Polignac of Auch (d. 1741) was its last general, it completely disappeared before the outbreak of the Revolution. The last remnant of the order, the hospital and monastery of Santo Spirito in Sassia at Rome, was suppressed by Pius IX.
Many Roman Catholic hospitals assumed the name of the Holy Spirit without belonging to the order, especially in northern Germany, although several in southern Germany and Switzerland, as at Memmingen, Wimpfen, Pforzheim, Rufach, Neumarkt, and Bern, were true branches of the order.
For the Hospital Sisters of the Holy Ghost, see HOBPITALERs.
II. Among medieval and modern congregations of the Holy Ghost six deserve special mention:
1. The Canons of the Holy Ghost were founded about 1430 by the Venetian Canon Andreas Bondimerio (patriarch of Venice 1460 64) and three other clerics. Though confirmed by Martin V., they attained merely local importance, and were suppressed by Alexander VII. in 1656.
2. The Priests of the Holy Ghost, or Mulotists, were founded in 1703 by Louis Maria Grignon de Montfort (d. 1703), and received their rule from his successor, Rent; Mulot. Their object was the education of young ecclesiastics, and their mother house was situated at St. Laurent sur Sevon.
$. A Benedictine Congregation of the Holy Ghost arose early in the eighteenth century in the diocese of Augsburg through the secession of eight South German Benedictine monasteries, and was confirmed with certain privileges by Benedict XIII. in 1725.
4. The Daughters of the Holy Ghost (Filler du Saint Esprit) originated in St. Brieuc, Brittany, in 1706, and spread through most of the dioceses of that province. Their objects are the instruction of girls and works of charity, and they are now said to possess more than a hundred institutions.
5. The Sisters of the Holy Ghost, or Sisters of the Heart of Jesus and of Mary of the Holy Ghost, form a female congregation for conducting poor schools. They were established at Tours in 1805 by the Abb6 Bourignon with the aid of a number of ex Carmelite nuns.
6. The Fathers of the Holy Ghost (P&ea du S. Esprit), or the Congregation of the Fathers of the Holy Ghost and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, popularly known as the " Black Fathers " (P&es noirs) from their habit, were established by a Jewish convert, Jacob Libermann (baptized as Frangois Maria Paul Libermann; b. in Alsace 1804; d. at Paris 1852), by the union of two missionary congregations. The first of these was the congregation of the Holy Ghost, founded at Paris in 1709 by P6re Desplace and suppressed during the French Revolution, but revived in 1816; the second was the Congregation of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, founded by Libermann himself in 1841 for negro missions. The first general was Libermann, and since his death the "Black Fathers" have rivaled the "White Fathers " of Cardinal Lavigerie in their missionary zeal, not only in the French colonies of Africa, but also in the Portuguese, Dutch, and English districts. They are active likewise in Mauritius, Trinidad, Haiti, and Australia, while their seminary in Paris trains missionaries for the French colonies in India and South America. They are represented in Portugal, Ireland, and the United States (Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Michigan, and Wisconsin), and after being expelled from Germany in 1872 were permitted to return in 1895. In the latter country they have a seminary in the former Premonatratensian abbey of Knechtsteden and exercise the supervision of the shrine of Drei Aehren in Alsace Lorraine, besides conducting the French S6minaire du Cceur Sacre de Marie in Rome.
HI. Two knightly orders of the Holy Ghost likewise require mention. In Whitsuntide of 1352 Queen Joanna I. of Naples founded the Cavaliers di Santo Spirito del Retto Desiderio. The knights, whose number was restricted to sixty, received a rule based on that of St. Basil and approved by Clement VI. Their emblem was an intricate loveknot (whence they were often called Cavalieri del nodo), which was replaced after some distinguished feat of arms by a dove, as a symbol of the Holy Spirit. The order became extinct before the end of the fourteenth century.
