« PoprzedniaDalej »
these considerations we cannot, with justice, sup- else than that they were "divided by partitions pose the chronicler to be guilty of arbitrary exag- into distinct compartments" (Merz). It comes to geration, but we must rather suspect the text of the same thing when Keil, who rejects "ribs” as corruption, which is all the more probable, since the meaning, translates nevertheless “side-chamthe verse in question bears even elsewhere marks bers.” According to Ezek. xli. 6, where, however, of corruption." According to v. Meyer's probable the reading is not entircly certain, the number of
these chambers was 33: according to Josephus, conjecture, instead of baby
with whom the moderns agree, there were 30read: Duy nipx, 1. e., 20 cubits (in Ezek. xlii. viz., 12 upon each side-wall of the house, and 6 16 also, whether the reading be niox or nixa is upon the rear-wall.–Ver. 6 states how the entire uncertain). The latter is adopted by the Syr., the side-structure ("chambers round about ") were Arab., and the Sept. (Cod. Alexand.). Thenius built into the chief-structure, the house itself. and Bertheau maintain, on the other hand, that as The wall of the latter had, upon the outside, rests the house was 30 cubits high, the sign 5=30 was
(nipaa, literally contractions, lessenings [" for originally in the text, but that through the oblite- he placed stays with retractions against the ration of the upper portion of the letter it became house." Bp. Horsley.-E. H.]). It was thickest at >=20. Aud certainly, in behalf of the supposi- the ground, and kept this thickness to the height tion that it was 30 cubits high, we may urge, in of five cubits; then succeeded a rest (like a settle), part, the absence of any statement of the height which was one cubit broad. Then again, after an in our text, which is the more easily explicable if elevation of five cubits, there was another rest, one the height of the "porch” and of the temple were cubit broad; there was also another rest of like the same, and, in part, the circumstance that the height and breadth. Upon these rests the ends of side-building was 20 cubits high on the outside, the beams, which served for the ceiling of each consequently the "porch ” would not have been story, were laid, and had in them their supporto especially distinctive or prominent had it been of The outer wall of the side-structure had no rests, the same height (Keil). That the "porch" had but was built perpendicularly; hence, as our verse thick stone enclosure-walls with a wide entrance states, the uppermost story was one cubit broader (Thenius), cannot be concluded from the obscure (deeper) than the middle, and the middle again was passage of Ezek. xli. 26; still less is the view es one cubit broader than the lowermost. The wall tablished that each side-wall had a window. To also of the house must have been very thick below me it seems that the “porch” had only side-walls -at least four cubits, for its thickness abovo the and a ceiling, but to have been entirely openin side-structure, bearing in mind the rests, amounted front, so that windows were unnecessary. The certainly to one cubit. Thenius and Keil place the extremely inadequate description of the "porch," thickness at six cubits, but this seems unnecessary. contrasted with the very careful description of the The reason given for this mode of construction house and of both its compartments, can only be is, " that the beams should not be fastened into the walls founded in the fact that it did not belong especially, of the house,” i. e., that the large, costly stones or as an integral part, to the sanctuary, but was should remain whole and uninjured (75W), that only a subordinate addition thereto.
