HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE. 162 HOLY SEPULCHRE. jiirp rnpidly sank in importance, and owed any ii'ul autliurily wliioh it possessed to the strength of the ruler who was Emperor. .Still the piis- x'ssidu (if the title gave some additional pres- tige. By the Peace of Westphalia (l(i48) the liciiiils which held the Empire together were greatly loosened, the right being accorded to the iiullvidual Stales to enter into foreign alliances. In the eighteenth century Voltaire said of the Holy Koman Empire that it wixs neither holy, nor Koninn, nor an empire. During its earlier existence, however, it was a very im|)ortant fac- tor in the history of Europe. Consult: Uryce, The }loly Roman Empire (London. ISIM) : Kisli- er. The Mcilicnal Empire (2 vols.. London. IS'.IS). Sec Okrmany; Italy, and the articles on the individual cmiierors, with the books cited. HOLYROOD (ho'li-rofid) PALACE. The fornur residence of the .Scottish l.iiig> in Edin- burgh. It was rebuilt between KiTl and IGTO by King Charles II. of England from the designs of Sir illiam Bruce of Kinross, after the almost total destruction by tire in 1500 of the prior pal- ace built by James IV. It occu])ies the site of the famous Augustinian Abbey of the Holy Rood erected by King David I. in 1128, at the place where, according to a fabulous story, he was miraculously saved from the attack of a hunted stag by the interposition of the lost holy cross or rood which fell from the stag's antlers into the King's hands, ami at the sight of which the ani- mal turned and lied. The black rood of Scotland, as it was called, was brought to Scotland by Saint Margaret about the year 1070 and became one of the kingdom's heirlooms. It is known to have falKn into the hands of the Englisli at the battle of Neville's Cross in I34(i, but its disappearance, in course of time, gave currency to the above fable. The sole remains of the ab- bey are the ruins of the church which, anciently, was a safe refuge for criminals, and remained so for debtors until the abolition of imprisonment for debt in 1880. Ilolyrood is interesting as the scene of many historical events, including the term of Queen Mary's residence and of Rizzio's murder in 1500. It is the occasional residence of the liritish sovereigns, and since the death of (^ueen Victoria has undergone thorough renova- tion. Consult: Jlislorieal Description of the Monastery and Chapel Royal of Ilolyrood House (Edinburgh, 1819) : Wilson, Memorials of Edinburgh (Edinburgh. 1848). HOLY SEPULCHRE. The place where .Icsus was cntonilicil. According to the New Testament data, the sites of the crucifixion and burial of Jesus were not far apart (.John xix. 41), out- side .lerusalem (Heb. xiii. 12), and near a road (Mark .v. 29; Matt, x.xvii. 39). The tomb it- self was in a garden (John xix. 41). and ap- parently on a slope. The place of erucilixion was called Golgotha (Mark xv. 22: ilatt. xxvii. 33; .John xix. 17), an Aramaic word meaning skull. Calvary is but the anglicized form of the Latin call aria, skull. There is no evidence for supposing that the locality was sufficiently ele- vated to be called a hill or mount. The Gospels imply that the site was well known when they were written, but the references are ^ot full enough to make a modern identification easy or certain. The traditional site of both Golgotha and the tomb of Jesus is that now covered by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, 400 to 500 yards west of the northern part of the llaram csh-.*<herif, or temple area, and will within the niodcin city of .lerusalem. Here Conslauliiic the Crcat built a beautiful church on the spot then supposed to be the place of the Ascension. This idenlilication was not seriously disputed until Jonas Korte, in 1741, claimed that, being within the city walls, it could not be correct. Korte 8U])posed that ■ the modern north wall was in existence at the lime of the crucifixicm. but in fact it was built later. In 1841 ICdward Robinson, in his tiihlienl J'esearehcs, disputed the correctness of the tradi- tional site, on the supposition that the second wall of .Jo.sephus — i.e. the north wall in Christ's day — ])assed to the north of it, and in that case it must have been within the city. Since Robin- son, this has been felt to be the chief and fatal obstacle to the view that the modern church actually covers the si>ot where Jesus was buried. But the excavations and measurements of Conrad Schick (1888 and later) have made it all but certain that the wall injChrists day lay south and east of the disputed site, which therefore was outside the city, and may well have been the scene of the crucifixion and burial. Of other proposed sites, two, both outside the modern city, near the Damascus Gate, have received strong support. The question is still unsettled, but the drift of competent opinion is toward acceptance of the trailitional view. A few years after the crucifixion, the northern area of Jerusalem was inclosed by a third wall, as it was becoming thickly settled. There is no reason to suppose that the early Christians forgot where the crucifixion and burial had occurred, though there is no probability that they venerat- ed the place as holy. In the Jewish war with Rome (00-70). this part of the city was occu- pied by the Roman army preparatory to the assault on the second wall. Krom its capture by Titus (70) to the rebellion of Bar-Cochba (132- 35), the city was practically in ruins, though not entirely desolate. After suppressing this rebellion Hadrian rebuilt Jerusalem as a heathen city, calling it .Elia Capitolina, and absolutely forbidding .Jews to enter it. On the site of the temple a shrine to .lupiter was built, and on that of the supposed tomb of .Jesus a temple to Venus was erected (by Hadrian or one of the later em- perors). Incidentally this may be evidence that even then Christian tradition pointed out that spot as worthy of veneration. In the third cen- tury the lioly places of the city and vicinity began to attract pilgrims from various parts of the Empire, though there is no evidence that any visited this particular spot. In the fourth cen- turj' the pilgrimages became more popular, and when through Constantine I. the Empire became nominally Christian, it was but natural that the Emi)eror. urged on, doubtless, by his mother, determined to rescue the holy sepulchre from oblivion and disgrace. What guided Constantine in selecting this spot was. without doubt, the tradition already current. On removing the ac- cumulated rubbish, the workmen came upon a rock tomb. So astonishing was this coincidence that it was counted as simply miraculous that the precious grave, so long hidden away, should at last have come to light. Legends soon began to multiply — e.g. that Helena, Constantine's mother, miraculously discovered the true cross near by. of which Eusebius, the contemporary ^