A French Ordre du Saint Esprit was established on Dec. 31, 1578, by Henry III. The order was intended to honor the feast of Whitsuntide and to revive the prestige of the knights of St. Michael. The king himself was the grand master, and all the members were required first to be knights of St. Michael. The number was restricted to 100, and included all princes of the royal family, four cardinals, four French bishops, and the high almoner of the king. Membership carried with it important privileges, and also certain religious obligations. The order retained its prestige during the four following reigns, and Louis XVI. conscientiously observed its religious requirements. It was dissolved by a decree of the French National Convention, and has been replaced since the reign of Napoleon I. (except for a brief revival by Louis XVIII.) by the Legion of Honor.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:On T.: F. E. von Hurter, Geachichte rnnocena' 111., iv. 224, Hamburg, 1842; G. Uhlhorn, Die
ehriatliche LiebeathNigkeit im Mittelalter, pp. 187 192
327 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Holy Fire
Holy Eoman Empire Stuttgart, 1884; G. Brune, Hint. de 1'ordre hotpitalier du
$. Esprit, Paris, 1892; C. de Smedt, L'Ordre hospitalier
and its inhabitants comprise much of the preaching.
Sandford claims to be Elijah, preaching in prepara
tion for this judgment. There is insistence on
baptism by immersion as prerequisite to salvation,
and no prior baptism is accepted as valid. The
Apocalypse, Daniel, and the judgment pictures in
the Synoptic Gospels are interpreted literally. Great
emotional excitement pervades the meetings. Mi
raculous healings are affirmed, credence in which
has not been shaken with the community by an
epidemic of smallpox, including several fatal cases,
that prevailed there in 1903. The sect is apparently
waning. W. C. STILES.
HOLY OFFICE, CONGREGATION OF THE: The department of the papal government which is charged with the direction of the Inquisition (q.v.). It was established by Paul III. in 1542, and has among its officers twelve cardinals, a commissary, and a number of theologians and canonists who act in an advisory capacity. The pope is ex officio prefect of the congregation, and on solemn occasions he may preside in person.
HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE: The designation of the German Italian empire established by Otto I., the Saxon king, who was crowned in Rome by Pope John XII. Feb. 2, 962. The " Holy Roman Empire " was at the best an ideal rather than an
accomplished fact. The Roman em
Origin pire, by reason of its almost world
and wide dominion and its tendency under
Name. the better rulers to promote universal
peace and well being, had made a
great and lasting impression upon the Teutonic
peoples, and it was natural that, when the seat of
empire had been transferred to the East and when
at last the empire had lost its grip upon the great
and rapidly developing West, the first western ruler
whose dominion seemed to justify imperial preten
sions should seek to revive the title of Emperor of
the Romans. At the close of the eighth century
the authority of the Eastern Empire in Italy had
reached the vanishing point. The Frankish pre
decessors of Charlemagne from Clovis onward had
professed the Catholic faith and had cooperated
with the bishops of Rome in extending the domin
ion of the papal church so as to be conterminous
with Frankish conquest as the most effective means
of civilizing barbarian peoples and reconciling them
to Frankish rule. The Lombards held a large part
of Italy and imperilled the autonomy of the Church
and its authority over what was claimed as the
donation of Constantine or the patrimony of Peter
(see PAPAL STATES). Charlemagne (q.v.) pro
tected the Roman See against Lombard aggres
sion, received the imperial crown at the hands of
the pope, and completed with the Roman See an
offensive and defensive alliance; and, while he
committed himself to the protection of the Roman
Catholic Church and the promotion of its interests
throughout his vast domain to the exclusion of all
of surrendering any part of his monarchical author
ity, and to the last legislated as freely in ecclesias
tical as in civil matters and required obedience from
ecclesiastical no less than from civil functionaries.
The empire of Charlemagne came nearer to the
realization of the idea of a Holy Roman Empire
than did any subsequent imperial administration.
The origin of the name is obscure. It is found in
no early documents. A certain sanctity was at
tached to the old Roman empire whose head was
the recipient of divine honors. That it should be
applied to the dominion of a Christian sovereign
who aspired to universal civil dominion and who
professed an earnest desire to bring about the uni
versal acceptance of the religion of Christ might
have been expected.