Ver. 5. And against the wall of the house no holes should be cut into them for the purpose he built, &c. The word yarn comes from ys of inserting the ends of the ceiling-beams. Ver. sternere, to spread or strew something for a bed, that all the stone-work had been so prepared in
7, which is a parenthesis, refers to this, and means and means literally stratum, a bed (Ps. lxiii. 6; Job xvii. 13). Symmachus renders it by korá- advance, that in the actual putting up of the buildOtpapa. So this building was very properly called, ing, stone-cutting was no longer necessary” (Theof the house 30 cubits high, and, as it were, lay south side: whether in the middle (Thenius) or at because it spread itself out against the lower half' nius); According to ver. 8, the entire side-struc
ture had but one door, which was placed on the upon it. yijy is gen. com. and stands as collective the foremost apartment near the porch (Éwald, masculine in vers, 5 and 10, of the whole of the Merz) is uncertain; probably the latter. That a side-structure ("chambers "), but it is feminine in door within the house opened into the side-strucver. 6, when the single, or three stories of the ture, has been erroneously concluded from Ezek. same, one over the other, are mentioned (see Gesen. xli. 5. The walls of the house were nowhere on the word). The ng before niz'p is scarcely the broken through, and certainly the historical acsign of the accus., "reaching to the walls” (Keil), count knows nothing of such a door. The wind. but a preposition, and defines more particularly ing stairway obviously was within the side-structhe preceding 7p-by, as indeed both preposi- ture. The word vps in ver. 8, and in Ezek. xli. 5, tions elsewhere are synonymous (comp. Ps. iv. 7, 9, 11, is like you, in vers. 5 and 10, in the singular, with lxvii. 2). If it can mean simply "in connec- and stands collectively for the whole of the sidetion with the walls" (Thenins), then the statement chambers.—The text says nothing of the perpenis that (Umbau) "the chambers round about "dicular outside wall of the side-structure. Thewere affixed to the walls. It went round the en- nius appeals to Ezek. xli. 9 for the supposition that tire house, so that the two side-walls of the porch this was a stone-wall five cubits thick. In that above stood free, and cansed the latter to appear all case it would have been as thick as the side-chamthe more distinctive. The three stories one above bers of the lower story were broad (ver. 6): and the other of this side-structure (ver. 5), had each why should the wall of these have been so thick ? niyby, i. e., literally "ribs" [joists
, so Bp. Hors. Then, too, the ceiling-beams of these chambers
would, of necessity, have been inserted into thesn ley oz the place.—E. H.], which can mean nothing walls, which is inconsistent with ver. 7. Hence
שְׂדֵרת .tainly indispensable for roofing
it seems to me much more probable that this ex- sign and pledge of the covenant established with terior wall, as indeed the entire side-structure, Israel, would dwell in the house about to be built, which was only subordinate in any event, was and that the covenant-relation also should con: built of cedar.---The text does not state the pur- tinue, if the king upon his part should keep the pose or design of these " chambers round about.” | covenant, and walk in the ordinances of Jeho. They served for the preservation of temple uten- vah. Such a promise necessarily encouraged and sils and temple stores (Keil), perhaps also of con- strengthened Solomon in his great and difficult secrated gifts (Ewald); but they were scarcely undertaking, as it reminded and urged him to the "expensively furnished bedrooms” (Thenius). performance of his sacred obligations.
Vers. 9-10. And so he built the house, &c. Vers. 14–19. So Solomon built the house, &c. In roofing, the building of the house was ended. Ver. 14 resumes the description of the building, But we must not, as many formerly, and even which had been interrupted by vers. 11-13, and Hirt himself now, fancy a gable-roof. The silence which from ver. 15 is applied to its interior. The of the text respecting its form allows us to presup-overlaying of walls with wood, which again was pose that it was, as with all oriental buildings, a covered with metal, and gold in particular, is an flat roof furnished with a parapet (comp. Deut. old Oriental custom, extending from Phænicia to Juxxii. 8). jy is not, with Merz, to be understood dea (comp. Müller, Archæology, translated by John
Leitch, p. 214 sq.; Schnaase, Gesch. der bild. Künste, of the wainscoting, but, with Keil, of the roofing, i. s. 160; Weiss, Kostümkunde, i. s. 365). The for the account of the former begins first at ver. covering with gold was not mere gilding, but con15. D'as are not planks, as the word for the most sisted of thin gold plates (Symb. des Mos. Kultus, i. s. part is translated, but beams, as such were cer adorned with precious stones, which is credible
