The Professor’s Page

This article is taken from Archeological Diggings’ Website. Click here to view the entire article with pictures.

Traditional sites are all very well, but when it comes to accepting them at
face value, the amount of salt [Note 1] required varies from the customary
“grain” to several liberal shovel-fulls! The silver star that marks the
“actual birth place” of Jesus is tucked away in such a tiny alcove that the
Virgin Mary must have been a contortionist to have given birth on that spot.
We were similarly sceptical in 1958 when our guide pointed to a particular
rock in the grounds of the St Peter Gallicantu church and assured us that it
was the very spot where the cock stood as it crowed after Peter’s denial of
Christ.

Such, I fear, is the attitude I bring to the traditional site of Jesus’
baptism. Located on the banks of the Jordan river a short distance from
Jericho, the site was marked in those days by a somewhat dilapidated Greek
Orthodox church, an extremely dilapidated wooden platform standing in the
water and an unusual number of police. Enquiries revealed that the day
before an American tourist had ventured onto the platform and fallen in and
the police were still hunting for his body!

That somewhat prejudiced us against the traditional site: it was hardly
likely, we felt, that John the Baptist would have attracted many converts if
every second or third one had been swept away and drowned! After taking a
photograph or two of the muddy stream flowing between the steep banks we
departed to look for a more likely spot and eventually found one a mile or
so south where the banks of the river fell away and the river itself spread
out to a broader, more placid stream that was no more than waist-deep.

[Picture: The King Husein Bridge, destroyed during the 1967 war, crosses the
Jordan river near a convenient ford where John might have preached.]

Not only was this a more suitable spot for the ceremony of baptism, we felt,
but as a place where the river could be forded it was also a morely likely
location for an aspiring preacher. Travellers [Note 2] journeying between
Palestine and the Decapolis would seek to cross the river where it was safe
to do so and might well be tempted to linger while they watered their beasts
in preparation for the desert ahead. They would thus be an  easy target for
John and his preaching. The fact that Qumran, the possible community from
which John had obtained the idea of baptism, was visible a short distance
away through the haze was another attraction.

According to the Bible, at the time of Jesus’ baptism John was in a very
specific location.

These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptising.
John 1:28 (KJV)

This all happened at Bethany on the other side of the Jordan, where John
was baptising. John 1:28 (NIV)

The Greek text actually states “Bethany”, but by the time people came to
consider the question there was no site known as “Bethany” near the Jordan.
Origen, a Christian who lived in Palestine around AD 200, suggested that
John had made a mistake (or copyists had written in the wrong name) and the
location should actually be “Bethabara”. This solution was adopted so
enthusiastically that it became enshrined in the King James Version of the
Bible and generations of preachers have unthinkingly identified Bathabara as
the site of Jesus’ baptism.

In 1877 a British army officer named C. R. Conder, who surveyed and mapped
Palestine for the Palestine Exploration Fund, proposed that Bethabara should
be identified with Makhadet ‘Abara in the north, near Bethshean.
Unfortunately although the name sounds familiar and there is adequate water
at Makhadet’Abara, the site itself is a mile from the river and is
intensively cultivated – hardly the desert place implied by the records in
the gospels. Finally, Makhadet ‘Abara is on the west bank of the Jordan and
hardly qualifies for the description “beyond Jordan”.

Various other suggestions have been advanced, including even that “beyond
Jordan” is a mistake and Jesus was really baptised at the better-known
Bethany near Jerusalem! All of them are more or less unlikely and in some
cases – like the site suggested by one scholar that turned out to be 3,000
feet above the Jordan valley – so implausible that you really wonder how
anyone could take it seriously!

Clemens Kopp in his book, Holy Places of the Gospels, puts forward the
suggestion that “Bethany” might be derived from bet anniyah, “the house of
the boat”. He points out that the Madeba mosaic map shows two lines across
the Jordan beneath which are a boat and suggests that these represent a
ferry across the river which was propelled by hauling on a fixed rope. This
points to the traditional site of the baptism, which would certainly require
a ferry.