It is not probable that the idea of the Holy Ro
Holy Roman Empire Holy Sepulcher
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG
man Empire in its fully developed form was ever conceived or entertained by pope or emperor. Popes and emperors were for the most part practical men who were beset with practical difficulties and who made use of whatever means were
Underlying available for the gaining of practical Ideas. ends. If the pope dreamed of ideal conditions he was sure to conceive of the one holy Catholic Church with its papal head as exercising absolute dominion throughout the whole world and of all civil rulers as yielding willing obedience to the dictates of the head of the Church. If emperors ever idealized, they were sure to think of themselves as exercising universal sway in Church and State alike and of all ecclesiastics with the pope at their head as disinterestedly devoting their energies to the promotion of universal peace and obedience to the imperial will. Who first conceived the idea of a Holy Catholic Church and a Holy Roman Empire, both world wide in extent, the Church with the pope at its head beneficently ruling a unified and willingly obedient Christian world and supported in its work by a unified and harmonious civil world administration; and the empire with undisputed dominion ruling the world in righteousness with the interests of the Church a supreme object of endeavor, the pope giving unstinted support to the civil administration without infringing upon its functions; the emperor being single minded in his devotion to spiritual interests without wishing in any way to interfere with the spiritual administration, does not appear. The sanctity of the old Roman Empire and the " eternal city " and of the Catholic Church now identified with the kingdom of God on earth and having the eternal city as its administrative center was in a sense conferred upon the German princes through the bestowal of the imperial crown. Yet nothing could be further removed from sanctity than the motives of John XII. in bestowing, and Otto I. in receiving, the imperial crown, as was manifest in the deposition of the profligate youth who held the papal office by the ambitious and selfish Saxon chieftain whom he had crowned and the excommunication of the emperor by the pope who sought the aid of Magyars and Saracens against his imperial foe. The almost continuous conflict between popes and emperors during the Middle Ages illustrated by the prolonged and .unrelenting hostilities between Gregory VII. and Henry IV., Alexander III. and Frederick I., Innocent III. and his three successors and Frederick II., shows that the ideal of the Holy Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire utterly failed of realization.
During the earlier time the imperial office was
practically hereditary, but owing to the lack of
centralized administrative machinery, occasional
failures in male heirs to the throne, the disposition
of the popes to interfere in favor of
Succession rivals ready to pledge themselves to to the greater subserviency' the growth of
Throne. the idea of the holiness and universal
ity of the office, the elective principle
finally prevailed. Theoretically, the entire body of
freemen were supposed to be the electors, but, as
no provision was made for the exercise of the ballot,
it devolved upon the leaders to vote for the people. The tradition that Gregory V. (998 99) and Otto III. arranged that the electoral function should be limited to seven princes is not confirmed by contemporaFy documents. In 1125 I,otbair II. was nominated by a small number of nobles and then or not long afterward the number seven was fixed upon for the electors and came to have a sacred significance. Urban IV. (1263) speaks of the choosing of the emperor by seven electors as a matter of immemorial custom. The electoral dignity at that time belonged to the archbishoprics of Mainz, Treves, and Cologne, and to four secular princes. There was much dispute as to which of the nobles should be electors. The Golden Bull (1356) fixed upon the king of Bohemia, the count palatine, the duke of Saxony, and the margrave of Brandenburg. Frankfort was agreed upon as the place for the assembly of the electoral college and the archbishop of Mains as the convener. This arrangement remained in force until the Thirty Years' War, when (1621) the Count Palatine was deprived of his eieotorship in favor of the duke of Bavaria. The peace of Westphalia (see WESTPHALIA, PEACE OF) restored the palatine electorship without annulling that of the duke of Bavaria. In 1692 the house of Brunswick Lilneburg was given an electorate.
