Vou iv

4« there were 'posts' (EV) or 'wall fronts 'o (A. B. Davidson) (Fig. 6, J J J J), which from guard-room to guardroom were 5 cubits. There were four in all — two on each side. Their use was purely archi- tectural. At the west end of the guard-rooms there was a second threshold /3 (7'), the same in all respects a-s the other, but acting as threshold to one entering from the outer court, as the other did to one entering from the outside. We now enter the porch {P), an empty space 8 cubits long (E.

to W.), c rf, and 20 broad (N. to S.),7 ki. The breadth of the gateway all along ibs length was 10 cubits,5 e.\cept where the l>arriers occur : these occupying a cubit each side wotild reduce the distance between the guard-rooms from barrier to barrier (m m n n) to 8 cubits. The length of the gateway, leaving out the steps, which are not counted, was 50 cubit8,e and it was wholly roofed, as may be gathered from the fact that guard-rooms and intervening ' posts' required windows.

The length of the gateway is thus maxie up — Outer threshold (T)ab . . 3 guard-rooms (fr G G) . • 2 'posta or ' wall fronts' (J0 • Inner threshold (2") n c Porch (P)cd 'Posts' or 'wall fronts' (J'J')dt Total . 6 cubit*. 18 .. 10 „, 6 „ • 8 „ . S .. CO cubits. Windows. — According to Ezk 40" there were windows in the guard-rooms, in the 'posts' be- tween them, and in the porch.

Those of the guard- rooms looked out into the court, and lighted at once the rooms themselves and also the adjoining gateway.^ The windows in the ' posts ' extended all through their thickness of 6 cubits. If these posts were solid walls, it must have been so, and not, as Davidson's diagram j; represents, a mere oiieiiirig on the outside wall. On the nature and function of the windows see above.

There must liave been windows on the north and south of the porch, and probably the ' post ' walls had them too. See Fig. 6. '1 he end ' posts ' (d e) had palm trees engraved on them. 9 The north and south gates are said to have been exactly like the eastern gate, and so did not need separate descriptiim. Uutcr i-Murt. — For remarks on the function and sigiiiticance of the outer court see above. And • 4010 a-y^f ; L.X.X «.>i/«, $ VP. r The widti) of the porch (N. to S.) is not given In the MT.

In Ezk -IMi-t, however, we read, ' He made also posts of 10 cubit.' Kliefoth, followed by lienor., Keil, Schroder (Lan^c). Perrot and Chipiez — [see their restorations] — and others defend the text as it stands. The two * posts ' at the end of the porch were like churcli steeples — so says Kliefotli ; and it was such gate pillars that HUK'Kest^'d our i^luirch steeples. Hut the 'posts' in question formed no part of the sanctuary, as chun^h steeples usually do: unless, indeed, Kl.

was thinkinfj of the campamU or bell-tower churches, such as is to be seen at Chichester, etc It is fur more sensible to emend the text with the aid of the LXX, and to read, 'And he measured the porch (changing 0'7'y 'Him to crx 'fMm)20oublt»'; i.e. In breadth— the other measurements have been piven : thus Smend, Comill, Davidson, and llertholet. This woulilleave 6 cubits for the two side walls, {.(!. 2A cubits apiece.

The ' Jaml»s ' or posts towards the outside (d «) are said to have had a thickness of t cubits. I 4Ull». • Kzk 4015. The statement in v." that the gateway was 26 cubits, thoupfh supported by the Versions, is in direct collision with v. 16, and must, vs'ith Smend and Comill, bo rejected as an inti'rpolation. Butt., llitz., lluv., and Keil retain, however, and explain thus : the whole gateway (lyv*) consisted of a covered portion at each end, with an unroofe<i space in the middle.

It Is, they bold, the covered part that is meant in v. 13. Hut if so, why is this not stated? Bortholet's defence of the words requires a noii-nalural interpretation of the verse. { The ' barrier ' was probabl;v a wall sulflclently low tor the Utrht to pass over it. There Is nothing in the text opposed to this. There mi(;ht have been windows in the barrier lt«eil ; Uils is likely If the barrier walls were high. • C<mt.p.£M. «E£k40U."n.

706 TEMPLE TEMPLE for considerations showing that the first temple had but one court, see ' Court ' under SOLOMoys 'TliilFLE. The outer court was comparatively free from buildings. Besides the iiortli, east, and south gates, it had 30 cells a ranged along its outer walls. The 30 cells (Fig. 5, 1. 2. 3, etc.) which went around the court were used for keeping utensils and provisions, and served also as residences for the pricsts.^S They were also used for sacrificial feasts.

The ancient high places had connected with them a festive chamber, where sacrificial meals were partaken We are not told the size of these cells, nor how they were distributed. A stone pavement extended from the outer wall to a distance corresponding to the guLeways, i.e. 44 cubits, which with the width of the wall (0 cubits) made 60 cubits. The cells are said to have been upon the pavement, which seems to mean that they had the pavement for floor.

But the preposition rendered ' upon ' means prevailingly ' to,' S and the Hebrew permits the translation : ' the cells were attached to the pavement,' i.e. they were placed at the termination of the pavement without being on it. But the analogy of other cells makes it practically certain that these were attAched to the boundary wall. Taking this for granted, the prophet is quite silent as to how they were arranged.

Most authorities— Stade, I Benzinger,C Nowacktj (both the latter follow Stade closely), Davidson, Perrot and Chipiez, Keil. etc. — place 10 cells on the_ north, east, and south sides, leaving the west side for the binyan i (Fig. 6, B). Five are supposed to be on each side of the respective outer gates. This answers well to the symmetry so characteristic of Kzekiel's temple.

Orelli and Bertholet — the latter treads closely in the footsteps of his Basel colleague — allocate six of these ceils to the west side, 3 on each side of the binyan (B). There are then 8 on each of the remaining 3 sides, 4 on one side of each gate and 4 on the other. The binyan occupying but a small part of the western wall, leaves room enough for 3 cells on each side of it.

The words 'chambers and a pavement' made for the court row nrf abmU,i support the plan of putting cells on each of the 4 Bides, unless, indeed, with Kliefoth and Cornill, we limit the words ' round about ' to the pavement. Opinions are divided also as to the way in which the cells stood in relation to one another. Keil>^ maintains that the cells on each side of the north, east, and south gates were but rooms in one building, like the rooms of a house.

He has there- fore on his plan but 6 buildings for the 30 cells, 6 cells in each. But in that case we should have expected to read of ti build- ings, and not merely of 30 cells. Davidson separates the cells by an intervening space.x Stade, Benz., Now., Orelli, Berth., and Perrot and Chipiez join the cells, putting a mere wall between them ; and this is the likeliest view, for on Davidson's conception there would be a considerable wast« of labour and materials in the extra walls required.

Pavement. — The pavement already spoken of is called the ' lower pavement,V from which one would infer that the inner and upper courts was also paved. Smend concludes from 2 Ch V and Aris- teas' letter that the whole of the inner court was paved. Cornill rejects the words as an interpola- tion, though on purely subjective grounds. Kitchen.^.

— In each of the four corners of the outer court there was a kitchen in which the sacri- ficial meals were got ready,^ the size of each being 40 cubits long by 30 broad. The ' ministers of tlie house ' 0 boiled in them what the people brought to be sacrificed. The Inner Court.— The inner court was for the priests alone ; and its being thus exclusively used, and there being more than one court at all, marks a new step in the religion of Israel.

As compared with the outer and larger court, the inner was crowded with buildings having to do with the temple service, particulars of whicli will be found below. From the external margin of the outer walls to the walls of the inner court there was a distance of 150 cubits. The entrance to the inner « For the sake of distinctness we use ' cell for nj-.f'^, piard- room' (or Nn, and 'chamber' for JJ^'J. Indian, Egj-ptian, etc.

, ^mples, as is well known, contained also, within their courts dwelhngs for priests, besides kitchens, refectories, etc. See Bealc's Oi/Wf to Architecture, p. 34. 0 Ezk 4017^0 42ifr. ; cf. 1 Ch O^, Ezr 10«, Neh IS"-. )- 1 S 922 ; cf. je, 3J4 sgio. ,1,^ > OmcA. ii. 61. { lleb. Arch. , jja,. Arch e Ezk 41". , Ezk 40" 3'59 3-39. M Com. p. 8S3, pi. 1. A Com. p. 299 u. tOi». » 4021. { 4621 'il. • i-t. the aubordiDBte officials ; cf. Ezk 44>0'i<.

court was by means of 3 gates opposite to the 3 outer gates and of the same construction, only tliat the parts — threshold to porch — occurred in reverse order ; the porcli of the inner gate being next the steps, and not farthest away, as in the outer gate, etc. There were 8, not 7 steps between the two courts — a sign perhaps of the increased progress in holiness as compared with the passage from the outside to the first court.

