There exist a number of instances at the present day of the magnificent walls of cut stone built in early days from the time of Solomon to Herod, at Jerusalem, Hebron, Arak el-Emir, Baalbek, Tyre and Zidon, and Egypt.
At Jerusalem some of the stones in the wall of the temple enclosure, still existing, are over 30 feet long, 8 feet vnde, and 3i feet high, weighing over 80 tons. The ancient walls are in places still over 150 feet in height, and were originally at the comers at least 230 feet in height. The stones are of hard mountain limestone, approximating to marble, and are carefully chiselled, with a sunken draft of about 3 to 5 inches width all round. The stones of the wall surrounding the cave of Machpelah at Hebron are very little in- ferior in size to those at Jerusalem.
At Baalbek the stones of the waU of the temple are not quite equal in size to those of Jerusalem, and the stone is much softer ; but this wall is pro- tected by another one in front built of exceedingly large stones, 3 of which weigh each about 800 tons, and are over 60 feet in length, 17 feet in breadth, and 14 feet in height. The manner in which these stones were cut and brought down from the quarry can be seen in the quarry itself. When a large stone was ready to be brovight away, it could be brought doNvn by gravity with not a very great expenditure of la\>our.
Josephus (Ant. XX. x. 7) speaks of square and very wuite stones used in the temple, the work of king Solomon, 20 cubits long and 6 cubits high ; he also speaks {BJ v. v. 1) of stones in the temple itself 40 cubits in length. These great stone walls are taken do\vn to the rock for their foundations, while the buildings of Babylon had their founda- tions usually on the sand near the surface (Perrot and Chipiez, L 157). The Pharaonic temples were also rather laid on the surface than solidly placed in the ground.
The gardens in Syria formerly, as at present, had stone walls as boundaries (BJ V. iii. 2), and narrow paths traversed the gardens of the suburbs (Nu 22-'''). The bare hillsides were terraced with stone walls and soil brought up from the bottom, so that the bare hills became fertile fields, as is the case at the present day in Spain, Northern India, Java, Japan. This also is carried out at the present day in many parts of Palestine (BJiP iL 493, iii. 14).
For other points connected with the subject of this art. see BRICK, GATE, HOUSE, MORTAR, PAVE- MENT, Roof.
Por details regarding the walls of Jerusalem, Babylon, Nineveh, etc., see the articles under these titles. C. Wareen.
WAR.—
L The Terrain of Palestta*.
U. The Jkthod of War. UL The Conduct of War. iv. Treaties.
V. Tile Outiook of the Prophet* on W»r. vi. Allusious to War in the NT.
i. The Terrain of Palestine.— The first re- quisite for understanding the wars of the Bible is a knowledge of the geography of Palestine. We
need to know something about the routes wliich so unwieldy a traveller as an army can use, the physical and artificial obstacles which hinder it in its march, the [)laces which allow it room for fight- ing or for encamping, and other similar geographical details. (In reading this article the reader snould have open before him the large map of Palestine prefixed to vol. i. of this Dictionary).
The great strategic routes are three in number. There is the important road which, coming from the north and skirting the coast of the Mediter- ranean, passes Tpe, Mount Carmel, and Gaza, and finally reaches the border of Egypt. Then there is the scarcely less important route, now followed by the railway from Damascus to Haifa, which takes a S.W. direction to the Jordan, and then crosses the whole length of the fertile plain of Esdraelon in a N.W. direction to the neighbourhood of Mount Carmel. The meeting of this road with the first- mentioned in the plain of Esdraelon confers great strategic importance on the plain. There armies could meet, victual themselves, and find room to manoeuvre both with footmen and with chariots. There, too, in ancient times stood four of the chief fortresses of Palestine, put there to hinder the free use of the great plain by an enemy (cf. G. A. Smith, HGHL^ ch. xix. pp. 387-390). The third great strategic route lies east of the Jordan and runs from Damascus through Sela (Petra) to the port of Elath at the head of the Gulf of Akabah.
Besides these three great routes, none of which touched the heart of the land of Israel, some others must be mentioned which gave access to the central range. Two of these are mentioned below as giving strategic importance to GUgal. A third, starting from the modern Jenin, crosses several small plains and easy passes (cf. HGHL^ ch. xvi. p. 327), and gives access from the north to the city of Samaria. It is a route which must often have been followed by Syrian invaders. On the west, the hUl-countrj' ot Judoea was pierced by several rugged and wind- ing passes, the best knowTj being that which is marked by the Upper and Lower Beth-horon. These passes were the scene of much of the irregular fighting which went on between the Philistines and Israel.