60). According to 2 Chron. iii. 6, the walls also were
. are scarcely enough since these were expressly named amongst "hewn cedar-timbers" (Thenius), but boards which from phir (chap. x. 11), and it was the custom in
the objects which Solomon obtained in abundance were laid upon the beams. The anxa refer to the Orient to make use of them in buildings and both the preceding. Without doubt this cedar utensils (comp. the same, s. 280, 294, 297).-Ver. covering was overlaid with firm flooring, perhaps 16 says explicitly and distinctly that the main even with stone slabs. Thenius very unnecessa- space was separated from the Debir by a cedar rily wishes D'as to be read for Dios, and then wall; hence surely it is an error upon the part of suggests "a flat roof vaulting" but in the ancient Thenius when, by an appeal to Ezek. xli. 3, he Orient there were never any arched roofs. In ver. cubits thick covered with wood and gold. Even
supposes, in place of this wall, a stone-wall two 10 yasin is again collective, for, according to it, in the tabernacle of the covenant it was not a not the whole side-structure, but each of its three plank-wall (Ex. xxvi. 15), but a curtain merely stories, was five cubits high inside. The men- (ver. 33) which separated its two divisions from tion of the side-structure here is in reference to each other. Even the massively-constructed the roofing. While ver. 9 speaks of the roof- Herodian temple had no such wall, of which being of the house, ver. 10 states how it is re- sides, the Rabbins, according to Josephus (Bell
. lated to that of the side-structure. Therefore the Jud. i., 5, 5, 5), knew nothing (Lightfoot, Descrip. height is again mentioned, with the observation, temp. Hieros., chap. xv. 1). The cedar wall, for "and he fastened the house with timber of cedar." the rest, since it reached from the ground to the If Solomon be the subject with the preceding 121 beams of the ceiling, must have been thirty cubits (Thenius), or yas: (Keil), the sense is: the roofing high.
p of the three stories (five cubits high each) of the the design of the latter, and proves that the side-structure was done with cedar timbers, which, with their ends, lay upon the rests of the walls of 777 does not mean oraculum or locutorium, for the temple, and likewise united the side-structure had it this signification, its object would havo with the house, thus making it a complete whole. been denoted by the word itself, and no explanaEntirely false is the translation: he covered the tory addition would have been necessary.-AChouse with cedar-wood (Gesenius), as if the stone-cording to vers. 16-20 the two divisions of the walls were overlaid, upon the inside, with cedar, house were of the following dimensions: the of which there is nowhere the slightest trace. room at the farthest end took off from the entire That the roof of the side-structure, moreover, was length of the building (which was 60 cubits), horizontal, level, like that of the house itself, twenty, and from its height (30 cubits), twenty. scarcely requires mention.
It was also, as is expressly stated in ver. 20, Vers. 11-19. And the word of the Lord twenty cubits long, broad, and ligh, and consecame to Solomon, &c. The interruption of the quently was a complete cube in shape. The front description of the temple, by these verses, shows compartment was forty cubits long, twenty broad, plainly that what is therein stated took place dur- and thirty high. For since its breadth and height ing the progress of the building. From chap. ix. are not given here (ver. 17), it must have had the 2, comp. with iii. 5, it is clear that we have to think breadth and height of the house mentioned above not of a revelation of Jehovah, but of a divine (ver. 2), otherwise, as in the case of the rear compromise communicated through a prophet (per-partment, it would have been expressly noticed. haps Nathan), such as happened to David (2 Sam. That the front compartment was not only longer, vii. 12 sq. and i Chron. xxii. 10), to which refer- but higher also, larger generally than the rear, its ence is made in ver. 12. Solomon thereby obtained the promiso that Jehovah, as He had formerly
name even proves spyo (see above on ver. 2). It dwelt among the people in a "tabernacle," for the lis hence decidedly incorrect when Kurtz and Merz
shows לִדְבִיר to לְקדֶשׁ הֵלָּ" The addition
suppose that the front compartment was only | 16, according to which the cedar wall before the twenty cubits high, that over the entire house holy of holies went from the floor to the beams of there was an upper room ten cubits high fitted up the ceiling. Besides, ver. 20 does not say that tije for the conservative of the reliques of the taber- cedar wall was only twenty cubits high, but onis nacle of the covenant, and that this room is desig- brings into prominence the fact that on all its sides nated by what 2 Chron. iii. 9 names