Sacrificial cell and tables about the porch of the inner Nortliem {or Eastern?) Gate. — On one side of the inner northern gateway, joining tlie porch, and with a passage into the porch, there was a cell, not further described as to structure, size, or position. Smend a represents it as on the south side of the porch, having the same length and a third of its breadth. This cell was used for washing the burnt-otlerings.

/3 Kliefoth, Keil, and Schroder (Lange) maintain that the sacri- fices were washed — the last process they were put through before they were laid upon the altar — at each of the 3 itmer gates. Indeed Kliefoth goes so far as to say that there were two washing cells attached to each porch of the inner gates, one on each side. But the slaughtering took place at one gate only.y and it is practically certain that the washing did too. ' Gates ' in v.

K* should be read ' gate ' with the LXX and most authorities. Another debated and debateable question is — Which gate U meant at which this washing cell was situated? Ew., Hitz., Smend, Corn., and Berth, hold that it is the eastern, their principal grounds being, that (1) the eastern gate was the most sacred, that (2) the stream that supplied water for washing the sacrifices passed by the east end of the temple, 5 and that (3) at the N. and S. gates there were other buildings t (Fig. 5, P P').

On the other hand, Bottcher,^ Havernick, and Davidson hold that the northern gate is meant,*? and for reasons which, to the present writer, appear conclusive. Here are some of them : — (1) The prophet is already at the N. gate. Cornill gets rid of this difficulty by his usual and often successful way of emend- ing the text. In the beginning of v.ss he introduces a clause answering to the beginning of v.35 ' And he brought me to the door of the porch of the eastern gate.'

But he has absolutely no external support for the change thus made. (2) According to the rf'gulations in Leviticus,^ the slaughtering of animals for sacrifice was to take place at the N. side of the altar in the case of burnt-, sin-, and trespass-offerings. No directions are given as to peace -offerings.! It is to be expected be- forehand that Ezekiel's legislation and that of the Priestly Code would tally. (3) The N. gate is called in 8^ the 'gate of the altar.'

Since it was to this gate that the people brought their offerings, it was the most frequented- The two E. gates were kept shut except on Sabbaths and new moons,x or on other special occasions when the prince desired to present freewill-offerings.x The western gate was closed by buildings connected with the temple. In the pre-exilic temple the S. gate was joined to the palace court, which is partly true of the eastern gate as well. Passing into the inner N.

gate, on both sides of the porch — which is first reached — we see 4 tables, 2 on each side (T'), on which the burnt-, sin-, and trespass-offerings were slain ; ix or at least they were used in connexion iirith the slaying of these sacrifices, as Keil and Davidson understand the words. The actual slaughtering took place prob- ably on 4 tables outside, the 4 inside tables being used in that case for preparing the sacrifices for the altar.

According to Lv I^ 6-^ 7" the above- named sacrifices had to be killed on the N. side of the altar.)/ If these tables were placed near the N. gate, this requirement of P would be met. Tliere were without the porch two tables on each side — 4 in all (T) ; on these, as stated above, the actual slaughtering took place.f In addition to the 8 tables noticed above there were 4 of hewn stone, each with a length and breadth of one cubit and a half, having a height of one cubit.

They had ledges running round the 4 top edges a hand- <t Com. p. 330. fi Ezk 4038. y toaa, i Ezk 47" . 1 41H4. C Probm. ,41135-37. (Ill 4M. S9. IS6M7S14U. , 3i 8. IS. , 461ir.. X ««U. ^ 4039. » See above. i 4i|M. Bdttcher contends that these tables stood In the outer court, two at each of the angles formed by the steps and the gate front. His reasoning turns chiefly 00 the meaning of inr, rendered 'side.' See Proben, etc p. 830 f.

But we haT« certainly to seek some spot in the InDer court in which tba angel and prophet now are. TOIPLK TEMPLE 707 breadth in ^ridth : those turned inwards. The instruments made use of in the burnt-offerings were kept on these stone tables. a Priests' cells ^ (P P').— Close to the N. and S. innei gates there were 2 cells for the otticiating inner gates there was a square, having 100 cubits to the side (a b c d).

The altar (A) was probably in the centre, and therefore equally visible from all the inner gates, a Tlie space between the altu and the house was deemed specially sacred.^ u no. 7. 5r=ltep« before the porch. /"sporrh. U = htkaL D = dmr. BB' = H and S. cntmncM to chnmliera. S' .S=hi.-iirs com linit the Blorejs. B^iloat ^ = Jachin. J/ = the munndh. T=lhe altar-Bhaped table uf shewbrcad. priests. The N. cell (P) was for the priests who | 2. TllE HOUSE AND ITS MEASUHEMENTS.-y— The >aw to the liouse.

y its pates, saeriliees, etc. The house and its appurtenances formed a squaro of other (P') was for the Zadokite priests who had 100 cubits oaili way. The manner in which this [» made up will be shown in summary after tha several uetuils have been considered. charge of the altar, Between the bouse and the inner ends of the y In iii"! the Leritea m uid to have charse of the bouM. • Cf. 43i:iir-. V Ezk 40«Mlf ^ Ezk 81*, Jl S>7, Mt !3». 708 TEMPLE TEMPLE The porch a (P). — The porch (Fig.

7) was 20 cubits from N. to S. {d c), and 11 cubits, or rather 12,/3 from E. to W. {d f). The platform of the house ■was 6 cubits higher than the ordinary level of tlie inner court : this was reached by 10 steps.7 Close to tlie 'posts' or 'wall fronts' of the ^lorch were two pillars,5 the Boaz and Jachin of 1 K 7-' (J5 J). The hekal or Holy Place e (H).—1\\e hrkal was 40 cubits long (E. to W.) and 20 broad (N. to S.)— inside measurements.

Tlie posts of tlie entrance wall (i A) were 6 cubits thick. The door or entrance way into the h^kal was 10 cubits (A h, i »). the dihir or Most Holy Place f {D, Fig. 7).— The dcblr was a cube of 20 cubits each way. Its posts (0 p) were 2 cubits in thickness, this bein" the thickness of the wall (n 0) which extended from the N. and S. walls of the house to the door. This wall 7; (ra 0) was 7 cubits wide, leaving 6 cubits for the door. 9 Doors of h^kSl and dl^lr.

i — Both Mkal and dfhtr had folding doors of the kind already de- scribed, it It is not said that the cUbtr of Solomon's temple had such doors. The doors of the hikcll were carved with cherubim and palm trees,X as the Mkal walls were./i The porch entrance (a-a : b-b) — we read of no door — was 14 cubits wide.M The door or entrance to the Mkal was 10 cubits wide.i' that of the diUr being 6.{ The entrances were therefore in the proportion 7:5:3 (14 : 10 : 6).

It is singular, though probably only a coincidence, that the wall projections ( = ' sidepieces ') 0 had exactly opposite ratios, viz. Z(za) : 5 (fh) : 7 (n 0). The side chambcrs.ir — On every side of the house except the east, Ezekiel's temple, like Solomon's, had side chambers. The MT ^ves the number of them as 3.3, and Sraend displays mucli in- genuity in justifying the text, which in this con- nexion is by universal confession very corrupt. In fa. our of there being 30 are the LXX, Josephus.

p Bottcher, Cornill, and most recent authorities, as also is the fact that there were 30 cells along the outer wall, not to add the greater .symmetry of the round number. In Kings the number is not given. The chambers, arranged as in Solo- mon's temple in 3 storeys, were on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd storeys respectively, 4, 5, and 6 cubits broad : in the first temple the figures were 5, 6, and 7. The 2nd and 3rd storeys rested upon rebatements, on which see p. 699''.

Concerning the rebates in the temple wall, the ladders by which the upper storeys were reached, and the uses of the chambers, see above, p. 699''. Ezekiel's temple had doors [E E'), one N., one S., by which admission to tlie chambers could be ob- tained. There was but one for the first temple, and it was situated at the south t (see Fig. 2, E). There was probably a ladder at each entrance : Ezekiel's temple would thus have two ladders (SS'), Solomon's temple one (Fig. 2, S).

The inunnnh,T or ' what was left ' (EV). — On the outside of the chambers N. and S. there was an empty margin of 5 cubits (M). It was out of this munndh that entrance was had to the chambers through the two doors {E E'j. S T)ius the LXX ; and the other measurement* require 1& See Summary at p. 708i>. ■y E;:k 41t>. i iV. See Boai. I 411f-. 413f-. II 413. LXX correctly nkr iiraiutlmt nv Su^fdmntt reading ninn^i Instead of 31311 (' and the width '), «'4l3. ' 1 41»». » Above, p. 7001>, Fig. 4.

X 41» 4117«.. ft Tboueh the Hebrew does not ^ve the width, It Is supplied by the liXX of 41^8. Adding to this 14 cubits the two project- ing walls (d 6, 6 0) we get 6 (= 2 x 3) -H4 = 20, the width ot the porch (N. to 6.), which is a confirmation of the LXX > 41>. { 413. , «i«. t41»-ii. f Ant. \m. \\l t. ( 1 K «». I nj:: Ezk 41«- ". The gizrah,a or ' separate place ' (EV). —On e\ ery side except the E. there was a space of 20 cubits, called the gizrah (Fig. 5, beef).

