The particulars which have been given under the head House (q. v.) require only to be aggrandized to convey a suitaljle idea of a palace; for the general ar- rangements and distribution of parts are the same in the palace as in the house, save that the courts are more
numerous, and with more distinct appropriations, the buildings more extensive, and the materials more costly. The palace of the kings of Judah in Jerusalem was that built by Solomon, thought by most interpreters to be the same with that called "the house of the forest of Lebanon," of which some particulars are given in 1 Kings vii, 1-12 ; and if that passage be read along with the description which Josephus gives of the same pile (.1 nt. V, 5), a faint idea may be formed of it, as a mag- nificent collection of buildings in adjoining courts, con- nected with and surrounded by galleries and coloimades. To the same Jewish historian we are also indebted for an account of Herod's palace, doubtless drawn from per- sonal knowledge ( War; v, 4, 4). The two buildings ap- parently occupied the same site, namely, the eminence of Zion, doubtless immediately adjoining and including the castle of David, or the present citadel of the me- tropolis. See Jekusalem.
" There are few tasks more difficult or puzzling than the attempt to restore an ancient building of which we possess nothing but two verbal descriptions; and these difficulties are very much enhanced when one account is written in a language like Hebrew, the scientific terms in which are, from our ignorance, capable of the widest latitude of interpretation ; while the other, though written in a language of which we have a more definite knowledge, was composed by a person who never could have seen the buildings he was describing. Notwith- standing this, the palace Avhich Solomon occupied him- self in erecting during the thirteen years after he had finished the Temple is a building of such world-wide notoriety that it cannot be without interest to the Bib- lical student, and that those who have made a special study of the subject, and who are familiar with the arrangements of Eastern palaces, should submit their ideas on the subject; and it is also important that our knowledge on this, as on all other matters connected with the Bible, should be brought down to the latest date. Almost all the restorations of this celebrated edifice which are found in earlier editions of the Bible are what may be called Vitruvian, viz. based on the principles of classical architecture, which were the only ones known to their authors. During the earlier part of this century attempts were made to introduce the principles of Egyptian design into these restorations, but with even less success. The Jews hated Egypt and all that it contained, and everything they did, or even thought, was antagonistic to the arts and feelings of that land of bondage. [Nevertheless it is certain that the Temple (q. v.) was in a large measure a copy of many of the Egyptian structures which remain to this day.] On the other hand, the exhumation of the palaces of Nineveh (q. v.), and the more carei'ul exam- ination of those at Persepolis, have throAvn a Hood of light on the subject. Many expressions which before were entirely unintelligible are now clear and easily understood, and, if we cannot yet explain everything, we know at least where to look for analogies, and what was the character, even if we cannot predicate the ex- act form, of the buildings in question" (Smith). "Al- though incidental mention is made of other palaces at Jerusalem and elsewhere, they are all of subsequent ages, and built under the influence of IJoman art, and therefore not so interesting to tlie Biblical student as this. Besides, none of them are anywhere so described as to enable their disposition or details to be made out with the same degree of clearness, and no instruction would be conveyed by merely reiterating the rhetorical flourishes in which Josephus indulges when describing them; and no other place is described in the Bible it- self so as to render its elucidation indispensable in such an article as the present" i^ibid.). See Architkctuke.
1. The follownig is substantially the reconstruction of Solomon's famous palace as proposed by Fergusson in his Handbook of Architecture, p. 202. It is impossible, of course, to be at all certain what was either the form or the exact disposition of such a palace, but, as we have
PALACE
5-J2
PALACE
Fif
SCALi; OF FEET
1. Presumed Ground-plau of Solomon's Palace, accordiug to Fergiissou
tlie dimensions of the three principal buildings given in the book of Kings, and confirmed by Josephus, we may, by taking these as a scale, ascertain pretty nearly that the building covered somewhere about 150,000 or 160,000 square feet. Less would not suffice for the accommoda- tion specified, and more would not be justified, either from the accounts we have, or the dimensions of the city in which it was situated. Whether it was a sfjuarc of 400 feet each way, or an oblong of about 550 feet by oOO, as rep- rcsented in the an- nexed diagram (lig. 1), must always be more or less a matter of con- jecture. The form here adopted seems to suit better not only the ex- igencies of the site, but the known disposition of the parts.