the holy of holies measured twenty cubits. As ,
the room in question was inaccessible, Ewald which the Sept. renders by tò ÚTrepớov. The rightly observes that it "had been left apparently following considerations make against this view : entirely empty.” It had no especial design, and (1) How could one have reached this supposed was what it was simply that the holy of holies upper chamber? Not from the side-structure, for might be a perfect cube. Upon this point more the ceiling of its uppermost story did not reach will be remarked farther on, in respect of the sig. to the floor of the supposed “upper room:" the nificance of the temple. For particular words on thick walls of the house, moreover, had no door vers. 17–20, see above, Textual and Gram. above the level of the side-structure. Just as little Vers. 20–22. And covered the altar, &c. could one have reached it from the interior of the And he overlaid the altar with cedar. Thus' only house, for in neither compartment was there a should we translate the concluding words of the stairway which led thither: there was no opening 20th verse, and not, with Le Clerc, J. D. Michaelis, in the ceiling. (2) The windows of the house and others-he overlaid the altar of cedar, namely, (ver. 4) were above the side-structure, which (the with gold like the rest. Apart from the fact that ceilings of the three stories being taken into the man is without the article
, and not in the conremained, therefore, the house being thirty cubits struct, the i gold." is first mentioned in the conhigh, but twelve cubits for the windows. If now
There the altar is
cluding words of the 22d verse. from these twelve cubits, ten are allowed for the more specifically referred to by 7275-hon, upper room, what space remains for the windows, which cannot mean “ which belonged to the Dowhich certainly were not very small, and which were necessary to admit light and 'air into the bir," in the sense that it stood within it; for the house? (3) From the extremely abrupt words of of the ark of the covenant (ver. 19), and never had
holy of holies was designed only as the receptacle the Chronicles, “ And the alioth he covered with gold,” it follows only that alioth (upper chambers) an altar. The altar of incense in the holy place is were somewhere, but not where they were ; and meant. Its position was "in front of the curtain" since the Chronicles in its abbreviated description (1299) (Exod. xl. 26), i. e., ““ before the ark of the says nothing of the entire side-structure with its stories and chambers, we have at least as much testimony" (Exod. xl. 5), and therewith also " beright, with Grüneisen. to suppose the alioth to be fore Jehovah." (Lev, xvi. 12, 18), enthroned above
the ark. the chambers of the side-structure, as an upper the Debir. If now this altar were "overlaid“
It stood also in special relation to room extending the length of the whole building, with cedar, we are shut up to the supposition that and which is nowhere else mentioned. The rel. " the body of it was of stone” (Keil). But this iques of the tabernacle could easily have been preserved in the several chambers of the side of burnt-offering, which was required to be com
was the peculiar, distinguishing feature of the altar structure. [For the other view, see Art. Temple
, posed of earth or of stones (Exod. xx. 24, 25), and above cited." But our author seems to me to have the fram of which, consequently, was filled with fully disposed of this doubtful matter. seem impossible from our author's reasoning that the same material (comp. Symbol
. des Mos. Kult., i. there should have been a large upper chamber s. 481, 488). The much smaller altar of incense over the “ holy place.”—E. H.] If now we must, wanting in the altar of burnt-offering (Exod. xxx.
was a simple frame with a covering, which was according to all the accounts, regard the front 1-3). În distinction with the latter, it is named in compartment as thirty cubits high, the question Ezek. xli. 22, "the altar of wood." The body of still remains respecting its relation to the rear, it could not have been of stone. These difficulties which was but twenty cubits high. . Stieglitz and disappear only through the translation of the Sept.: Gruneisen are of the opinion that the rear com- | και εποίησε θυσιαστήριον κέδρου partment, viewed externally, was ten cubits lower than the front, which was the case also with instead of 9)?!, which Theniis lolds to be genuEgyptian temples (and like the chancel in the so
ine. In that case the absence of the article in called Gothic church.-E. H.]. But ver. 2 conhouse at thirty cubits, and does not limit it to the observation in ver. 22: And the whole altar [of flicts with this: it gives the height of the entire nan is explained, as well also as the concluding front compartment. Apart from all other considerations, we cannot appeal to the adytum of the cedar) before the Debir, he overlaid with gold.