This court ran round the whole bouse buildings, including the munndh, on N. and S. ; or it went round the raised platform on which these stood. Reckoning to- gether gizrah, munnah, chambers, and house, there was a breadth (N. to S. ) of 100 cubits, which makes it highly probable that the gizrah formed /)ar< of the upper platform, instead of merely enclosing it. The text;3 is silent as to any use to whicli the gizrah was put.

Perliaps, like our cloisters, it was for the priests to exercise themselves in, and take fresh air when unable to get farther afield. The binyanyor ' building' (EV). — On the W. side of the house and adjoining the gizrah there was a rectan^lar structure called, apparently, techni- cally binyCin (Fig. 5, B), the inside measurements of which were 70 cubits from E. to W. and 90 from N. to S. Its encompassing wall was 5 cubit.s in thickness. Its W.

limit reached to the western wall and joined it, as may be seen from the dimen- sions below : — I/ength ot binyan (E. to W.) 70 cubits. 2wallsof do. (E. and W.)2x6 . . 10 „ Oizrah 20 „ Total . . 100 cubits. We know that the western side of the house waa 100 cubits from the outer wall, so that there could be no space between the latter and the binyan.

TheniusS contends strongly that there was such an inter- vening space, and that behind the binyan there were gates throu^'h which wood and animals to be sacrificed were brought into the temple area, and through which refuse of every kind was carried away, lilief. and Keil hold that the binyan was made for the purpose of receiving the offal of the sacrifices and the sweepings of the gates. Curry 1 says the carcase of the sin-offering was burnt at this building.

^ It is veiy probable that by the binyan we are to understand the same as the Dii"!grr,( of 2 K 23U (places in which horses and chariots were kept) and the l^ng of 1 Cb 2619 (a part of the temple west of the house, of wliicli the priests had charge). In Ezk 4115 we read of the binyan and its 'galleries ' : for the last word we should certainly read, with Com. and others, 'walls.' 5 This is confirmed by calculation. Adding 90 cubits, the N. to S.

dimension, to the "widths of the two enclosing walls (5-1-5 = 10), we get 100 cubits. Besides, in no other place do we read of there being galleries in the binyan. General measurements of the house. — The house and its belongings formed a square of 100 cubil.-< a side,4 as shown below — From E. to W. m have these details (see Fig. 7)— ab Porch wall, Ezk 408 6 cubit. (V Porch, 40*9 12 „ /k Wall of hfkal.

411 6 „ fcn Length of hfkdl, 41« 40 „ nr Wall of dMr, 41» 2 „ r» Lenirth of dibir, 41* 20 „ Walla ot house (W.), 41» . . 6 „ 1, 2, eto., Side chambers, 415 , , . , 4 „ Wall of side chambers, 419 , . 6 ,, Total . 100 cubits. This calculation proves that the munndh (JO did not extend to the W. side. Theee are ths dime ntiont from N.toS.— Breadth of house, Eek 41> . . 20 cubita. Side walls, 41°, 6-1-6 ... 12 » Sidechambers, 414, 4-1-4 . . g „ Walls of side chambers, 41», 6+6 . .

10 „ Jfunmii, E. and W., 41", 6-f6 . . 10 „ Gitrah, E. and W., 411°, 20-t-20 . 40 „ Total . 100 cubit • ,T)I1, from 11} Elk 411" 421- !»• ". /9 Ezk 41". y i;)5, lit ' building,' from .1J5 ' to build.' ) See Da* vorex. Jems, vnd detsen Tempel, Taf. iii. fig. & 1 Speaker » Comm. i Ezk 43^1. •1 AV 'suburbs,' BV 'precincts.' Both inj and IjiJ an derived by Oesen. (Thet.) from Pere. farwar, a summer-house, open on all sides to admit air.

He considers the ' parbar ' of 1 Ch 26"* to have been an open porch atljoining the temple. In Rabbinical Hebrew (Mishna, etc) parbar means temple court, and also suburbs of a city. See, further, art. PaRBia. e niTp for D'P'BK. « 41i»^». TEMPLE TEMPLE 7Ui, Decoration of the inside of the house. — Tlio walls a of hfkfil, dlbir, and porch were wainscotted, as were also the closed windows.

(3 The wall decora- tion was arranged in compartments or liekls,7 in each of which a clicrub and palm tree were en- graved, the cherub havinj; faces of man and lion, one face looking upon the other.S On the side walls of the porch, palra trees alone were carved. Wiudmna. — Little is said about the windows of Ezekiel's temple. Those of the gateway,^ the porch.f and the house i; are characterized as 'closed,' 9 i.e. 'latticed.'

In 1 K 6^ the windows of Solomon's temple are further characterized as 'beamed.' This second feature is probably under- stood of Ezekiel's temple too. See more fully above (p. 700*) on windows of Solomon's temple. Priests' cells in the Inner Court. i — N. and S. of thegizrdh there were 4 rows of cells in which the priests ate the holj' food and deposited their garments, two rows being on the N. and two on the S.

First there was one abutting upon the gizrah and lying along its whole length of 100 cubits. Then came a parade or walk 10 cubits broad of the same length. Next to this, parallel to the gizrah and the first row of cells, was a half row, starting at the west, the remaining space Contents of the house — In the hSkill of Ezekiel's temple there was nothing except the cedar wood altar,o which was 2 cuhits in both length and breadth (3 and 3 culiits high.

It had raised comers,7 wrongly called horns S by the LXX, and is described as a 'table (set) before Jehovah.' t The altar of bumt-ofl'ering is also called the table of Jehovah. f It cannot be the altar of incen.se that is meant, for we find no such table mentioned earlier than P. No doubt we are to understand the altar-shaped table of shewbread (Fig. 7, T), as in Solomon's temple, this table occupying the same fiosition in both temples. Of other tables or of ampstands not a word is written.

Nor is anything said about what the dSblr contained. This may, of course, be due to the brevity with which the house is treated ; but as a matter of fact we do not read of the ark after the destruction of Solomon's temple. i; Ezekiel's altar is much more elaborate than that of Solomon's temple, and owing to the large num- ber of technical terms 0 and other difficulties it is harder to reconstruct.

The altar was in form as if made up of four square blocks of stone, the lowest being the largest, the next being smaller to the extent of one cubit ~io Cubits 0123436-38 no. 8. — AI.TAR or BUBNTK)FPERINO 15 KZKRIEL'B TRMrLB.1 being taken np by a wall. The chambers had 3 storeys, but no pillars supporting them, as the 30 cells of the outer court had. 'flie cells on the upper storey were narrower than the two below, so that in the direction of the house there was a balcony, or rather corridor.

The entrance to the cells was at tlie E. end, and was apparently on lower ground than that on which the cells were.it Bertholet concludes from this that the entrance was thus on the outer court level. The MT doea not say anything as to the number of cells there were, but the LXX (fives the number as 30 in its host copies (A, etc.) : i.e. Ifi N. and tlie wime nunil)er S., 10 in each full row and & In each half row.

The total would, according to this, be Identical with the cells along the outer walL • I.e. the walls enclosing the openings rendered 'openingi.* These walls were themselves covered with beams; cf. D'C~;f' I K tv» : it was on these beams that the wood-car\'ing was done. Berth., on account of the difficulty of uiiiierstanding how windows could be covered with wood, rejects this clause ; yet II is found in all the .M8S and versions. 3 ■ naileries' of MT must go — so LXX, Comlll, Davldwn.

Other changes are necessary in 4118. »• n^i? ; of. Neh 3'1- •»■ i. The LXX omit* the word. i Not four faces, like the chenibitn of ch. 1. More tbao two bees could I )t be represented on a Hat surface. 1 tik 4U'«. ; 41M. , 41". « OlItJH. / 41"> t2>'I'. > F.lk t». each side, the third and fourth having a superficial area less than the block below also of one cubit each side. There was thus a ledge or margin k of one cubit in width at the basis of the three upper blocks (Fig. 8 dd', ee', g g').

