DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.26747#0267
Chap. III.
THE SECOND TEMPLE.
203
of tlie curious work of these stones was in three rows, hut the fourth
was pre-eminent for the beauty of its sculpture, for on it were
represented trees and all sorts of plants. These trees and plants
covered the stones that were beneath them, and their leaves were
wroug’ht so wonderfully thin and subtile that they appeared almost in
motion; but the rest of the wall up to the roof was plastered over, and
as it were wrought over with various colours and pictures.”1 This is so
exact a picture of what we have recently discovered in Assyria as to
leave no doubt of the identity of the two styles of building. The same
observation applies to the other works of Solomon as described by
Josephus—the Porch of Judgment, the house of Pharaoh’s daughter,
and the house where he dwelt, which had another court within the
porch, which was of like work. The historian’s whole account of the
banqueting-halls, pleasure-gardens, &c., might serve as well to describe
one of the exhumed edifices on the banks of the Tigris as anything
which ever existed at Jerusalem. This analogy, when a little more
study has been bestowed on the subject, will enable us almost certainly
to restore tlie whole style by comparing the existing remains in the
one place with the clescription of those in the other.
The Second Temple.
Although it is anticipating somewhat on the chronological order
of the book, and transgressing a rule which in other parts has been
strictly adhered to, of not attempting the restoration of buildings from
mere verbal descriptions, still the last ternple of Jerusalem is so in-
teresting, both from its history and associations, that it may well claim
to be an exception.
This was at all times regarded by the Jews as the Second Temple,
though it appears to have undergone repairs in the time of Herod
anrounting to a complete rebuilding. The temple itself no doubt stood
on the foundations of that of Nehemiah. It was situated at tlre south-
western angle of the enclosure now called the Haram-es-scherreff and
was exactly one stadium or 600 G-reek ft. each way. On 3 sides it
was surrounded by double porticos or cloisters of 2 rows of columns,
that to the east being called Solomon’s, probably from one which had
been built there by him. To the south stood the magnificent Royal
porch, or Stoa Basilica, erected by Herod. This consisted of 4 rows
of Corinthian columns, 40 in each row, and consequently 15 ft. apart
from centre to centre. The outer aisles were 30 ft. in width, the
central 45 ft. or two and three intercolumniations respectively. The
central aisle terminated in a bridge wliich, spanning the intermediate
valley, led direct to the city.
These porches, with the space immediately within them, were called
the court of the Gentiles, and were separated from that appropriated
exclusively to the children of Israel b}r a low railing; within which
steps led to an upper platform, on which stood the Temple, properly
so.called.
Joseplrus, Ant. Jud., viii. v. 2.
THE SECOND TEMPLE.
203
of tlie curious work of these stones was in three rows, hut the fourth
was pre-eminent for the beauty of its sculpture, for on it were
represented trees and all sorts of plants. These trees and plants
covered the stones that were beneath them, and their leaves were
wroug’ht so wonderfully thin and subtile that they appeared almost in
motion; but the rest of the wall up to the roof was plastered over, and
as it were wrought over with various colours and pictures.”1 This is so
exact a picture of what we have recently discovered in Assyria as to
leave no doubt of the identity of the two styles of building. The same
observation applies to the other works of Solomon as described by
Josephus—the Porch of Judgment, the house of Pharaoh’s daughter,
and the house where he dwelt, which had another court within the
porch, which was of like work. The historian’s whole account of the
banqueting-halls, pleasure-gardens, &c., might serve as well to describe
one of the exhumed edifices on the banks of the Tigris as anything
which ever existed at Jerusalem. This analogy, when a little more
study has been bestowed on the subject, will enable us almost certainly
to restore tlie whole style by comparing the existing remains in the
one place with the clescription of those in the other.
The Second Temple.
Although it is anticipating somewhat on the chronological order
of the book, and transgressing a rule which in other parts has been
strictly adhered to, of not attempting the restoration of buildings from
mere verbal descriptions, still the last ternple of Jerusalem is so in-
teresting, both from its history and associations, that it may well claim
to be an exception.
This was at all times regarded by the Jews as the Second Temple,
though it appears to have undergone repairs in the time of Herod
anrounting to a complete rebuilding. The temple itself no doubt stood
on the foundations of that of Nehemiah. It was situated at tlre south-
western angle of the enclosure now called the Haram-es-scherreff and
was exactly one stadium or 600 G-reek ft. each way. On 3 sides it
was surrounded by double porticos or cloisters of 2 rows of columns,
that to the east being called Solomon’s, probably from one which had
been built there by him. To the south stood the magnificent Royal
porch, or Stoa Basilica, erected by Herod. This consisted of 4 rows
of Corinthian columns, 40 in each row, and consequently 15 ft. apart
from centre to centre. The outer aisles were 30 ft. in width, the
central 45 ft. or two and three intercolumniations respectively. The
central aisle terminated in a bridge wliich, spanning the intermediate
valley, led direct to the city.
These porches, with the space immediately within them, were called
the court of the Gentiles, and were separated from that appropriated
exclusively to the children of Israel b}r a low railing; within which
steps led to an upper platform, on which stood the Temple, properly
so.called.
Joseplrus, Ant. Jud., viii. v. 2.