The words in ver. 21 are obscure and difficult: Egyptian temples, because it was not connected with the fore-temple, but was separated from it ayrı (and he made a partition) by the chains by chambers and passages, and was an indepen- of gold before the oracle (Debir). Thenius is of dent structure (Müller, Archæology, p. 190 89.; Leitch (German edit.) 's. 258 ; Schuaase, Gesch opinion that the subject here, viz., natan-is der bild. Künste, i. 8. 392). Wo must certainly as omitted, and then translates," he hung the cur. sure that there was a room over the rear com- tain before the Debir with gold chains." This partment ten cubits high. Böttcher thinks this curtain was before the door of the latter, and was was open in front and only having chains hanging hung in such a manner that it could be moved as its partition (ver. 21); in itself, " very improba- this way and that, “ by means of golden chainlets ble" this ( Winer), and besides it is against ver. I each provided with an end-ring, upon a round stick
sipon which these rings were made to siide.” But compartment, and also how that those upon the this mysterious chain-work, as Winer names it, ark of the covenant could have had but one face. is by no means “forever explained and done Ezekiel, on the other hand, in his vision of the with," by this suggestion. For, according to it, throne of God and of the temple, gives something the chief thing in the text, the mention of the cur- more definite. According to the first and tenth tain, is wanting. But no MS. nor any ancient version names this supposed missing object. And if chapters the cherubim were nin, i. e., swa, living any one wish to insert it, then must the words creatures (not Oīpes, wild beasts) with four wings
and he overlaid it with gold " refer to the cur- and four faces. On the right side the faces were tain; and this is impossible. Besides, the text those of a man and of a lion, on the left those of says only " with chains," and does not know any. a bull and of an eagle. The human element thing either of end-rings or of round sticks, both seems to have preponderated in their form (ver. 5). of which are essential, and far more necessary But according to chap. xli. 18, the cherubim repthan the chainlet" for the sliding, this way and resented upon the walls and doors of the temple, that, of the curtain. With De Wette, Gesenius, between palm-trees, had but two faces, the one of Ewald, and Merz, yay is to be translated, he a man and the other of a lion. The former were bolted, as in Chaldaic gay means a bolt, and for on the right side and the latter on the left. The on??, i. e., bolt (Exod. xxvi. 26), the Chaldee has apocalyptic vision of the throne, Rev. iv. 7, in nay. But then the question is, what was bolted? which the four types of creatures composing the According to Calmet and others, it was only the cherub are separated and stand round the throne, door of the Debir, which had two leaves. But in having six wings each, rests upon that of Ezekiel. that case it would have been necessary to take cherub was not a simple but a complex or crllec
From everything we have, it appears that the · away the chains on the day of Atonement--a thing tive being; and when he has now one, then two nowhere hinted at, and in itself highly improba- then again four faces, or two, or four, or six ble. Obviously the bolting chains were not a movable but a fixed contrivance running across
wings; when, too, the four types of which he is the entire wall. They held together the parts of composed are separated side by side, so we gather the wall made of cedar, like the bolts on the still farther that he had no unalterable, fixed form, planks of the tabernacle (Exod. xxvi. 26), and but that one element or another was prominent likewise represented the Debir as barred, Closed or subordinate according to circumstances. In A further argument for this : nipin
fact, one element might even disappear without
any change in the fundamental idea attaching to comes from pon, which means to bind, to chain the cherub. This has been questioned warmly by together, and in Arabic to shut up, and the ex- Riehm recently (De Natura et notione symbolica pression jipy the concealed, the closed, is used by Cheruborum. Basil, 1864). He maintains that beEzek. (vii. 22) of the holy of holies. The suppo- that of a man standing upright, with wings. The
fore the exile the cherub had a fixed form, viz., sition of v. Meyer and Grüneisen, that there was in the cedar wall an opening above the door, later description in Ezekiel's vision is a departure which like the capitals of the two brazen columns from this characteristic and original form, and, for was covered (chap. vii. 15 sq.; 2 Chron. iii. 16) the four quarters of the world, gives to the cheru
the sake of the "throne, chariot" moving towards with a net or lattice-work, is just as untenable as bim with it four faces, yet not four component that the chains served the purpose of decoration only (Jahn).—In ver. 22 all that had been said parts. The three faces added to the original one hitherto about the gilding, [done with thin plates hu man face by Ezekiel are borrowed from the and not with gold-leaf.-E. H.] is again brought grandest and strongest of creatures whether living together and emphasized. It is by no means de- on the earth or in the air. He was induced to do clared by the expression " the whole house," that this probably by the Babylonian grouping tothe interior of the porch was gilt (Thenius): it gether of animals which he had learned during refers only to the holy place and to the holy of the captivity: We remark against this: If any holies, since the porch is explicitly distinguished person, on the one hand, knew well enough the from thd house (Keil).