On the outer hall of the lowest margin there was an upright parapet X (g h, g' h'), forming a kind of channel into which, according to tradition, the sacrificial blood fiowed, whence it was conducted by a subterranean passage to the Wady Kidron./x The altar was not made of solid stone ; its interior was of earth, f but this was covered with stones, just as the altar of Solomon's temple had a covering of bra.ss. The • 41>>. ^ The breadth 1* Dot glveii In MT, but It Is supplied by the LXX.

y nH'ipO. I mifarm. i 4ia. C Ezk 41W. , See Abi. » aj, ^133, p'n, mj!' . Ezk 43is«r.. m p'n. The majority of commentator follow the Targum, and make this word stand for 'basement,' 33 being really the word used for this. Thus Oeson. (.The.) Iliiv., Kell, Corn., Orelli, Bertholet. and Kraetzschmar. The view fovo\ired in the text al>ove is defended by Villalpando (HOOS) and other oldel commentators, and by Smond (see his Ezechitl, where the argu menta are ylvenX *■ '?<3;. u Voma ill. 1.

i K^ SC" 710 TEMPLE TEMPLE altar had, however, the appearance of three blocks of solid stone, with three successive terraces, the lowest of tlieni being bound by a para|)et half a cubit wide. The uppermost surface was a square of 1-2 cubits each way ; and as on this the sacnhces were offered, it is called, by way of pre-eminence, the altar.a Kcil and ComiU maintain tliat the altar proper ™s ac"^, of 12 cubits a side, tlie rest of the structure (all except i/^t^) beinl' a Ided tor use or o.

nament, but formn.g no part o t e altar; but in the text the ^voni 'altar' .s used of the en^n. structure ; (3 and this larger sense is defended by hJietotb, Ewaia, Emend, A. B. Davidson, and Bertholet. The 'arVely or altarhearth had four horns [ba, b'a'), each a cubit high, rising out of its four corners. S The uppermost surface was as stated a square of 12 cubits on each side. The higliest block (A) had a thickness of 4 cubits.

The area of the next block (B) was a square of 2 cubits wore on each side ; that is, it was 14 cu^ s a side and it had a thickness of 4 cubits The thud block from the top (C) had for its surface a square of 16 cubits on each side, and a thickness of Z cubits. The lowest block, tlie back or base,e had for its upper surface a square of 18 cubits a side, and a thickness of one cubit. The hci;.

ht of the upper surface of the whole was 12 cubits, as is seen from the following details :— Basement (33) 1 <=">'''• Lower block (n-|;jD? 2 cubits. Higher block (rnivj? * " Block of altar hearth p.xnx) . 4 .. HomB l"'""- Total 12 cubits. the temple had been destroyed, Sheshbazzara WR« sent by Cyrus, king of Persia, to be governflr of Judiea. He received permission to take with huii his leading fellow-countrymen from Babylon, to restore their Jewish religion and rebuOd tb9 teraple.

jS Sheshbazzar was accompanied by his nephew Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest, representing respectively the royal and priestly lines Cyrus not only gave orders that the temple should be re-erected, but he gave Sheshbazzar power to carry with him the sacred vessels taken by Nebucliadnezzar from the temple, and imposed a tax upon tlie provinces west of the Euphrates to meet the expenses of the return of the Jews to their own country.

7 Phoenicia and Tyre were to supdIv the wood from Lebanon, and to send it on rafts to Joppa.« Whether all the instructions given by tlie Persian king were carried out we have no means of knowing. Seven months after the Ketum, the altar of burnt- oflerin" was erected,e probably upon the same site as the old one. The building of the house was slower work, but a collection was made to meet the needful outlay.f In the 2nd month of the "nd year after the Return, the foundation-stone was laid.

7, Then there was a pause m the work owin" to the opposition of the mixed population ot Samaria.e who, as not being pure Israelites, were not allowed to share in the rebuilding of the temple. I There is no conBrmation ot the statement that the people of &." aria intrigued with the Persian king to authonUtively s o^tTe work. According to Hagga, -f Z«>-"J^'^^,ii''; indffcrence of the people that was at '''\':^"°J °i.

'^^ft^ See especially Zee 1-8, where the various dilBcultie» are met m the successive visions. The proportion of height and (assumed) basemen.s s ( = {e).^ a favourite ratio with Ezekiel. Note further that the he Sjht ,s identical with the altar surface : thus we get a cube (a *. a A). In the calculation of height the horns are mcluded. In act the horns seem to have been an essential part, nay the r^iost sacred part, ot the altar.

9 On them the blo«l was sprinkled and to them fugitives came, feehng safe if they had hold of them In early times the altar possessed no horns., btade » NowMk X and others regard the horns as a sur>ival of the bull fm«"of Jehovah worshipped in the N. kingdom, which w,^ klso a representation of deities woijhipped by the Egj-ptians Canaanites, and Phmnicians. The ho^v stone or altar .

t has been said, was in early times covered by the skm of the amma K^rificed the skin of the bull having the horns attached But whv,ur that case, was not the altar constructed with «>™honis, The number on oAe skin, instead of dmM,- that ,.«m6er? Villal- pandox thought the horns trophies of the anunals sacnBoed to £Sd Spencer «. inclines to the opinion that the horns were expressive of (Ugnity, the horn being a decoration worn by distinguished persons. iii ZERUBBABEVS r£jl/PZ,E.

-The temple erected by tiie Jews who returned from exile IS called Zerub- babel's because he was the leader m promoting its erection, supporting Haggai and Zechariah in their endeavours to urge the people to build when the latter were inclined to relax. He was grandson of Jehoiachin and probably nephew of Sheshbazzar. i- In the spring of B.C. 537, forty -nine years after « "jN-inri : Sx-isn : tor the proper writing ot the word see SROr liotes on Is'aiah 291 (Cheyne), a.

id on Ezckicl 4315 (ToyX It is probable that the word is not compound, the endmg being a mere noun suffix as in Sn?, S-n;, and ^V- ^ So Chej^e and Kraetzschmar, following Ewald (see Coinm. and Gram, i 1CJ<;). The word simply means in that case 'burning place, from m.^ % Sec"Ezk 4S1»«. * So Cheyne would read it. J V.15. ' 3|. tEV ' settle •• the Heb.

wonl means elsewhere court or eiiclo^ure from a Semitic root meaning to press in, to en- dose Perhaps the word stands in Ezk 4314 strictly for the surroumling ledge ot one cubit width ; then for the square block above it. „^, . „ij . Ezk 4tH2 4lM. Ct. Am 314. " Ex 20^ (Book ot Cov.) ; ct. Stade. Guch. L 466 ; Now. fl<. ^"''lmM X On Erdtwi, ii. S9S. u. De Leiiibui, U. 677 (ed. Tub. 17S2). Called Sanabassar by the beet Greek authontie* Nothing further was done until B.C.

520, the "nd year of the reign of Darius Hystaspis. Shesh- bazz'ar was probably dead now, and the lead was taken up by his nephew and successor Zerubbabel, aided by the high priest Joshua. Much of the new zeal was owing to the earnest pleadings of the new prophets named. Recommenced in B.C. 5iU, ^ the temple was completed in B.C. 516.M Sources of information as to Zerubbabel s Temple.

—These are very meagre : indeed we have hardly anything which for certain applies to the temple as it was at or soon after the txile. Ihere are scattered notices in Ezra and Nehemiah Heca- tffius of Abdera, contemporary and friend of Alexander the Great, is said by JosephuSF to have written a book concerning the Jews and he quotes parts of it referring to the temple.

It is bv no means certain that Hecatfeus wrote the book in question; nevertheless, the quotations made by Josephus are interesting and of value. The OT Aiiocrvpha also has important allusions ; e'^pecially is this true of the Books of Maccabees. But it is hard to say how far the statements are true of the temple completed in B.C. 516.

Josephus is too much controlled by the temple as he saw it, to be a reliable guide concerning the earlier ^It^ir'probable that the temple building occnpied the same site as the earlier temple. Hecatieua says it was a 'great house.' Cyrus gave instruc- tions that it was to be 60 cubits liigh and 60 cubita broad. i Probably this means that they \yere to build it as large as they liked— as large, if they . Not the same as Zcnibbabel, as U often held: pf ComUl^ Uistory of People of iKiacl.

Chicago, lb98, p. lol t. , Cheyne JUL p. 0 ; and cf. Shesiihazzar and Zbkubbabki. ^ 2 Ch 3623, Ezr l»ff- 61' 6if-. r ^'^ 1'^ 6i4f- ». i Ezr 3' ' " C Ezr 2iiS«-., Neh VOU-, d. Ezr 1«. « Ezr se^ eSeeSAMARiTiXS. ^' ■ %L- Mua una . Ezr 48-3. '^ee Sohrader on this section in i A , 1867, 867 II xEzrSiff. tE"^- TEMPLE TEMPLE 711 would, OS, siiy, some well-known temple in Babylon.

We aie not told that it was actually built of these dimensions, nor is it likely that Solomon's, which was CO cubits long, 20 broad, and 30 high, should be 80 far exceeded by Zerubbabel's. It is not needful to consider the 60 cubits' length as meaning height of porch, a and the breadth as applying to the chambers as well. It is inferred from Ezr 3i2 and Hag 23 that the second temple was greatly inferior to the first.

But when these words were uttered, tlie temple was not finitilied; and the inferiority may refer to the absence of the arl< arnl other sacred \'cssels wliicli were for ever lost after the destruction of the first temple. According to Bab. T;ilmud (Yoma 22f/), the second temple wanted five things which were in that of Solomon : (I) the ark, (2) the sacred fire, (3) the shekinab, (4) the Uoly Spirit, (6) the Urim and Thummim. Hrkrd or Holy Place.

