Of sculpture in the round the most striking examples must have been the great cherubs of olive wood, iilated with gold, which stood in the most holy place. Their height of ten cubits, or fifteen to twenty feet, shows that they were joined and built up of many pieces, like the lesser statues in Egypt. The wings, stretching out to a width equal to the height, were also, of course, joined on. The po.sition of the.se cherubs was not at all like that described of the similar figures on the mercy- seat of the ark ; the latter were face to face, but those of the temjile stood side by side, both facing one way. The most holy place was twenty cubits wide; of each cherub ' from the uttermost part of one wing unto the uttermost part of the citlit-r were ten cubits,' mid they stood ' so that the wing of the one touched the wall, and the wing of the other cherub touched the other wall, and their wings touched one another in the midst of the house' (1 K C*'-''). They appear to have only had two wings each, like those of the mercy-seat, and in this resembled Egyp. cherubic figures, while
the Assyr. many-winged figures are more akin to the four-winged of Ezekiel or the six-winged of Revelation. In actual artistic work only two-winged figures appear to have been made. But we must not hastily suppose that these were direct copies of the winged figures of Egypt ; the Heb. figures were male, while the Egyp. protective winged figures were always female, and often specialised as Isis and Nepthys. The symbolic meaning of these statues is outside of our scope here ; but the strange duality of two equal figures placed side by side is parallel to the two great columns before the temple, and the curious feature of a double entrance to porches with a central pillar, as seen in the tombs.
Figures of animals were also made, as the brazen serpent, which was still treasured and worshipped down to the time of Hezekiah ; also the twelve oxen of Solomon, which seem to have been done away with by Ahaz, as there is no mention of thera in the plunder (Jer 52) after he had removed the brazen sea from them (2 K 16"). This unnatural motive of placing a great vessel on the backs of animals is unknown in Egypt, unless in some of the Asiatic goldsmith's work ; but the same idea appears in Syria, where the goddess ^edesh stands on a lion's back.
In embroidery we see another sign of Asiatic rather than Egyp. influence. No embroidered robes appear on Egyp. figures, at least until post-Exodic tmies ; whereas in Babylonia and Assyria dresses are constantly represented as being embroidered with elaborate patterns. The Egyp. system was that of appliq^U work of leather, which was elaborately carried out in complex patterns ; and such a style of decoration still survives in the usual tent-linmg of Egypt, where pieces of various coloured cloths are all stitched on to the backing in a pattern, and elaborate inscriptions cut out and applied in the same way. The mention of large figures upon the curtains and vail of the tabernacle appears as if they were appliqui ; but they are only on the linen curtains, so that leather work of this kind is not implied. On the other hand, the makin" of gold wire by cuttin^up sheet gold is specially described for the ephod (Ex 39'), and this shows that dresses were certainly embroidered with thread.
LOrni AA'D BUD PATTERN (Egyptian), misnamed in I'alestine as
BELL AKD POMEGRANATE.
Until some extensive and well-directed excava- tions may open up for us the remains of Syrian and Jewish art, it is hopeless to do more than indicate the mere outlines. These seem to show a native Syrian style, influenced mainly by Mesopotamia, but also in some respects by Egypt. A single good slab of stone might teach us tar more than all we know at present.
W. M. Flinders Petrie.
ARTAXERXES (mjSTnrrix, Kncpnirix). — The name is wriiten Artakhsliatra in Old Persian, Artaksatsu and Artaksassu in Bab. cuneiform, and is derived from the Persian arta, ' great,' and khshntra, ' kingdom.' "The meaning of ' great warrior,' there- fore, given to it by Herodotus (vi. 98) is incorrect. Ardeshir is the later Persian form of the name.
The only Artaxerxes mentioned in the OT i« Artaxerxes I. Ix)ngimanus (or ' Long-handed '), the son of Xerxes, who reigned B.C. 464^25.
AETEMAS
ASA
159
Ewald, Hitzi<r, and other commentators have supposed that m Ezr 4"'^ the pseudoSmerdis (n.C. 522) is meant under the name of Artaxerxes. Hut the decipherment of the cuneiform inscriptions has shown tnat the Persia>n kinf's did not bear double names of the kind implied by the theory, and the diificulty felt by the commentators has been occasioned by the insertion of letters which relate only to the rebuUding of the city and walls of Jerusalem into the narrative of the rebuilding of the temple. The 24th verse of the chapter ought im- mediately to follow the 5th. (See Zeruhbabel.)
It may have been in consequence of the letters whi''ii pas.sed between the Persian king and his representatives in Palestine that in his seventh year Ezra was allowed, with other priests and temple-servants, and a grant from the imperial ex- chequer, to go up from Babylon to Jerusalem and there settle the affairs of the community (Ezr 7. 8). Thirteen years later (B.C. 4-t4), Nehemiah, the cup- bearer of Artaxerxes, was allowed to leave Susa for Jerusalem for a similar purpose, the first result of his mission being the restoration of the city walls.