The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 106

692-inete&d o[ 480 yean. 6. The chrono- and labour, and see Jos., Ant. viii. 9. 9, and logy of Josephus - to which by itseH, Dell. Jnd. v. 6. 1. We can ho.rdly be wrong perhaps, no great weight is to be a.tte.ohed, in identifying the rome.rke.ble rook known as agrees with St. Paul's estimate, and o[ the Sakrah, over which the mosque of Ome.r oouree contradicts that of the text. 7. Nor (Kubbet-es-Sakrah) is built-the "pierced does it seem to be a valid e.rgument for the rock" ~f the Jerusalem Itinerary-with the retention of the suspected words, the.t " the threshing-floor of Oman. The reader will prooieion of the ete.tement ie e. voucher for find an interesting pnper on the site of the ite accuracy." (Bii.hr, who e.dds, "Not only temple in " Scribner's Monthly," vol. xi. ie the whole number of the yea.re given, but pp. 257-272. According to Mr. Deewiok, also the yee.r of the reign of the king, e.nd whose measurements and oonolusions ii even the month itself," for the genuineness gives, the porch stood on the Sakrlih. Mr. of the le.tar de.ta, "In tht, fourth year," &c., Conder, however, urges strong reasons ie not questioned.) The remark of Keil (" Tent Work," pp. 187-9) for plo.cing the the.t the building of the temple marked e. Holy of Holies on the rook. We should new and importe.nt epoch in the history of then " see the Holy Honse in its naturo.l the chosen people, e.nd eo justified e.n ex- and tre.ditiona.I position on the top of the ceptiona.l reference to the birth or emanci- mountain; we see the courts descending on pation of the nation, though undoubtedly either side, according to the present slopes true, will he.rdly e.ve.il mnoh e.ge.inst tha of the hill ; we find the great rock galleries considere.tions alleged e.bove. On the whole, dropping naturally into their right places; therefore, I confess to the belief the.t these e.nd finally, we see the temple, by the im- words a.re the interpolation of e. le.tar he.nd mutability of Oriental custom, still a temple, (of which we shell find tre.cee elsewhere), e.nd the site of the great e.ltar still conse- though it would, perhe.pe, be premature, crated [?] by the beautiful little chapel of with only the evidence now before ns, to the chain." But see Porter i. p. 125; Po.I. exclude them from the text. It is certein.ly Explor. p. 4, also pp. 342, 343; "Our Work noteworthy the.t such destructive critics as in Palestine," ohs. viii. and iL ; "Recovery Ewe.Id e.nd Thenins e.re se.tisfied e.s to their of Jerusalem," oh. xii., &o. Quot viatores, genuineness], 1n tha fourth year of Solo- tot sententiae.] mon's reign over Iara.el [ e.coording to the Ver. 2.-And the house [i.e., not the chronology of Desher, this we.a .LM. 3000], whole structure, but the ma.in building, ex- 1n the month Zlf [i.e., May. The word sig- clusive of porch (ver. 3) and side chambers :n.ifies splendour. T"ne month was pro- (ver. 6)] which king Solomon built for the bably so celled bece.nee of the brill.iancy of Lord, the length thereof was threescore its flowers (Gesen., Keil, al.)], which 1s the cubits [But what was the length of the second month [This exple.nation is e.dded cubit t (hi;)~) This unfortunately is by no because before the captivity the months (with the exception of .A.bib) e.ppear to have mee.ns certain, as the Jews would seem to he.d no regul&r na.mes, but were e.lmost have had three different cubits. All the always designated by numbers. (See, e.g., e.ncient measures, both Jewish e.nd Gentile, Gen. vii. 11; 2 Kings x:xv. 1). Oniy four were ta.ken from parts of the body. Thus pre-captivity na.mes are recorded, e.nd of we :find e. ".finge1·-breadth" (Jer. Iii. 21), these three e.re mentioned in connexion with "hand-breadth" (1 Kings vii. 26), "span" the building of the temple, viz., Zif here (1 Sam. xvii. 24), and the Greeks had their and in ver. 37, Bulin ver. 38, e.nd Ethanim Jarn,Xot .,..ol,1: e.nd .,..;jxv1:, and the Romane in eh. viii 2. It bas hence been inferred theircubituB, pea, digitw, &c. i"l~tt is need that these names were not in general use, in its proper sense (ulna) Deuteronomy iii. 11. but were restricted to pnblio documents, Probably at first it signified, like 1riixv1:, the &c. (Diet. Bib. ii. 416), a supposition which, length from point of elbow to tip of little or if correct, would e.oconnt for the :f.e.cility middle finger. But it ie obvious the.t this we.s with which the old appel.le.tione were super- an uncertain measure, and hence perhaps seded by poet-captivity names. The later arose cubits of different length. According to name for this month -was Iyar (Te.rgnm on Gesen. the cubit here mentioned, which was 2 Chron. xxx. 2)], that he bega.n [not in the older or se.cred Mosaic cubit (2 Chron. Heb.] kl bull4 the house of [Heb. to] the iii. 3), we.a six palms, while that of Ezekiel Lord. [The chronicler mentions the site (Ezek. xl. 6 ; xliii. 13), the royal Babylonian (2 Chron. iii. 1), "In Mount Moriah, . . . cubit, was seven, but on this as well as in the threahing-:Boor of Ome.n," &c. We other points the authorities e.re very far know from the extensive foundations yet from e.greed. "The length of the cubit 1a remaining that the prepare.tion of the plat- one of the most knotty points of Hebrew form on which the temple lhonld stand archlllology" (Diet. Bib. iii. p. _1736), There mlllt bave been a work of considerable time is a general eo111e111UB of op1won, however, OIi, VI, 1-88,) THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 101