— The Mkal liad within it one holy lampstand, one table of shewbread, one golden altar of incense, together with pouring vessels and spices.j3 There would seem to h.ave been the two veils of which we read as being before the lUkdl (masCikh) and d£bir (pa,r6keth) doors of the tabernacle.7 The fact that Anti- oclius Kpiphanes is repre.sented as plundering the gold, silver, etc., of the temiile,5 is no proof that the walls, doors, etc.

, were covered with gold, as the MT declares to have been the case with Solomon's temple (see above, p. 700 f.), though Schiller seems to think it is.e JUiJbir or Most Holy Place. — The dibSr had a veil in front of it, as the hckiil also had. There was nothing in the dcbir according to Jos. (/}./ v. v. 5), excipt that according to the jMishnas" the stone of foundation t; stood where the ark used to be. Upon the Day of Atonement the priests used to put their censers on this stone.d Prideau.

\, without a tittle ol evidence, held that the ark was in the second temple. Tacitus applies the words ' inania arcana ' to the 'tdytuni or dibir of the temple. i t'ijiirta. — This temple had two courts.K but the separation between them was not perhaps rigidly enforced, for when Alexander Janiianis was sacri- licing on the altar during the Feast of Tabernacles the people pelted him with citrons, etc. To stop such conduct, he ran a wooden wall around the {)riests' court.

According to Ezr 6', three rows of lewn stone and a top row of new wood were to go about the temple, viz. the inner court.X The inner court had in it an altar of bumt- olfering made of unhewn stone /x — .so conforming to the ancient law of Ex 20^, which Solomon's did not. According to Hecatfflus^ it had the same dimensions as the first temple, viz. 20 cubits long by 20 cubits broad by 10 cubits high. The Mishnaf speaks of a 1''?

or laver as being in this court ; and Sir 603 si)eaks of a ' cistern ' as having been made by Simon the high priest. The Syriac leaves out 'cistern' alto- gether, and renders ' he dtig a well.' The allusions are far too uncertain to infer from them that there was a molten sea in the inner court of the second temple.* There were cells in the outer court for storing furniture and for other purposes. In 1 Mac 4'''- " jiriests' cells are named. jr Josephus makes mention of corridors with pillars.

p The ' Mi|ilikad gate' of Neh 3" was probably one leading into the outer « As Herod the Great; see Jo. xL; Winer, ItWIi^^t. 'Temper; Keil, HiM. Arch. i. lK4n. & 1 .Maj- r^ i-taa. ; Jos. Ant. nv. Iv. 4 ; of. Hecatajus as quoted ap. Jos. c. Ai/ion. i. 22. y 1 Mac '-' ; see Vkm.. > 1 Moc 123. 1 Uiihin, WlKija lUU2a. Yoma v. 2. fi n;.-;' J5N. «lHacl»4U. i Ann. til 9. m IMac 4 «■ M ; cf. Jos. Ant. xrv. xvi. 2. » Of. 1 K (i-'Xl 7i>. fi 1 M.ic 4«. t In Jos. IIJ V. T. 6. { Afiilil. iii. 0.

t Ezr 631 lOO, Neh S" 103'»- 12" ll-'"- .irf ^ In every cose but Neh 830, where we find its equivalent .t^v'J C'?anl 3 intcrchang- ng. Ct T. W. Duvics, Ma'jic, Divination, and Deinonoloijii, \\. b\). w w^r^t^tfum LXX (or n;;ji^. f Ant xi. iv. 7, xiv. vi. i. court on the western side (see Jerusalem, vol. ii. fi. 5'J3'). The ' pri-son gate' of Neh 1'2^ was nmst ikely on the north side (ib.)

In later times there was a bridge crossing the Tyropoeon or Cheese- motigers' Valley from the modern Mount Zion to the temi)le hill. When Pompey besieged Jeru- salem, many Jews took refuge on the temple area and broke this bridge, that the Koman soldiers might be hindered from coining to them. This w.as probably where the remains of Wilson's arch are now seen, though Kosen.a thinks the bridge was of Herod's making. Later history of this temple.

— Simon the high priest, son of Onias, repaired and fortilied the temjile ; but the passage in which we have the information^ is very obscure. In B.C. 168 Antiochus Epiphanes plundered, laid waste, and desecrated the temple, y He placed an altar to Jupiter Olj'inpius on the altar of burnt- oU'ering. Tne brazen vessels taken away by him were given by him to sympathizing Jews at Antioch, and they were transferred to the local synagogue.5 Three years e later Judas Maccab.

ijus recovered Jerusalem, cleansed and repaired the house, made a new altar, and also fresh vessels.^ The Feast of Dedication, still observed among Jews, commemor- ates the opening ceremony of the restored and cleansed temple. At this time Judas also adorned the front of the temple by hanging u]);; gilded crowns and shields, 8 and he also fortilied the enclosure by putting high walls around it.

i These were razed to the ground by Antiochus Eupator,K but restored by Jonathan Maccakeus ; \ they were strengthened by Simon his brother.^i Reference has already been made to the wall put around the inner court by Alexander Jannteus. In B.C. 63 Pompey conquered Jerusalem, and after a long siege took the well, fortified temple hill. He entered the house, and even, in the face of loud protests, the dibir itself ; but he did not touch the sacred vessels.^ Nine years later (n.c.

54) Crassus plundered the temple of its valuable things most mercilessly, taking away what «as worth two millions of pounds in English money. f Herod, afterwards called the Great, a descendant of the Maccabees, was made king of the Jews by ilecree of the Koman Senate. In B.C. 37 he stormed Jeru- salem,o and burned some of the temple walls, causing a goodly amount of blood to be shed. l'"rom other injury, however, he protected the temple. iv. HEROD'S Temple.— The sources.— l^\\a prin- ci])al .

sources of information in regard to Herod's temple are : (1) Josephus, who in Ant. XV. xi. gives a full account of the outer court with its gates and rooms, and in BJ V. v. describes the inner court and also the liou.se. Josephus was a jiriest, and was therefore familiar with the temple and its services from personal experience. He writes his history, however, from memory, and he is so full of admiration for the sacred enclosure that he falls into obvious exaggeration when giving measurements.

(2) The Mishnie tract Middoth preserves valuable Jewish traditions (see Eng. tr. in Barclay's Talmud, reproduced in F'ergusson's Temples of tlie Jews, Appendix i. In Surenhusius' Mislina [vol. vi.] there is a Lat. tr. of the text, as also the text and translation of Bartinora's Com- • iToramTfT., c(. p. 04. ^SlrSOif- J. 1 Mac 12"- "f- " 43S, 2 Mao O^-. > Joa BJ vil. ill. 8. 1 1 .Mac 4-"i', 2 Mac 103 (two years, according to last passagoX { .njijq ; cf. Jn loaa. See 1 Mao i^^ " 1" ("» ; Jos.

AiU. Ju vll. 7. <j Inside the porch. 0 1 Mac 4*7. 1 1 .Mac 4« 07. « 1 Mac GM. X 1 Mac 003 of. with 6', 2 Mao 123« ; Jos. Ant. xin. v. IL /i 1 Mac 13°3. > Jos. int. XIT. tv. L { Jos. A nt. XIV. vil. 1 ; fly L vUL 8. • Jos. Ant. XIV. xvL ti. 712 TEJIPLE TE]\rPLE mentary). The Middoth is more modest in its dimensions than Joseplius, and nearer ilie truth ; hut it is also often inaccurate. Kabhi Hilders- heim's Die Bcsvhreibung des Herod. Tempel im Tractate Middut und bei Fl.

Joseph, status and examines the divergences between these authorities. (3) Maimonides in np;n t (part vi.) collects many passages about tlie temple wliich are scattered tlirough the Talmud. These relate especially to the priests, temple furniture, etc., and have Deen put into Latin by Ludwig Compibgne. This tr. is to be met with in Ugolinus' Thesaurus, vol. viii. (4) Dr. Jolin Lightfoot's work on The Temple, etc.

(London, 1823), rests mainly upon Rabbinical sources, and is for that reason valuable. Was Uerod's temple the gecorui or the third f — It is usual to speak of Herod's temple as the third Jenisalem temple. Modern Jews, however, followed by m.iny Christian writers, re<,'ard it Bs simply the second temple rebuilt and improved, and ko call it the secoDd temple.

Christians are led to this coDclusion, or I Antonia I □ □ got together all the material before the work ot rebuilding was begun, and tlien pulled down and put tip as gradually as could be (lone. Since only Eriests could enter the house and the inner court, e engaged a thousand of them to act as masons and carpenters in these parts. The building of the house was hastened on with great vigour, and was finished in a year and a half.

