NOTE TO LECTURE XXVII.

In the following LECTURE on the TEMPLE, the authorities are:

1 Kings vi.—viii. ; 2 Chr. iii.—vii.; Ezek. xl.—xlvi.; Josephus, Ant. viii. 3 and 4; and (though chiefly relating to the second Temple) the Tract Middoth in the Mishna.

The modern works on the subject are too numerous to cite. But I wish to express my obligations for the oral assistance given me by Professor Willis of Cambridge, in the general idea of the Temple; and also by a former pupil, the Rev. W. H. Lowder, particularly in regard to the illustrations to be derived from the descriptions in Ezekiel.

203

LECTURE XXVII.

THE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON.

Or all the monuments of the internal administration of The Temple. Solomon, none is to be compared in itself, or in its effect on the future character of the people, with the building of the Temple. It was far more than a mere architectural display. It supplied the framework of the history of the kingdom of Judah. As in the Grecian tragedies we always see in the background the gate of Mycenæ, so in the story which we are now to traverse, we must always have in view the Temple of Solomon. There is hardly any reign which is not in some way connected with its construction or its changes. In front of the great church of the Escurial in Spain-in the eyes of Spaniards itself a likeness of the Temple-overlooking the court called from them the Court of the Kings, are six colossal statues of the kings of Judah, who bore the chief part in the Temple of Jerusalem ;-David, the Proposer; Solomon, the Founder; Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, Manasseh, the successive Purifiers and Restorers. The idea there so impressively graven in stone runs through the subsequent history, and requires a brief description of the first appearance of this new scene of sacred occurrences.

Like all great works, it was the result of a long succession of events. Ever since the return of the Ark from the captivity in Philistia, the idea of a permanent building for its reception had been growing familiar. The mere fact of its separation from its ancient habitation in the Sacred Tent,

Its build

ing.

had necessitated its accommodation within the walls of a house.' The 'house' of Abinadab first, and of Obed-edom afterwards, became, as it were, little temples for its reception. When Jebus was conquered by David, his first thought was to find out a place for the Lord; a habitation for the Mighty One of Jacob.'1 The new capital was the fitting place for the new sanctuary. The ark was accordingly brought to Mount Zion. But here the design was suspended. David belonged to the earlier warlike and nomadic epoch. The fulfilment of his design was reserved for his peaceful son. Still, two definite steps were taken towards it. First, in consequence of the vision which connected the hill with the name of Moriah,' the threshing-floor of Araunah was selected, rather than the sanctuary on Zion or Olivet, for the sacred site; and the whole hill was subsequently added. Secondly, the materials were begun to be laid in, and communications were opened with Hiram. The Chronicler even ascribes to David the whole plan of the building down to the minutest details.

4

It was the first work that Solomon undertook. The stones were brought partly from Lebanon, partly from the neighbourhood of Bethlehem,3 partly from the quarries which have been recently discovered under the Temple rock, and known by the name of the Royal Caverns.' Hiram's assistance was doubly valuable, both from the architectural skill of his countrymen, already employed in his own great buildings, and from his supply of the cedar of Lebanon, conveyed on rafts to Joppa. An immense array, chiefly of Canaanites, was raised to work in the forests, and in the quarries of

5

1 Ps. cxxxii. 5.

2 1 Chr. xxviii. 11, 12, 19. Of this there is no indication in the Books of Kings. On the contrary, the design and preparation is ascribed exclusively to Solomon, on the very occasions where they are by the Chronicles ascribed to

David. Comp. 1 Kings v. 6; 2 Chr. ii. 3, 7; 1 Kings vi. 2; 2 Chr. iii.

4

"Mishna, Middoth, iii. 4.

Josephus, B. J. v. 4, §2.

Amongst whom the Giblites were famous, 1 Kings v. 18 (Heb.); Ezek. xxvii. 9.

Lebanon.' In order to reconcile the spirit of the new architecture as nearly as was possible with the letter of the old law, the stones were hewn in the quarries, and placed with reverent silence one upon another without sound of axe or hammer, as if, by the gradual growth of nature,

Like some tall palm, the noiseless fabric sprang.

As the building was itself an innovation on the strict Mosaic ritual, so much more was the ornamental treatment of brass and wood. Accordingly Hiram, the first sculptor and engraver of Israel, was half a foreigner.3 His father was a Tyrian, and was dead; but his mother was a Danite who lived in Naphtali. He thus sprang, on the Israelite side, from the same tribe, and (according to Jewish tradition) from the same family, as Aholiab, the Danite artist in the wilderness. So wide was his fame, and so profound the reverence entertained for him by the two sovereigns to whom he belonged, that he is called the father' both of Solomon and of Hiram.5 Under his directions, the vessels of brass were cast in the clay-pits of the Jordan valley; and they were so numerous, that Solomon, with a true Oriental and imperial magnificence, left them unweighed their 'weight was never found out.'

The uneven rock of Moriah had to be levelled, and the inequalities filled by immense substructions of 'great stones,'