Archaeological Views: Mount Zion’s Upper Room and Tomb of David

024

One of the most fascinating tourist sites in Jerusalem is a building that stands atop Mount Zion, the southwest hill of Old Jerusalem. The lower story of this unique building is traditionally identified as the Tomb of David and the upper story as the room of Jesus’ Last Supper. What is the historical evidence for these claims? How likely is it that these sacred sites are actually located on Mount Zion, let alone in this specific building? Can archaeology help answer these questions?

The location of the burial place of King David seems clear in Biblical accounts. The Book of 1 Kings tells of David’s burial in the City of David (1 Kings 2:10), later known as the Lower City. The early fourth-century B.C.E. Book of Nehemiah agrees (Nehemiah 3:14–16). Tosefta Baba Bathra (c. third century C.E.) also knows the tomb to be near the Kidron Valley,¹ and it apparently was still thought to be there by the time of Maimonides (1135–1204).² It was only later, in line with Christian claims, that Muslims and Jews began to venerate the location of David’s tomb on Mount Zion. The general view of scholars is that the Mount Zion of the Bible is the southeastern hill upon which the formerly Jebusite City of David stood. It was toward the end of the Second Temple period that Mount Zion came to be identified with the western hill as it still is today. Evidence for this change comes in part from Josephus (c. 30–100 C.E.) who, in his later years, (mis-)characterized the western hill as the stronghold of King David (Josephus, Jewish War 5.137; Jewish Antiquities 7.62–63).

Archaeologist Raymond Weill excavated a number of ornate tombs in the City of David (1913–1914) among which may be that of the great king of Israel.^a On the other hand, the earliest literary record for the presence of a tomb belonging to King David on the western hill is found in the anonymous Vita Constantini (Life of Constantine) roughly dated to the tenth century C.E.³ After the Crusader conquest of Jerusalem, Latin Christians recorded that “tombs” belonging to David, Solomon and the early Christian martyr Stephen were found on Mount Zion.⁴ Whether this reference was to actual tombs, such as the kokhim type found all around Jerusalem, or simply to empty sarcophagi (cenotaphs) that can still be seen in the building today, is uncertain.

Connecting the site with Jesus’ Last Supper presents different problems. Unlike the location of David’s burial, the place of the Last Supper is never specifically identified in the Bible—although one presumes it was in Jerusalem, since the first three Gospels describe it as a Passover meal. Also, the literary record associating the location of the meal with the western hill goes back only to the fourth century.⁵ There is nothing in the Bible to connect the location of Jesus’ Last Supper with David’s tomb.

Other events from the New Testament are also traditionally located in the Upper Room/Tomb of David building (hereinafter referred to as the Cenacle, which is derived from the Latin cēnāculum, meaning “upper room”): appearances by the risen Jesus, the selection of Matthias as an apostle and the first Christian Pentecost. Fourth-century pilgrims began to celebrate these events on Mount Zion, but unfortunately their accounts are often unclear in which building the events were commemorated. Were the pilgrims describing the building we see today in its original form? Or did they mean to indicate the large Hagia Sion (“Holy Zion”) Basilica 025constructed in the late fourth century and located near where the current Dormition Abbey stands in Jerusalem? The accounts leave us in doubt as to whether the Cenacle was a structure that predated the Hagia Sion.

According to some scholars, the Cenacle came first.^b They suggest that the building was originally a two-story Jewish or Jewish-Christian synagogue. Proponents of this view date its construction to sometime in the first few centuries C.E. Evidence for the existence of such a synagogue, some suggest, is found in the works of fourth-century writers Optatus of Milevus, Epiphanius of Salamis and the anonymous pilgrim from Bordeaux.⁶ This structure, some propose, served as the first apostolic church and may have even been the site where Jesus dined with his disciples. If this view is correct, the little synagogue was later honored with the construction of the Hagia Sion next door. Evidence for the two adjacent structures can be seen, for example, in the sixth-century floor mosaic found in Madaba, Jordan.

Other scholars disagree and suggest that the Cenacle that stands today is simply the remaining southeast corner of the Hagia Sion.⁷

Can archaeology help to support or refute either of these conflicting proposals? The lowest foundation stones, or ashlars, of the Cenacle should give us the date of the original building. Unfortunately, scholars disagree not only over the date in which the ashlars were hewn but also the time at which they were used in this building. Despite their disagreement over the ashlars’ Herodian or Byzantine origins, scholars do seem to agree that they were not cut for the Cenacle but for an earlier structure and reused here. If Herodian, the ashlars may have belonged to another building that stood prior to the Jewish-Roman war of 70 C.E., become rubble after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and later used in the construction of the Cenacle. If the ashlars are Byzantine, however, we must wonder under what circumstances a fourth-century building would be so quickly destroyed as to make the stones available once again for constructing the Hagia Sion.

In addition, it seems that archaeological evidence supporting the origin of the building as a synagogue is weak. Early proponents of this view pointed to the large eight-foot-high niche in the original north wall, now visible behind the cenotaph of David, which they identified as a Torah niche. Challenges to this view are numerous.⁸ The niche, standing 6 feet above the floor, is quite unlike most niches found in early synagogues—its061 nearest parallel perhaps being that at Dura-Europos. There are no other architectural features (columns, benches, artistic embellishments) normally found in synagogues built in the centuries around the turn of the era.⁹

In terms of habitation, what is the likelihood that a Jewish or Christian community could exist for several centuries on Mount Zion just south of a detachment of the Tenth Roman Legion encamped below the towers of Herod’s former palace? Archaeologist Emanuel Eisenberg’s 1983 excavation near the southwest corner of the Hagia Sion seems to demonstrate that the area around the Cenacle was continually inhabited from the Early Roman to the Ottoman periods.¹⁰ This makes possible the Church Fathers’ claim that an early Christian group settled there a few years after the war of 70 C.E.¹¹

The answers to the riddle of the Upper Room/Tomb of David are slow in developing. But with more archaeological work, we will surely come closer to the truth.

One of the most fascinating tourist sites in Jerusalem is a building that stands atop Mount Zion, the southwest hill of Old Jerusalem. The lower story of this unique building is traditionally identified as the Tomb of David and the upper story as the room of Jesus’ Last Supper. What is the historical evidence for these claims? How likely is it that these sacred sites are actually located on Mount Zion, let alone in this specific building? Can archaeology help answer these questions? The location of the burial place of King David seems clear in Biblical accounts. The Book […]