Surrounding buildings took eight years, but the work went on, and was not ended until the time of the procurator Albinus (A.D. 62-64). The Jews (see Jn 2-°) said the temple had been forty-six years in buildiitg, and in fact it was still in building then, and was to be for over thirty years more (but see E. A. Abbott in Class. Rec. 1894, p. 8911'.) The building ia spoken of as exceedingly impressive in its grandeur.

Its eastern front was covered with plates of gold, which threw back the rays of the rising sun, and formed an object of rare beauty for miles around. The stone of which it was built was white marble. North I Bridge ' \ Outer Court. M no. 9. — BBROD'8 TBMPLB : OEKKRAL VIEW. stleast oonflrmed In It, by a consideration of H.^1J 2«-9. Messiani- cally inter]ireted, the temple erected by Zorubbabel was, they say, to see the Messiah.

But the passaf^e is not Messianic, and, if it were, the prediction contained in it is made from the writer's point of view. It was in the 18th a year of his reign (B.C. 20-19) that Herod the Great set about the rebuilding of the temple. In his day there was among the Romans a great rage for restoring Greek cities and their temples, and Herod probably caught the prevailing .spirit. Josephus reports (Ant. XV. xi.)

the speech in which Herod announces his intention, and gives as his reason a desire to promote the religious welfare of the nation ; but the historian says the king's real purpose was to raise for himself an everlasting memorial. The Jews were at first afraid that, if the king pulled down their temple, no other might be for a long time put up in its place. To allay this fear, Herod « According to Jos. BJ i. xxl. 1, the 15tb. and a large part of the side walls was covered with gold.

The area of Herod's temple is essentially that of the modem IJaram esh-Sherif, with the exception of the north end, at which, in Herod's day, the fortress Antonia was situated, the temple court being to the south of it. The excavations made beneath the Haram and its surrounding walla show that the lie of the ancient walls on the west, south, and east agrees with those of the walls to be seen to-day (see \iosen. Das Haram, iS.; Kobinson'i BRP iii. 2-22 If.)

The house itself would be sure to be erected on the site of the one preceding it. For his temple Herod used double the space that was covered by Zerubbabel's temple.a and in order to obtain it he erected subterranean vaults in the south of the temple hill, and filled intervening spaces with stones and earth. The bounding line was raised from 4 stadia /3 to 6, the breadth remain- « Jos. BJ :. xxl. 1. /S Jos. Ant. xv. xi. 8. TEMPLE TEMPLE 713 inf,' 1 stadium, the length ( N. to S.

) being doubled.a Tlic wliole « as surrounded by a liigh wall, covered with spikes,(3 the better to protect the place. The temple, including its courts, occupied an area of 1 stadium according to Josephus, or 500 cubits according to the Talmud. Assuming the stadium to bo about 600 English feet, and the cubit to be about 18 inches, thereisadillerenceof over 100 feet; but the numbers are round in each case, and the truth lies probably between them.

Perhaps, as Fergusson sujjgests, the Talmud copies the dimen- sions of Ezekiel's temple : Fergusson's own dimen- sions, got by careful calculations, a^ree well with what Josephus says, viz. 585 ft. h. to \V., and 610 ft. N. to S. ; see Temples of the Jews, p. 77 tt'. Oate-1. — The principal entrance to the enclosure was on the western side. Midduth y names one only on that side called ' Kiponos,' but Josephus haa four.5 Probably that named in Midd.

is the principal one, as it led to the king's palace and to the city. Two more to the south led to suburbs of the city, one coinciding probably with ' Barclay's' gate, the other with ' Warren's.' Remains of the fourth are to be seen perhaps to the south of ' Wilson's arch.' Josephus e speaks of gates on the south, but he does not say how many there were. Midd. mentions the two Iluldah gates, which are to be ideu tilled with the two gates buried iii the middle of the three aisles was 45 ft.

wide, the two side ones having a width of 30 ft. The inner portico was cm higher ground than the two nearer the wall. 'I lie columns were so thick that three men with tlieir hands stretched out could hardlj' clasij around one. On the east was what is called Solomon's Porch in the NT,a and is said by Josejilius to have survived from the time of Solomon.

(3 The east porticoes were, however, the work of Herod, according to the best judges; but it is singular that Josephus should have believed any part of these porticoes to have been the work of Solomon, unless it was much older than Herod'e time. During the feasts the Konian .soldiers usci to walk on the roof of the porticoes in order to see that order was kept. The whole of the outer court was paved with stones.

There were for the lower oliicials pastopkoriay or chambers ranged along the outer walls, probably between the walls and the porticoes, unless, indeed, they were be- tween the double porticoes themselves. In close pro.\imity to the west gate and the chambers was the Beth Din,S where the Sanhedrin met.

In the older sources (Josephus and Midduth) the Holy Place is not the hekdl, as in tlie case of the previous Jerusalem temples, but the whole of the mner court, including the women's court, as contrasted with the outer court, which was L Chambera. 8. Oate-rooras (Exedrce), S. Porticoes. 4 7. Altar of burut-ofFerin^. 8. Place for killing, etc., animula. no. 10.— THE INNER COtTRT. S. Porticoes. 4. Women's court B. Court of Israelites. 9. Temple porch. 10. Uikdl. 6. Priesta' court. 11. DMt.

existing south wall of the I^arara — one west of the double gate, the other east of the treble gate. Both these show Herodian workmanship. Throu>;h both tliese gates it was possible to ascend from the vaults below to the temple area. On the east, Middoth refers to one gate on which the palace of Shushan was carved. It has been commonly thought to have been the same as the modern Golden Gate, but the latter is undoubtedly a Byzantine structure. Josephus does not say any- thing of any east gate.

He speaks quite incident- ally of one gate on the north ;f Midd.r) calls it Tadie(or Tari ?) The Outer Court. — This is commonly called the Court of the Gentiles, because Gentiles were allowed to enter it ; but in neither Josephus nor in Midd. does it get that name. The walls of this court were surrounded on the inside by porticoes or cloisters. The north, west, and east sides had double porticoes, with two rows of white marble monolithic colunms. The roofs were of carved cedar.

On the south were the roval porticoes, the arod ^acriXuTJ, which had 162 columns, with Corinthian capitals. Tliese columns formed three aisles. The outermost row of columns Were fastened into the wall of the enclosure. The • DJ V. V. «. /i. a. I I.OC. cit. &, n Loo. cit. $ B.I IV. ix. 12 ; aee Pinnacul i AnI. XV. xi. 6. V.' II. xix. 5, n Iv. L 6 no (or •no ?) Open to heathen, and could be used for bujring, selling, etc.

e The inner court was a rectangle, whicli included in it the women's court (4), the men's court or court of the Israelites (5),^ the priests' court (6), and the house which stood in the last (10, 11). The inner court was on hij^her ground than the outer, there being five steps from the one to the other.

Between the wall of the inner court and the porticoes of the outer court there was a free space of 10 cubits, higher than tlie rest of the outer court, and reailied by a lliglit of fourteen steps. This formeil a terrace all round the inner court except the east, and was called the /u:l (S'n). At the inner edge of this Ac/ there was a stone parapet called fSretj (J-iSo).)) On this tablets were put with inscriptions warning non-Jews against passing beyond this boundary.

One such was found in recent years by the French consul, ClermonlGanneau, on which, in Greek, the following words occur : iiriOina. iWorfevi) dairopcviadai ivTb'i Tou TTfpl t6 lepdv TpvcpdKTOu Kal nepifitiXov. Hi 5" B.v X^lfpOii {airrf atrios tarai 5ii t6 iianoXovBeXy Odvarof, i.e. ' jVo stranger is to enter within the balustrade » Ant. XX. li. 7; &/V. ». 1. » I'T n-3. « Jn 10-», Ac 8" W«. y DJ IV. ix. 2. 1 Jn 2»iif- C Kvil (Bib. Arch. L p. 100) excludes the women's court from the inner court.

Now. (il. p. 78) includes it, and rii.'htl.v, becaune It stood on the hi&;her platfonn of tbo courts of Isruelites and pnests and of the house. « Jos. £y T. r. X ; if idd. U. S. 714 TEMPLE TEMPLE and emhrtnkment round the snored place. Whnfvcr is caught will be answerable fur Ids death, which will ensue.' This illustrates Ac 21™"-, wlien St. Paul almost lost his li/e.

The inn«r court \v:ia surroximled by a wall 40 cubits bi^'h on the out- side, anil on the inside but 25, owinj; to the raised ground inside. From the lower ground to the liigher there were five stops. Gates. — This wall had nine gates — four on the north, four on the south, and one on the east. The west had no gate at all. They had all of theni folding doors, covered with gold and silver. o Of the four on the north side three were in the men's court (5), and one in the women's (4).

