In a recently published article, Amos Kloner rejects the argument that the wall Hennessy excavated can be dated to the period before 70 A.D. [Amos Kloner, “The ‘Third Wall’ in Jerusalem and the ‘Cave of the Kings,’” Levant 19 (1986)]. Hennessy’s preliminary report (all that was published) is, Kloner argues, “very concise, lacking in detail.” A pre-70 A.D. road was excavated but, says Kloner, “the connection between the levels of the early road from the Second Temple period and the building of the gate and adjoining wall is not clear.” Kloner notes that at other points along the northern wall of the Old City where excavations “have been conducted, the excavators have found no trace of a pre-70 wall.”

For Hamrick, however, “Hennessy’s sound archaeological evidence has demonstrated that the Third Wall did in fact follow the general route of the present north wall of the Old City.” According to Hamrick, Hennessy “established beyond any reasonable doubt (with full stratigraphic, ceramic and numismatic evidence) that Agrippa’s Third Wall is found on the east side of the present-day Damascus Gate.” Hamrick worked with Hennessy in one of the soundings and “witnessed the evidence firsthand.”

Kloner is equally confident: “It is almost certain that the line of the present northern wall of the Old City cannot be identified with the line of the Third Wall of Josephus. Clinging to this theory ignores the archaeological evidence first presented by Hamilton and strengthened by the various examinations over the last decade.” (Kloner, “The ‘Third Wall,’” p. 126) Obviously, there is a great need for someone to restudy Hennessy’s field notes.