Page 294

Page 294

Temples THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG 294

spectator, but were concealed by a structure fifteen to twenty cubits high. This was in three stories and contained a great number of small rooms or cells, each five cubits high; those on the ground floor were five cubits wide, those on the second floor six, and those on the third, seven. The approach to the whole was on the south side and the ascent from lower floor to upper was by means of a stairway. Ezekiel mentions thirty-three rooms on one floor, which would show them to have been very smallprobably for storing paraphernalia, votive offerings, and the like. The Temple proper was divided into two chambers, the holy place and the holy of holies. The door to the latter was of olive wood, the lintel above forming with the posts a pentagon. The entrance door to the holy place was of cedar and cypress, very wide, double, and each door was in two parts. The holy place was forty cubits long and twenty wide. It was the room for the officiating priests and the vestibule to the holy of holies. The latter, which was the real shrine, inaccessible to the ordinary mortal and even to the priest, was a cube of twenty cubits and was accordingly ten cubits lower than the holy place, and there must therefore have been a room ten cubits high above it, as in the Temple of Herod. From this the light was completely excluded, while the holy place was but dimly lighted. Both chambers were wainscoted and paneled with cedar and cypress. The windows are not described (I Kings vi. 4), but were probably along the upper third of the walls. Light was obtained from candles. In the holy of holies stood the Ark of the Covenant (q.v.); in the holy place, the table of showbread, the candlesticks, and the altar of incense (see below, IV.).

The account reports ornamentation by means of carved cherubs, palms, and flower garlands. Everything, moreover, is said to have been covered with gold-leaf (I Kings vi. 20 sqq., 28 sqq.,

4. Orna- 35), though the texts are not in commentation. plete accord. There is some question as to whether the treasures and trophies hung on the walls were of gold. It seems likely that Solomon ornamented certain parts of the interior with gold-leaf, though there is no poysitive evidence of the fact. On the other hand, it seems certain that there were in the time of Ezekiel figures engraved on the walls. This is suggested by II Kings xii. 8 sqq., xvi. 10 sqq., xxiii. 4, 11 sqq. The roof is not described. II Kings xxiii. 12 shows that the kings of Judah had placed altars there, and a gloss affirms that Ahaz built an upper story for this reason. It must be inferred that the roof was flat. In the porch stood two bronze pillars, eighteen cubits high, twelve in circumference, and four fingers thick, which were surmounted by capitals five cubits high, covered with checkered work. The capitals were formed like lilies, and two rows of 100 pomegranates each ran along each, in the form of garlands over the checker-work. The description is vague, especially as to the relation of the checker-work to the lilies. The pillars stood do the right and left of the portal, that on the right being called Jachin, and that on the left, Boaz. The meaning of the names and the significance of the pillars are obscure. The purpose here may have been purely architectural

but the pillars are probably to be related to the obelisks and pillars that were characteristic of Phenician and Canaanitic temples (see ALTAR, L, § 3 ; ABHERAV; GROVEa AND TREES, SACRED; MEMORIALS AND SACRED STONES).

Solomon's Temple can hardly have been of native design. Solomon was obliged to import not only material, but workmen. There was apparently no native architectural art in Israel. g. Architec- The bronze work. was entrusted to

tore. Huramabi, a Tyrian artificer, and it seems probable that both execution and conception of the plan of the Temple were strongly influenced by Phenicia. But it seems un likely that the Phenicians originated the style of architecture employed; they were better imitators than inventors. The type is common in Egypt, where a chamber of columns corresponds to the holy place, and the pylon to the porch, while in front of the pylon stand two pillars or obelisks. The home of the peculiar style employing wooden columns must be sought in the Lebanon district, in northern Syria; but it probably goes back still further, to Egypt. The Temple represents, then, a mixture of styles. The Temple proper with its firm, square construction corresponds to the native Phenician-Canaanitic style. It was essentially Phe nician in origin, though details were borrowed from Mycene and Egypt. The arrangement of the holy of holies, cells, vestibule, and walled court is ulti mately of Egyptian origin, further developed in northern Syria under Phenician and Hittite influence.

II. Zerubbabel's Temple: The most important source for the origin of the Temple which took the place of Solomon's, which was destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar, is the book of the prophet Haggai. This says nothing of the opposition of the Samaritans, who, according to Ezra iii. iv., prevented the early completion of the structure on which a beginning was made two years after the return. Haggai attributes the delay of construction to the lukewarmness of the congregation itself. The building was begun about the middle of the year 520 B.C., and the corner-stone was laid on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Haggai says nothing of a former attempt, and it must be assumed that the returned exiles had merely raised an altar, as narrated in Ezra iii. 1 sqq. Hag. ii. 14 has a similar implication. The accounts, Biblical and other, give unfortunately scarcely any information as to the character of the Temple that was built in 520 under Zerubbabel and the high priest Joshua. It may be assumed that it occupied the site of Solomon's. From Hag. ii. 4 .it appears that the new building made a sad impression on those who, dad seen the earlier. It was, in all probability, inferior not so much in its dimensions, for the plan of Solomon's Temple was probably followed, but in its construction, appointments, adornment, and surroundings. But according to Ezra vi. 3-4, Cyrus ordered a building sixty cubits high and sixty wide, much larger, therefore, thai Solomon's Temple. If Cyrus issued this order, it evidently was not executed. Hecateus is probably right (Josephus, Apion, i. 22) in giving the dimensions of the fore-court as 475 x 142 feet. It was entered by a folding-door. The altar for