The imperial dignity was retained by the house
of Saxony from 962 to 1138 (the Salic line from 1024), the Hohenstaufen from 1138 to 12'73, the HapebUrgers 1273 92, 1298 1308, 1438 1742, and 1765 1806. During the earlier centuries of the modern period the house of Hapsburg represented the greatest aggregation of power in Europe. The Holy Roman Empire consistently opposed the Protestant Reformation, yet Luther's reverence for it as an ancient and legitimate institution was so great that to the end of his life he discouraged his followers from taking up arms against it and predicted calamity in case his counsel should be unheeded. The hostility of France to the imperial house of Hapsburg on several occasions saved the Protestants from destruction (as in the Smalkald War, Thirty Years' War, etc.). The empire ended as a result of the Napoleonic conquest (1806).
A. H. NEWMAN.
HOLY SATURDAY. See HOLY WEEK, § 6.
I. The Site.
The Name Golgotha, its origin and TmpGcntione (§ 1).
Eueebiua concerning the Site ($ 2).
Modern Identifications (§ 3).
II. The Structures Erected There.
I. By Constantine. The Rotunda of the Resurrection (§ 1). The Basilica, Atrium, and I'ropyls°um (§ 2).
2. Later Structures.
I. The Site: The tomb of Jesus was located in a garden belonging to the Jewish councilor Joseph of Arimathas (q.v.), near or at the place of crucifixion, which. was called in Aramaic gulgulta or gulgalta (Matt. xxvii. 60; John xia. 41), corresponding to the Hebrew haggulgoleth, " the skull." The name in Greek was written golgotha which appears in Matthew (xxvii. 33), Mark (xv. 22), and John (xix. 17), with the explanation "the place of a skull," while Luke (xxiii. 33) has " the place
829 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA called skull" (Gk. kranion; A. V. "Calvary" from the Lat. calvaria). The location was evi
dently well known by the current 1. The designation. There was doubtless
Name originally in the Aramaic a limiting
Golgotha, addition, as there are traces in the its Origin Pseudepigrapha (particularly in the and Im Ethiopic Book of Adam) and in
plioatione. the Church Fathers (Epiphanius, Har., xlvi.; Basil, of Seleucia, Oratio, xxxviii.) that it was connected with the name of Adam. For the story in its Jewish form consult J. A. Fabrieius, Codex pseudepigraphuset Veris Teatamenti, i. 60, 75, 267 268, Hamburg, 1722. The form and content of the tradition imply that there was a round knoll, by its shape suggesting the form of a skull, and near it a sharp depression which was associated in legend with the name of Adam, whose skull was said to have been deposited there by Shem fu the center of the earth (cf. Ezek. v,. 5). The New Testament locates Golgotha outside the city (Heb. xiii. 12; Matt. xxvii. 32; Mark xv. 20; John xix. 17), but near the city (John xix. 20) and by the road (Matt. xxvii. 39). The marks of identification require that the place be sought to the north of Jerusalem, since only there do the exits from the city debouch upon a plain, as was remarked as early as the time of Eusebius (Onomasticon, ed. Lagarde, Gbttingen, 1870, p. 229, cf. 99 and 248, also 130). The place Eusebius had in mind was certainly the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher built by Constantine, but that this is the true site has in modern times been questioned.