In addition, the Pilgrim of Bordeaux (AD 333) locates the site of Jesus’
baptism as five Roman miles north of the Dead Sea. (“Thence to the Jordan,
where the Lord was baptised by John – miles V.”) This again points to the
traditional site, which is approximately five miles from the modern north
shore of the Dead Sea and was probably less back in those days. (Five Roman
miles would be about four and a half modern miles.)

The modern church – which replaces the building we first saw – stands on the
east bank of the Jordan in Jordanian territory. On the opposite bank, in
Israeli territory, is a crenellated structure known as Qasr el-Yahud or “the
Jews’ Castle”. It is believed to be built on the ruins of a monastery
erected by the Byzantine emperor Anastasius. The presence of the monastery,
together with fear of marauding Arabs, led pilgrims to be satisfied with a
visit to the west bank of the river and gradually the east bank, which alone
can be described as “beyond Jordan”, was forgotten.

[Picture: The modern baptismal pool at Bethany-beyond-Jordan is available
for all Christian denominations which practise immersion.]

It was the Six-day War which revived interest in the east bank, for the
Israeli occupation of the west bank meant that Arab Christians were no
longer able to visit the west bank site. At first Bethany-beyond-Jordan was
also impossible to visit; it was so close to the river that divided the two
countries that both sides regarded visitors with suspicion and tended to
shoot first and ask questions afterwards.

The situation changed with the 1994 peace treaty between Jordan and Israel,
which not only allowed pilgrimages to recommence, but also provided
opportunity for archaeological investigation. Although earlier surveys of
the area had dismissed it as Byzantine, a more detailed survey conducted by
the Jordanian Department of Antiquities revealed a settlement dating from
the early Roman era and which grew, by Byzantine times to a substantial town
that stretched for two and a half miles along the river bank!

Significantly, excavations which began in 1996 have uncovered the remains of
several churches and some large rectangular pools, at least one of which was
approached by steps, which might indicate that it was used by many people
simultaneously. If that interpretation is correct, then it points to a
ritual use with pilgrims flocking in to immerse themselves in the course of
a religious festival.

There is now a path which visitors can follow that leads past many of these
new discoveries. There are the ruins of several churches, in which a few
scatterings of mosaic flooring can still be seen; there are the pools
mentioned above; there are even a couple of hermits’ caves where monks spent
their time in prayer. Unfortunately, it is still not possible to have a
baptism in the Jordan river itself. You can walk right down to the water’s
edge, but any attempt to get into the water gets a hostile  reaction from
the Israeli side! Instead pilgrims have to use small font near the bank or,
if they prefer full immersion, there is an attractive pool filled with
Jordan water [Note 3] a short distance away.

The situation is less happy on the west bank, where access to the river is
strictly controlled. Pilgrims are allowed to visit at the Feast of Epiphany,
but that is about all and recently (2011) even that was stopped on the
grounds that the government needed to conduct health tests on the water.
Some suspect that the health tests are simply an excuse for further
discrimination against Christians by the Jewish authorities; it is notable
that whereas the Jordanians spent two years clearing the mines that had been
laid on their side of the river, there are still signs warning of mines all
along the Israeli side.

This contrasts with the Muslim Jordanians who have treated their site with a
respect that is wholly commendable. The excavated churches have been
protected with shelters; no tatty commercial development is allowed within
the area, which has been declared a nature reserve; the visitor centre is a
mile from the holy sites themselves to avoid trespassing on their sanctity,
and electric vehicles have been provided to transport visitors to the river.