forms of the cherubim both in the tabernacle and Vers. 23–28.–And within the oracle (Debir) here firmly to ancestral institutions and to priestly
in the temple, and would, on the other hand, ad. he made two chambers, &c. The reason why traditions, that person was Ezekiel, the son of a olive-wood was used in the construction of these figures was owing to its firmness and durability. priest. How is it possible that this prophet, who was In Greece it was employed to make images of the emphatically warned by the sight of the images gods (Winer, R.- W.-B., ii. s. 172).
of the Chaldeans," doubtless mythological (Ezek.
The etymology of the word 3179 is to this day so vari-xvii
, 14), portrayed on the walls. should himself
have been induced, by means of these, to alter ously stated, that nothing reliable can be gathered completely the sacred cherub-form, and to have from it respecting the form and shape of the made to it arbitrary and self-appointed additions ? cherubim. From Exod. xxv. 18 sq. and xxxvii. 7 Umbreit (Hesekiel, 8. xii.) rightly says: “So far as 89., we gather only thus much—that the cheru- the form of the cherubim is concerned, the prophet bim over the ark had two wings, and that their has certainly copied the original type of the temfaces were opposite each other and directed to ple, the ark of the covenant and the tabernacle wards the ark. Nor do we learn anything more floating in his imagination, with conscientious from our text and from 2 Chron. iii. 10-13. It is fidelity; but in particular instances he has enonly said that each was ten cubits high, and that riched the idea by the addition of inore complete each of the wings measured five cubits; that they features, without changing anything essentially." stood upon their feet, and that their faces were The assertion that he gives to the cherub not a turned towards the house, i. e., towards the large | fourfold composition, but only four faces, is a mis
take, for he gives to him the feet of a bull, the and a man's face towards the palm-tree on the wings of an eagle, and the hands of a man (Ezek. other side," so that there was always a cherub 1. 6-9); and in the passage chap. x. 14, which, in between two palm-trees. These had not four deed, in a critical respect is not free from suspi- faces, but assuredly the wings of the eagle and cion, the word 2177 stands for bull, so that many the feet of the bull were not wanting. We are not interpreters think that the bull is the prevailing leaves (Luther), but of palm-trees, such as we see
to think of palm-branches (Ewald), nor of palmelement in the composition of the cherub, Besides, upon ancient coins, and such as Titus caused to be in every living creature the face is the chief thing, struck off, out of the booty from Jerusalem, with by which in fact it is recognized; and when Eze- the inscription Judæa capta (Lamy, de Tabernaculo, kiel gives to the cherub four faces, he signifies thereby that those four types of being unite there. P: 783; Winer, R.- W.-B.
