TEMPLE (9yriri, or ;lin+ marl+ nsz, csr6N rn). The word is a par • 1 ticipia noun from the root 7r1, capere, excipere, and reminds us strongly of the Roman temphim, from TeiLEPOS, 71/..W4.1, locus liberatus et effatus. The Septuagint translation usually renders :+rl by oticos or va6s, but in the Apocrypha and the N. T. it is generally called 76 lepbv. Rabbinical appella tions are npnri n,z, the house of sanctuary, n,z rivrcm, the chosen house, lynS3m nsz, the house of ages, because the ark was not transferred from it, as it was from Gilgal after 24, from Shiloh after 369, from Nob after 13, and from Gibeon after 50 years. It is also called fivn. After the Israelites had exchanged their nomadic life for a life in permanent habitations, it was becoming that they should exchange also their movable sanctuary or tabernacle for a temple. There elapsed, how ever, after the conquest of Palestine, severai cen turies during which the sanctuary continued MON able, although the nation became more and more stationary. It appears that the first who planned the erection of a stone-built sanctuary was David, who, when he was inhabiting his house of cedar, and God had given him rest from all his enemies, meditated the design of building a temple in which the ark of God might be placed, instead of being deposited 'within curtains,' or in a tent, as hitherto. This design was at first encouraged by the prophet Nathan ; but he was afterwards instructed to tell David that such a work was less appropriate fot him, who had been a warrior from his youth, and had shed much blood, than for his son, who should enjoy in prosperity and peace the rewards of his father's victories. Nevertheless, the design itself was highly approved as a token of proper feelings towards the Divine King (2 Sam. vii. 1-12; 1 Chron. xvii. 1-14. ; xxviii.) We learn, moreover, from r Kings v. and Chron. xxii. that David had collected materials which were afterwards employed in the erection of the temple, which was coin menced four years after his death, about B. C. 1012, in the second month, that is the incmth of Siv (comp. Kings vi. ; 2 Chron. iii. 2), 480 years after the Exodus from Egypt. We thus learn that the Israelitish sanctuary had remained movable more than four centuries subsequent to the con quest of Caanan. In the fourth year of Solomon's
reign was the foundation of the house of the Lord laid, in the month Siv : and in the eleventh year, in the month Bul, which is the eighth month, was the house finished throughout all the parts thereof, and according to all the fashion of it. So was he seven years in building it.' The site of the temple is clearly stated in 2 Chron. : Then Solomon began to build the house of the Lord at Jerusalem in Mount Moriah, where the Lord appeared unto David his father, in the place that David had prepared in the threshing floor of Ornan (or Araunah) the Jebusite.' In south-eastern countries the site of the threshing floors is selected according to the same principles which might guide us in the selection of the site of windmills. We find them usually on the tops of hills, which are on all sides exposed to the winds, the current of which is required in order to separate the grain from the chaff. It seems that the summit of Moriah, although large enough for the agricul tural purposes of Amunah, had no level sufficient for the plans of Solomon. According to Josephus (De Bell. .7ud. v. 5), the foundations of the temple were laid on a steep eminence, the summit of which was at first insufficient for the temple and altar. As it was surrounded by precipices it be came necessary to build up walls and buttresses in order to gain more ground by filling up the interval with earth. The hill was also fortified by a three fold wall, the lowest tier of which was in some places more than 3o0 cubits high ; and the depth of the foundation vvas not visible, because it had been necessary in some parts to dig deep into the ground in order to obtain sufficient support. The dimensions of the stones of which the walls were composed were enormous ; Josephus mentions a length of 40 cubits. It is, however, likely that some parts of the fortifications of Moriah were added at a later period. The characteristics of the site of the Solomonic temple have undergone sa many changes that it is at present scarcely possible to discern them. Niebuhr gave an accurate de scription of what he found, illustrated by a map, in the Deutsche's Museeem, 1784,vol. p. 448, seq. ; ii. 137, seq.; and also in the third volume of his travels (comp. also Mishna, Middath, ii. 4).