Eusebius, in telling of the command of Conatantine to erect a stately structure over the tomb of
Jesus (Life of Constantine, iii. 25 40), 2. Eueebius says nothing of any official order to
concerning make search for the true site of the the Site. death and resurrection of Jesus. He
narrates that the place had been buried deep in rubbish, over this a pavement had been laid, and on this a temple to Venus erected. By command of the emperor this temple was destroyed and the rubbish carried away, when the tomb of Jesus was disclosed, to the great joy of the emperor (Life of Constantine, iii. 30). The story of Eusebius shows that in Jerusalem, at least among Christians, not the slightest doubt existed concerning the site of the tomb. Yet Edward Robinson and other scholars who could not feel sure of the site called attention to the fact that, according to the words of Eusebius, the place had remained forgotten, and that the words of Constantine were that the rediscovery was a miracle. On the other hand, it is to be noted that no words of Eusebius affirm that knowledge of the place had been lost, as in that case it would have been expected that Constantine would have ordered careful search for the true site. Eusebius has raised doubts in another direction by the fact that his list of the bishops of Jerusalem is not altogether trustworthy (Hiat. ecd., iv. 5 6, v. 12). Still it is to be presumed that the short break (between 70 and 135 A.D.) in the continuity of the Christian community had not resulted in the total loss of knowledge of the notable site of the death and resurrection of Jesus. And, though the first
generation of Christians might place no special emphasis upon knowledge of the sacred sites; it does not follow that they forgot the location, especially since Golgotha is shown by the way the word is used in the Gospels to have been a well known place. The covering and defiling of the site Eusebius traces to ungodly men (whom he does not name) and to the whole horde of demons. Jerome states that for 180 years, from Hadrian's time to that of Conatantine, a statue of Jupiter stood on the place of the resurrection and one of Venus on the place of the crucifixion, placed there with the design of casting scorn upon the faith. So far as Jerome controverts Eusebius, he may not receive the preference. In general, the attribution of design in the placing of rubbish on the spot and the erection of the heathen objects there may be wrong, and the results rhay have been brought about simply by the location just outside the walls. While Eusebius's identifica, tion may be correct, he mentions no mark by which the identification was assured. So long as other graves in the vicinity were unknown, his location would be unchallenged. That is no longer the case, since the graves assigned to Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea are now known and supposed to have been connected with that known as the Holy Sepulcher. Indeed, the discovery of still others has made questionable the assertion that the site of Constantine's church covered that of the tomb of Jesus.
Identiaca bering that the present north wall dates tione. from 41 to 70 A.D., and that the "second " wall was in the time of Jesus the northern limit of the city. Recent investigations by tracing the course of the "second" wall have made it very likely that Golgotha lay outside. 0. Thenius decided for the Grotto of Jeremiah northeast from the Damascus Gate and the hill near it. James Fergusson hit upon the strange identification with Mount Moriah, that is, the site of the present Mosque of Omar. Still more recently a small hill outside the Damascus Gate and to the left of the road to Nablus has been claimed as the site so General Gordon in 1883. E: M. Clos selected a spot for the tomb about 200 yards south of the present church. These identifications are without value.
It was the followers of Eusebius Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret not Eusebius himself, who brought Helena, the mother of Constantine, into connection with the finding of the grave and of the three crosses and the inscription of Pilate and with the building of the church on the site (see CROSS, INVENTION OF Tm). Eusebius places her church on the Mount of Olives, and he is to be followed. It is to be remembered that it was the custom in Christian circles to honor the sites of the burial of martyrs. Eusebius relates (Demonahatio evangelica, vi. 18) that Christian pilgrims came from all parts to Jerusalem to assure themselves by sight of the ruined state of Jerusalem of the fulfilment of prophecy and to pray in the cave of Bethlehem or on the Mount of Olives. It was in connection with
Holy Sepulcher THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG ggp
these pilgrimages that Constantine thought to adorn the tomb by a structure, the knowledge of which is due chiefly to Eusebius's description (Life of Constantine, iii. 25 40). Another writing of Eusebius dealing wholly with this subject is not extant. Eusebius's account is confirmed and supplemented by the account of the pilgrimage of Silvia Aquitana (380 390), and C. Mommert's investigations have shed much light on the subject. The site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is to day shut in by streets. The rocks under the foundation slope from west to east and from north to south, so the site is not level, leading to the necessity for preparation for building by leveling the ground. That fact has led to certain investigations, and invites a description of the parts of the church.