Three of the north gates were called Nitzius, the Gate of Ollering, and the Makad. On tlie south we read of the I'laniing Gate, the Gate of Oli'ering, and the Water Gate. The last opened upon the altar, and appears to have been a continuation of the Huldah Gate. The gate on the east was much more costly than the rest, and it is probably the ' Gate Beauti- ful ' of Ac 'i-, and 'Nicanor's gate ' of the Mishna./3 It \\as made of Corinthian brass.

Between the women's court and the men's there was a gate larger than t!ie others, led to by fifteen steps, at the top of which was the level of the men's court. It was thickly overlaid with silver and gold. Buchler>' art^ues ably that this is the Nicanor gate of the Mislina. SIklil. i. 4, as all a<imit, states that ; but it is argued by Sschiirer.fl Oratz.i Spiess,^ Nowack.tj and most, that it is the gate on the east of tiie women's court that is meant by the above name.

Biichler admits that Josephus is against him ; but he charges the Jewish historian with inaccuracy, and calls the Talmud to his aid in proving this. Biichler's view is bound up with another position, which he also defends with ability, 6 viz., that the wall of the inner court shut out the women's court altogether, as being part of the court of the Gentiles ; the Nicanor gate being, then, that one at the east of the men's court through which one passed into the inner gate.

Keil also speaks of the inner court as being reached by a gate at the western end of the women's court.* But this is, as Biichler admits, against the common view, which is supported by Schurcr,.^ and Nowack,A and the received text of Josephus. Nicanor's gate — assuming the usual view — was 56 cubits high and 40 broad, the others that led out of the lower court being 30 high and 40 broad.

Round the walls of the court there ran porticoes with a single piazza, the roof of which rested on lofty anil highly-linished pillars. These porticoes were less indeed, but not less beautiful, than the porticoes of the outer court. Between the gates there were cells for storing the various properties belonging to the temple : these are called by Josephus /i 7afo0i/XdKia.i' Concerning the special purposes of these rooms see Now. op. cit. ii. 79 n. 2.

There were upper rooms over tlie gateways, hence justifying Joseplius' description of them as tower- shaped. The cells between the gates had also upjier rooms ; hence we read of the upper room of Bet-Abtinas.l Somewhere within the women's court would be placed the thirteen boxes for re- ceiving contributions to the temple. At least one must have been in the women's court, else the widow (Lk 21"-) could not have put in her mite. See Trkasury. According to Midd. ii.

5, there were four cells in the women's court, but both Schiirer and Now. think this unlikely. The inner court was divided into an eastern part, into which women were admitted as well as « Thev were the gift of a Jew from Alexandria. 0 Midd. i. S. r JQR. Oct. 1898. i Uichm'8 tlWB' 1606'>. i Monatssch. 1S78, 434. C Da9 Jerusalem de4 Joseptius, p. 70. <i Op. oil. ii. p. 78. 0 JQR, July 1898. ( Op. cit. i. p. 190. But he is inconsistent, for in the previous page (Eng. ed.) he B.ay8 the inner c.

rdrt went around the women's court, and he takes the view that Nicanor's gate was on the east of the woireii's court. « Riehn\, U tVB- KlUlib. x Op. cU. ii. 78. lA, BJ v. V. 2, VI. V. 2. > See Tkeasurt. { Yuma L 6 ; Tarn. L \. men, and a larger western portion, which included the men's court and tlie priests' court. The house and the altar were in the latter, and were sur- roiinded by its rampart. Just .'

is the whole inner court was separated from the outer, and within the inner the men's was shut oH' from the women's, so the remainder was subdivided into a larger part for priests only. The men's court was 11 cubits wide, and surrounded the priests' court on all four sides.a The Mishna, however, appears to reduce the space for men to 11 cubits on the east alone. Tlie altar and all the arrangements for sacrificing, as well, of course, as the house itself, were in the priests' court. The house.

— The higher ground of the house was attained by means of twelve steps. The inside area was 60 cubits high and the same in length, by 20 cubits in breadth. There were, as in the other temples, two divisions — the lickal or Holy Place, (3 which was 40 cubits long, and the debir or Most Holy Place, which was 20 cubits long. This last was empty, and w;is entered by the high priest once a year, viz. on the Day of Atonement.

The hi'kcd or larger room had in it the following : — Table of shewbread,^ altar of incense, the seven-armed lampstand.5 The altar stood in the middle, between the temple walls : to its north was the table, and the lampstand was on its south.e Only the othciating priests were per- mitted to enter the hekcd, to bring in the incense morning and evening, to trim the lamp, which was done once a day, and to supply the table with fresh shewbread, which was done every Sabbath.

The porch was 100 cubits in both height and breadth, and 11 cubits deep. It stood, therefore, like a high wall in front of the house. The breadth of the house, including its surrounding chambers, being 70 cubits,f the porch projected 15 culiits on each side.)) There was an entrance to the porch 40 cubits high and 20 broad. There was, however, no door.

Above the entrance Herod placed a golden eagle, which as a Roman emblem was very distasteful to the Jews ; and during a turmoil, some time before the king's death, it was destroyed. From the entrance of the porch the hckal door, gilded like the court gates, could be easily seen. It was adorned with carvings of golden vines, with grapes, according to Joseplius, as large as a mau.9 Tacitus also speaks of this vine. I Veil.

— In front of the hckal door there hung a beautifully coloured Babylonian veil. The lickcd was shut oft' by a veil or veils, but there was no wall, nor therefore any door, leading into the dehir. According to the Mishna, k there were two veils between the hckcd and the dibir, with a cubit's free space between them. The outer was loose on the south side, the inner being loose on the north.

On the Day of Atonement the hijrh priest entered the dcMr with his censer by passing to the south side and getting behind the outer veil, until he reached the north of tlie inner veil, where he was able to enter the dcbir. In the NT this veil is spoken of in the singular, the two perhaps being looked upon as one.X The veil outside the door of the hiked is never referred to in the NT. See Veil. Light.

— No natural light came into the house from roof or side wall : it depended, for what light it had, upon the lampstand. Chambers. — On all sides except the east, where « Jos. BJ v. V. 6; cf. Ant. vni. Hi. 9, xm. lill. e> (3 Not called ' the Holy I'lace ' in the sources. J- See SnEWBRKAD, Tablb of. 5 See LAUrSTiVIX i Ct. Ex 2635 40-.:: 26. ; See below. f) Twenty, according to Josephua ff Josephus says 70 cubits high by 26 broad. I Ann. V. 5. » Yama, v. 1. X See Ml 2751 n Mk VJ^ || Lk 23«.

TEJIPLE TEMPLE ■15 the porch was, tliere were small chambers in which temple utensils were kept and priests re- eiUcd. They were thirty, eight in number, and arranged in three storeys, in such a way that on the north there were five on each storey, makin" lifteen on that side : on the south there were also live on each storey. On the west there were three on the lowest and three on the nii<idle storey, two being on the top. The three storeys reached, together, the same height as the house.

The main entrance was on the N.E. of the house, where a small door communicated directly from the porch with the nearest chamber. From this chamber there was a stairway leading to the upper and middle storeys. This stairway was erected at the N.E. corner ; just opposite, on the S.E. corner, there was an arrangement for carrying otl' the water. Above the house proper there was an upi)er room 40 cubits high, and of the same ground area as the house itself.

The entire building, including the intervening wall and the ceiling, attained a height of 100 cubits, i.e. exactly that of the porch. The upper room h.ad on the south a door leadin" upon the roof of the upper chambers on tliat side. By means of the stairs on the N.E. the top chambers could be reached. I'assing round from N.W. to S. one came to the door leading into the top room of the house.

In the lloor of this upper room tliere were trap- doors, through which workmen were let down in boxes, that liiey might not be able to see any part of the house excei)t where they were repairing. Including the side chambers, the house had a width of 70 cubits, which is thus made up — 1. Wall of stairway 5 cubits. 2. Stainvay 3 „ 3. Wall of cliamber ^ it 4. Chamber itself '5 ,, B. Wall of Imuse « ., 6. S^tace within the house . , . 20 „ 7. U all of house t' „ 8. Chamber <1 .. 9. Its wall !> ,.

lU Uoom for letting off water . , S „ 11. WoU behind 5 „ Total . .TO cubits. Altar of burnt ■ offerin/f. — In the east of tlie priests" court, iiiiincdiately in front of the porch, was the altur of buriil-oU'ering made of unliewn stone. It was larger than Solomon's altar, it being, according to the Rabbis, 32 cubits in length and breadth, and 10 cubits high. Joseplms, how- ever, gives 15 cubits as length and as breadth.

The length and breadth given above are for the base, for it rose in three sections, so that at the top it formed a square of 24 cubits. According to Lv 6", fire was to be always burning on the altar. On the ea-st of the altar there was a stairway of unhewn stone leading up to the altar : it was 32 cubits long and 16 broad. Altar and steps were whitewa-shed twice in the year, viz. at Hassover and Tabernacles.a In the S.W.

corner of the altar there were two holes for receiving the sacrificial blood, which passed thence to a i);issage in the ground, by which it was conveyed to the Kidron. Close by there was a marbled opening, down which men went to cleanse the channel along which the blood ran to the Kidron. IJetween the altar and the house there was a space of 22 cubits, taken up largely by the twelve steps which led up to the porch.