, i. s. 252). We may, with in. To delineate cherubim is consequently a haz-lilies, for these certainly belonged to the emblems
the Arabic version, understand by “open flowers," ardous business, because the form is not fixed; of the sanctuary (chap. vii. 19, 22, 26). Ver. 18 nor as yet is there anything perfectly satisfactory. The latest, by Thenius (tab. 3, fig. 7), is borrowed, names, besides the flowers, O'yna also, which is remarkable that the archæologists are forever regarded generally as synonymous with nype, 2 finding the original of the cherub in Egypt, while Kings iv. 39, and is translated "coloquinths" (i. e., neither the sphinx nor any other Egyptian com- wild or spring gerkins which burst at the touch). plex creature presents the four types united in the We should then understand by it: "egg-shaped cherub. On the other hand, Asiatic, and particu- decorations like that of our architectonics." (Thelarly Assyrian, images, exhibit all four together nius, Keil). But the intimate connection with (comp. Neumann, die Stiftshütte, s. 68 sq.). Never-graven figures in the highest degree significant, theless the cherub is not a copy of these, but is such as cherubim, palm-trees, and lilies, makos the pure and specific product of Hebrew contem- against a wholly meaningless, empty decoration, a plation. Upon this, more, farther on.—The words thing not known to oriental sacred architecture. of ver. 24 state that the four horizontally out- Add to this that in another passage the stretched wings took in the entire breadth of the Debir (twenty cubits); that they also touched on described as deadly, a fruit so dangerous and the right and left, the north and south wall, and unwholesome would have suggested just the oppoeach other in the centre, while it presupposes that site of that which was represented by the other they (i. e., the wings) stood close to each other at symbolical figures. If it were employed simply on the shoulder-blades.' Under the outspread wings account of its egg-shape, why these coloquinths," the ark of the covenant was placed, as chap. viii. since they were not alone round, why not eggs sim6 plainly says; and it is hence an error when ply? The stem ypa does not mean simply to burst, Ewald asserts that the cover of the ark was re- but also circumire, in hiphil conglomerare, circumaDewed, and in place of the old cherubim, those massive wooden and gilt were fastened upon it—a gere, and hypo involucrum, glomus, globús, so also thing impossible, for they stood 10 cubits apart Yupa glomus, fasciculus convolutus vel colligotus (Bux(ver. 27), while the ark was 3} cubits long (Exod. torf, Lex. Chald. et Talm., p. 1790). In its intimate Xxv. 10), Vers. 29–30.-And he carved all the walls connection with Dix"720p,
be taken of the house, &c. Comp. rer. 18. Keil and others to mean flower-bundles, i. e., buds; and so the transunderstand by myspng" basso-relievo,” Vulgate lation is, budding and blown flowers (flower-work). cælaturæ eminentes, which, however, cannot be es
Possibly this flower-work had the form of wreaths,
only we can scarcely, with Thenius, translate tablished by the word itself. For although up on="festoons, garlands of flowers." Whether means to set in motion, to sling (1 Sam. xvii. 40; in single panels, and such panels were in two or
the three kinds of graven figures were distributed XXV. 29; Jer. x. 18), this signification is not availa- three rows, one over the other, after the analogy ble here. But it becomes clear through the fol- of Egyptian temples, must be left undecided, owing lowing 'mama from nnp to break open, to open, to the silence of the text.—Thenius wishes the
" without” of vers. 29 and 30 to be understood of then to furrow, to plough (Ts. xxviii. 24); Dining the porch; but nothing has been said of the porch in Exod. xxviii. 11; xxxix. 6, is used for the work from ver. 3, and it would have been necessary of the graver in stone, and in Exod. xxviii. therefore to designate it by a word. According 36 ; xxxix. 30 of engraving in metal. The
can be referred only to the Defigures, moreover, were not in basso relievo, but were sunken. 1 Kings vii. 31 cannot avail, bir, and not to the interior of the whole house, for with reference to the figures upon the flat surface of the “bases," it is said in ver. 36 nAE'),
consequently by pisans the large compartment
must be meant. and this agrees with yp, which means in Arabic,
Vers. 31–35. And for the entering of the loco dimovit. Most of the figurative representa- oracle, &c. The rabbins, whom many interprettions upon the old Egyptian monuments were ers, even to v. Meyer and Stier, follow, translate wrought after this fashion (Thenius). The forms the difficult words nuunan nina box" the linof the cherubim upon the walls were different from the colossal figures under which the ark in tel (entablature) of the (or with the) posts, a pen. the Debir rested. According to Ezek. xli. 19, "a tagon." The sense would then be the lintel of lior-face was towards a palm-tree upon one side, the doors supported two posts abutting one against