111. The Structures Erected There. 1. By Constantine: The rocks about the grave are broken away on all sides so that it has the
1. The appearance of a monument. The lev
8otnnda eling of the site probably produced
of the changes in the relation of the tomb to
8esurreo its entrance, though it is possible that
tion. the level of the approach remained as
it was. To the east of the tomb lay the
stone, described by Antoninus Placentinus (c. 570)
as like a millstone, which was rolled to the mouth
of the grave to close it (Mark avi. 3). The interior
of the tomb is said by Arculf (c. 670) to have been
large enough to hold nine men standing, and the
roof might be touched by raising the hand. The
grave was to the north, on the right of the entrance,
trough like, three spans above the floor. This, as
the central point of interest, Constantine had
adorned with beautiful and costly pillars. A round
structure was arranged about the grave, with a
circular hall, the upper part of which was open
to the sky. The connection of this structure with
the other buildings is shown to be possible from the
fact that neither the inner circle of pillars which it
contained nor the containing wall were closed toward
The basilica stretched in a broad middle aisle and two smaller side aisles eastward from the rotunda, about 245 feet in length. The
arises as to the place meant as that where the cross
was found; whether it was at or near Golgotha, or
in the holy tomb, or in the so called Chapel of
Helena, or in a still deeper hole in the rock, the so
called Chapel of the Invention of the Cross. The
finding was first mentioned by Cyril of Jerusalem
about 350 (Catecheaes, x. 19), described first by
Rufinus, Socrates, and others, though the accounts
differ. The place of the crucifixion was given as
in the southern aisle, west of the choir. Conatan
tine's builders treated this in like manner as they
did the grave, breaking away the rock so that a
high hexagonal platform raised itself above the sur
rounding level, to which the names Mount of the
Rock, Mount Golgotha, and Mount Calvary became
attached. Three doors in the east wall of the basilica. connected the latter with the atrium. That this was to the east of the basilica is confirmed by the Madeba map, by investigations on the spot, and by the fact that to the east lay the market place. The architect thus departed from custom in the construction of the building, constrained partly by the circumstance that the tomb would not be suitably located in the court of the church. The atrium was a hall of pillars provided with lavers. From this three doors led into the propylaeum. As early as 1844 46 Dr. SchultzandProfessorKrafft, of Bonn, found traces of this structure, which were confirmed by Mommert and supplemented by later discoveries. The whole building was begun in 326 and consecrated in 336.
2. Later Structures: These buildings were destroyed by fire under Chosroes II. in 614. In 616 Modestus, abbot of the monastery of Theodosius, began the erection of new structures which, finished in 626, differed from those erected by Constantine. He supplied the rotunda with three new niches on the south, east, and north, and installed altars. To the southeast he built a Church of St. Mary; over Golgotha, a special chapel; and over the place of the invention of the cross he erected a basilica called the Martyrium, between which and the rotunda was a square, entered from the south. The situation of Christians and their possessions after the taking of the. city by the Arabs under Omar in 637 became constantly more precarious. From an old Arabic inscription on stone, found July 31, 1897, it appears that the Arabs possessed in the first half of the tenth century a mosque on the site of Constantine's atrium, commemorating the fact that Omar had prayed there. In the same century the buildings of Modestus were burned, and about 1010 special orders directed the destruction of the tomb. In 1048 new structures were erected under the auspices of the Byzantine emperor which embraced the rotunda, chapels over Golgotha and over the stone on which Jesus was said to have been laid for his anointing, and the Chapel of the Invention of the Cross. These coincided in general with those of Modestus, and were entered by the Crusaders in 1099. Under the Crusaders new structures were begun in 1140 and completed about 1168, among them a church with three aisles, in the French style of the twelfth century. The tomb itself was also subjected to change. After the destruction in 1244, the church of the Crusaders was restored in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The chapel of the tomb was newly erected by Boniface of Ragusa, also the Chapel of the Angels: On Oct. 12, 1808, the larger part of the church over the tomb was destroyed by fire. Restoration began in 1809 under the auspices of Greeks and Armenians upon the plans of Komnenus Kalfa, a Greek. The present dome was erected in 1868 under the joint auspices of France and Russia.
Light is thrown on the form of these varied structures by models in Europe copied from the originals. These are the holy tomb in San Stefano in Bologna (430), the Chapel of the Tomb in Constance (tenth century), and that in G6rlitz (1480).