South of these steps there was a laver or wash-basin, in which priests wa-shed their hands and feet. It was sup- plied through two pipes from the tem]>lo spring : these two pipes were increased to twelve at a later time by a certain Ik'U Katin, who also made a^Tungcinonts by which the water could be regu- larly rcnewed.;3 ■ ilidd liL l-«. 0 i'oma UL 10.

North (S) of the altar the sacrificial animals were slain, and to aid in this there were six rows of rings, four in each row, all fixed in the ground. The animals that had to be killed were attached first of all to these rings, and then despatched. Still farther north there were eight low pillars with boards on them, each board having three rows apiece of iron hooks from whic'h the animals after death were suspended.

The spot would look much like a butcher s shop, lij' the side of these pillars there were eight marble tables on which the slain animals were flayed, washed, etc., ready for the altar, o Priests' Court. — No one except a priest was usually permitted to enter the priests' court, which was regarded as more sacred than the men's court. Vet lay Israelites were allowed admission when they had sacrifices to oll'er, that they might, according to the ritual, lay their liands on the victim.

/3 As before stated, this court was bounded all round, and not merely on the east by the men's court, which was 11 cubits broad. The temple police. — The charge of the sacred enclosure was in the hands of the priests and Levites. The head of police — the captain of the temple 7 — held so digniUed a position that he was ranked with the chief priests. The entire external arrangements of the temple were under his autho- rity.

We read in Marko and Luket of 'rulers of the temple,' who were subordinates of 'the captain.' The guardianship of the temple was entrusted mainly to Levites, but partly also to priests. By day they were to see that no one overstepped the bound.ary beyond which he had no right to go, e.g.

Gentiles had to be kept out of the inner court, women out of the men's, laymen out of the priests', and non-olliciating priests out of the house ; the debir to be entered but once a year, and even then by the high priest only. By night the gates were all shut, and none were allowed within except priests and Levites, who were stationed at diller- ent points. Three places of the inner court were guarded by priests ; at twenty-one positions Levites kept watch, especially at the various gates.

Dur- ing the whole night the captain walked around to see that each was at his jjost. If the guard did not imniediatelj' arise on the captain's approach, the captain exclaimed, ' Peace to you.' If the guard were asleep the captain would strike him with a stick, and he had the right even to set fire to his clothes. Each day the guards were chan|zed, those who followed receiving the keys from their predecessors at niid-day.

f The senior of the men in charge kept the key of the court, in which the men were sentry, in a hole covered by a marble slab, to the under side of which was fastened a chain : the key was attached to this chain. When the time came to close the gates, the marble slab was lifted and the key taken : the priests locked the inner court, replacing the key in the usual place. On the slab under which the key was, the guard in charge laid his clothes, and on them Lay down to slucp.

ij How many were at one time in charge of the enclosure we do not know, but according to Josephus 200 men were ai)pointed for the gates alone. For the fate which befell the temple in the last years of its existence, reference must be made to the histories of Josephus, Griitz, and others. See, especially, short but striking accounts in Cornill, History of the People of Israel, d and Cheyne, JRL.i Already, in the days of Archelaus, the courts of the temple became the scene of revolt and « Nidd.

111. S, T. S ; Tarn. UL 6 ; S>\rk. vi. 4. fi Krlim i. a >• Ac «' 62*. ) 623. < %». C Jo9. e. Apion. IL 8. « iluld. I. 8. ( Chia^o, 189S. i Now York and LondoD, ISM ri6 TEJIPT, TEAIPTATION TENDER bloody massacres.a During the last Jewish revolt tlie most horrid scenes were witnessed. In A.D.

70 Roman soldiers were in possession of the fortress of Antonia, close to the enclosure One of them, though contrary to the wish of Titus the emperor, tlirew a firebrand into the liouse itself, wliich took fire and burned to the ground. Tlius perished the last of the Jerusalem temples. All or them were built by a people feeble politically, in art and in literature (e.xcept religious) despised ; yet these temples are better known, and their records more fully preserved, th.

in is the case with any other ancient temple, Egyptian, Assyrian, or Indian. LiTERATFRE.— (A) JEWISH ITfl/T'/ArrpS.— Josephus, Ant. XV. xi., BJ V, V. ; cf. Spiess, JJer Tempel zu Jerusalem nacii Joite- phu3, ISiiO ; the Mislinic tract. Stiddotk ; cf. Rabbi iJildersheim, Dig Ueschreibutuf des Herod's Tempcl im Tractat Middot mid bei Flaviits Josi'pfnus (' Jahreshenchi des Rabbiner-Seminara fiir das Ortbodox Judenthum,' Berlin, 1876-77).

There is a good edition of Middoth (no Gemara has been handed down) with Latin tr. and Com. by L'Empereur (Lugd. IJat. . 1630, small 4to). See also Sureuhusius' ilishjia. Mainionides, in part vi. of his npTn T, gives the Rabbiuical traditions regarding the temple, its furniture, priests, etc. This was put into Latin by Ludwig Conipiegne, and is found in vol. viii. of Ugolinus' AiUiquitates HeWaicai. Monographs on the temple have been written in Hebrew by O. Altschul (Amst.

1724) and others, but none of them are of much importance. (B) ClIBlSTlAX iV RITI.VGS.—Of the Older treatises by Christian writers the following are noteworthy : — Villalpando and Prado, Jn Ezech. 3 vols. 1605 ; Capellus, Tf^eiytov .^'tte Tnptex 2'empli DeliiuUio (Amst. 1643 ; also included in the Introd. to the London Polyglot) ; Lamy, de Tabeniacido Foederis, de Sancta Oioitate Jeriufalem et de Templo ejus (Paris, 172U); Lightfoot (Dr. John), Deacr. TempU Hieros. (Eng. in vol. ix.

of Pitman's edition of his works in English ; also published separately, Lond. 1825), — Lightfoot uses the Rabbinical material, but deals mainly with the temple of Herod; Lund, Die aiteii Jud. HeiiUjtkiitner, Hamb. 1695, bk. ii. (several other editions). For a detailed recital of the older literature see Winer, RWB'^, 8. ' Tempel,' and Bahr, Der Tempel Saiomo's.

The following are the most important modern treatises: — Hirt, Der Tempel Salonio'St Berlin, 1809 (strong on the architectural side, but deficient in Biblical scholai*6hip) ; J. Fr. von Meyer, Der Temp. Salom.t Berlin, 1830; Stieglitz, Gesch. der Baukunst, Niirn. 1827, p. 127 ff., Beitnuje zur Ausbildumj der Baiikmist, Leipz. 1834 ; Biihr, Der Temp. Sal. 1848 ; Keil, Der Temp. Sal., Dorpat, 1839 (critical and constructive, valuable), Biblica.1 Archaeology, T. and T. Clark, i. 10211.

; Robinson, BR}' (1841) i. 415ff. ; O. Williams, The Holy City (1849), ii. 296ff. ; Fergus- son, Essay on the Ancient Topography of Jenisalem, 1847, The Holy Sepulchre and the Tomb, 181)5, The Temples of the Jews, 1875, art. 'Temple' in Smith's /)/? (Fergusson's fanciful views as to the site of the temple, etc., have failed to win con- viction except to a ven' limited extent) ; Warren, The TempU and the Tomli, ISSO, fSlSA vii. S09flf. (in both he answ»rs the arguments of Fergusson); T. H.

Lewis, 2'he Holy f laces 0/ Jerusalem, 1880; Th. Fricdrich, Tempel u. I'alast Saturn. etc., Innsb. 1887; O. Wolff, Der Tempel otm Jerusalem urul seine Maase, 1SS7; Stade, Gesch. i. 311 tl. (the author, an acknowledged Biblical scholar, was aided by his colleague von Kilgen, professor of architecture) ; Perrot et Chipiez, Le Temple de Sol., Paris, 1889, large folio, with tine diagrams; History of Art in Sardinia, Judaea, etc., London, 1890, i. 142ff.

; Conrad Schick, Die Sti/lshutte der Tempel in Jerus. wnd der Tempel- filatz der jetz. Zeit, Ber. 1896 (by an architect; the scholarship js weak, and proof references almost wholly wanting, though the constructions and plans are good). In addition to the older treatises on Bibtie.al Arch^voloi/y by Jahn (in English also), de Wette(4th and last edition ininroved by Riibiger, 1864), Allioli, and Keil (cf.

also Spencer, de LeiiiOus, Disscrtatio Sf^ta), note particularly the works by Benzinger and Nowack, both issued in 1894, and based on the latest results. Nowack'a work is the fuller, but Beiizinger's the more compact and interesting. See also the Commentaries and other works referred to in the course of this article. T. W. DaVIES.