Page 296

Page 296

Temples Temptation THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG 296

tinned with the booty. The second Temple also had a table (I Mace. i. 22) which was among the costly articles that excited the cupidity of Anbiochus Epiphanea, and was replaced later (I Mace. iv. 49). For the Herodian table the directions'of Ex. xxv. were probably followed (see TABERNACLE, THE MosAIC), though the representation on the Arch of Titus suggests some departures in details. The description by Josephus (Ant., III., vi. 6) of the table in the Tabernacle corresponds with the Exodus description, except that he places feet on it; Josephus places the rings differently from that on the Titus Arch and from that in Exodus.

At Shiloh in the night light was furnished by a lamp with enough oil to last till morning (I Sam. iii. 3). This implies that the sanctuary moat have been adequately lighted by windows.

z. The Only a little natural light entered the Candlestick. holy place (ut sup.) of Solomon's Temple, and artificial illumination was necessary. Accordingly, mention is made of ten golden candlesticks, placed on both sides of the entrance (I Kings vii. 49). Though the passage is a later addition, it is not justifiable to reject these candlesticks as unhistorical; they were, however, probably of bronze. Josephus (Ant., III., vii. 7) makes the sevenfold candlestick consist of seventy pieces, and sees in them seventy symbols through which the seven planets pass. The symbolism may be old and true, but applies more appropriately to seventy lights than to seventy scarcely distinguishable parts of a single candlestick. It corresponds, moreover, to the ten candelabra of seven lights each placed by Solomon in his Temple. The Chronicler (L, xxviii. 15; IL, iv. 7, xui. 11) varies between one and ten in his account. It follows from the foregoing that the candlesticks were intended for use in the daytime. The reference in TI Chron. xlll. 11 is to the time of lighting, not to its duration. The Temple of Zerubbabel contained only one candlestick, and that was comparatively large. It was carried off by Antiochus Epiphanes, restored by Judas Maccabreus, and by Herod placed in his Temple. It was also carried off by Titus, and is figured on the arch. Veapasian placed it in the Temple of Peace, and it can be traced till 534 A.D., when it was taken from Carthage to Constantinople. Subsequently it was taken to Jerusalem and destroyed at a plundering of the city.

In the Temple of Solomon stood a circular basin (" sea ") of bronze, ten cubits in diameter, five in height, and a handbreadth in thickness; its brim was slightly curved, like the petals of a lily. Under the edge were two rows of bronze cucumbers as ornamentation. It stood on twelve oxen in groups of three, each of which groups faced toward a cardinal point. It was con-

3. Other strutted out of copper taken as booty Articles. (I Chron, xviii. 8). It is said to have served the priests in ceremonial cleans ing, but was ill adapted for such a purpose. The expression "sea" recalls that Babylonian, Egyptian, Syrian, and Phenician temples were also provided with " seas," symbolic of the deity subduing the eeardragon. King Ahaz made use of the oxen to pay tribute to the king of Assyria. The basin was

finally carried to Babylon by Nebuchadrezzar. In the Temple of Zerubbabel no " sea " seems to have existed, though there were means for ceremonial washing. In the Temple of Herod stood a fine lover, with brass pedestal, for the priests for the washing of hands and feet before officiating.

In Solomon's Temple were ten peculiar pieces, the " bases " (I Kings vii. 27) not otherwise men tioned. Vessels found in Cyprus seem to aid the description, and to show that on four wheels was a frame, on which figures of animals and cherubim were depicted. Upon this frame was a cylinder, into which a kettle was fitted. As these articles were movable, they were possibly for washing the sacrificial animals. (R. KITTEL.) V. Other Hebrew Temples. A new chapter in the history of Hebrew worship and temples has been opened by the investigations in Egypt. For the Onus temple see LEONTOPOLIa. It is now known that a temple for worship and sacrifice existed at Elephantine, Egypt. The Aramaic papyri discov ered there (see SEMITIC LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE; cf. E. Saehau, Abhundlungen der k6niglich-preussi schen Akademie der yVissenschaften, 1907, partial Eng. trans]. and discussion in Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution, 1907, pp. 60511; A. H. Sayee, Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assouan, London, 1906) show that in the fifth century a Jewish community possessed an imposing temple, which in 408-407 s.c. had already existed for a con siderable period. The Persian control of Egypt had been favorable to the community and its temple, but through the machinations of Egyptian priests the temple had recently been destroyed and its treasures and vessels appropriated. Two of the documents are an appeal for the reconstruction of this temple, while the third implies that the request was granted. The net result of the documents is to show at least two temples in which sacrifice was offered to Yahweh in Egypt. .A suggestion which is made in connection with the critical opinions con cerning Isa. xix. 18 is that in view of the known numerous settlements of Hebrews in Egypt, the discovery of other temples there would now hardly be a surprise. It is interesting to note that partly as a result of the discovery and verification of the existence in Egypt of these Jewish temples, Ezek. xx. is interpreted as referring to an inquiry by the " elders of Israel " (verse 1) respecting the erection of a temple to Yahweh in Babylonia. The answer, on this interpretation, was an emphatic negative (verses 39-41). GEO. W. GILMORE.

BxaLrooxnrar: On the topography of the site of the Temple consult the abundant literature under JERUSALEM, and the following: G. Rosen, Der Haram von Jerusalem and der Tempelplatz des Moria, Goths, 1886; F. Adler, Der Felaendom and die heut%pe Grabeskirche zu Jerusalem, Berlin, 1873· C. Schick, Belt el Makdaa oder ¢er alte Tempelplatz, Stuttgart, 1887; idem, Die Stijtshiitte, der Tempel in Jerusalem, and der Tempelplatz der Jetztzeit, Berlin, 1898; C. Mommert, Topographic von Jerusalem, 3 parts, Leipaic, 1903-05; A. KGmmel, Materialen zur Topographic des alien Jerusalem, Halle, 1904-06.

On the different temples in Jerusalem consult: J. F. von Meyer, Der Tempel Salomos. Berlin, 1830; C. F. Kiel, Der .J'empel Salomos, Dorpat, 1839 (still of value); C. C. W. F. Bghr, Der aalomonische Tempel, Carlsruhe, 1548; G. Williams, The Holy City, ii. 296 sqq., London, 1849; J. T. Bannister, The Temples of the Hebrews, ib., 1881; J. Ferguason, The Temples of the Jews, ib. 1875; T. H,