We run archaeological tours of the Middle East (see
www.diggingsonline.com/pages/tour.htm), not pilgrimages, and our emphasis is
on accurate historical information, not on devotional exercises – though we
always allow opportunity for those who wish to pray to do so. However on
almost every tour there is someone who wishes to mark their visit to the
Jordan in some special way, either by being baptised or by renewing their
baptismal vows and we are happy to make this possible. That is why, on our
trip to Jordan, we stop at Bethany-beyond-Jordan. There is enough
archaeology to make the non-religious happy – and the chance to stretch
one’s legs by the riverside is not to be missed – and for the religious it
is an occasion that will never be forgotten.

Alas, tradition – even ones that turn out to be correct – can get carried
away! Up in Nazareth there is the now ruined Church of Our Lady of the
Fright, which allegedly marks the very spot where Mary was standing when she
saw the mob hustling Jesus out of the synagogue and feared for His safety.
Similar inventiveness has been at work down by the Jordan. Arculf, [Note 4]
a pilgrim who visited the Holy Land in AD 670 records that when he visited
the baptismal site, not only was there a wooden cross in the water marking
the exact spot of Jesus’ baptism, but there was even a chapel on the bank,
erected over the place where Jesus placed His clothes before entering the
water!

======================

Note 1: For those not used to English and its idioms, when one is expressing
doubt about something, a common expression is “I’ll take that with a grain
of salt”. Apparently the phrase comes from a Latin original – cum grano
salis – where also it means that what is being said should not be taken too
seriously. Return

Note 2: The convenience of the spot was proved when we returned in 1967 and
discovered that in the meantime the Jordanians had built a bridge across the
Jordan to replace the rusting baily-bridge constructed by General Allenby
some forty years before. We paused for a swim in the cool water before
continuing on to Jerusalem – and a week or so later were almost the last
people to cross the bridge in the opposite direction when the Six-day War
broke out and we had to leave Jerusalem in something of a hurry. We heard
that the bridge was blown up by the Jordanians about half an hour  after we
drove over it in order to stop the Israelis crossing the Jordan. Return

Note 3: In fact the water comes from Elijah’s Spring, one of the tributaries
of the Jordan. Since the Israelis took the  whole of the Jordan river as it
leaves Galilee and piped it down to the Negev for irrigation, the only water
which reaches  this spot is the miniscule flow from a couple of wadis
between Galilee and the Dead Sea, supplemented by a toxic mix of
agricultural run-off and raw sewage! It is pobably as well that immersion in
the river is not allowed, for whatever the  spiritual benefits the pilgrim
may receive, the physical effects are likely to be dire! Return

Note 4: This is Arculf’s own account of the Jordan, as recorded by Adamnan
of Iona.

“That sacred and honoured place, where the Lord was baptised by John, is
always covered by the waters of the river Jordan, and as Arculf, who went to
the place, relates, he passed backwards and forwards to it through the
river. In that sacred place a wooden cross of great size is fixed, close to
which the water comes up to the neck of the tallest man, or, at a time of
great drought, when the waters are diminished, up to his breast; but when
the river is in flood, the whole of the cross is covered over by the
additional waters. The site of that cross, accordingly, marking the place
where, as has been said above, the Lord was baptised, is on this side of the
bed of the river, and a strong man can with a sling throw a stone from it as
far as the other bank on the Arabian side. From the site of the
above-mentioned cross, a stone bridge is carried on arches to the bank,
across which men go to the cross and descend by a slope to the bank,
ascending as they return. At the edge of the river is a small square church,
built, as is said, on the spot where the garments of the Lord were taken
care of at the time when He was baptised. This is raised, so as to be
uninhabitable, on four stone vaults, standing above the waters which flow
below. It is protected above by slaked lime, and below, as has been said, is
supported by vaults and arches. This church is in the lower ground of the
valley through which the river Jordan flows; while on the higher ground,
overhanging it, a great monastery of monks is built on the brow of the
opposite hill. There is also enclosed within the same wall as the monastery,
a church in honor of St John Baptist, built of squared stones.”

© Kendall K. Down 2011