passage to the narrative in Chronicles may be viewed, also points to an exchange of temple duty from Sabbath to Sabbath.

(7) The turns of the respective races of Eleazar and Ithamar were probably so arranged (see Bertheau on 1 Chron. xxiv. 6) that one house of Ithamar followed after every two houses of Eleazar. Hence, since the line of Eleazar was begun with, Jehoiarib and Jedaiah would be of this line, and Harim of that of Ithamar, etc. In opposition to the view of Herzfeld (Geschichte des Volkes Israel vor der Zerstörung des ersten Tempels, i. p. 381 sqq.), who regards the reference of this organization of the priestship to David as an invention of the Chronicler, we would only here mention that we have, in Ezek. viii. 16-18, an evident trace of this division of the priests in pre-Babylonian times; for those twenty-five men worshipping the sun, who from their location could be none but priests, must, as expositors after the precedent of Lightfoot correctly suppose, be the High priest and the heads of the twenty-four priestly orders. How this institution was subsequently developed, see the article quoted, p. 185 sq.

(8) The Levites whom David summoned to bear and accompany the ark, were divided into six houses under as many heads, four of which were of the race of Kohath, one of that of Gershon, and one of that of Merari (1 Chron. xv. 5). Besides musicians, there were also Levitical doorkeepers, sq.), of whom certain were also musicians (ver. 18).

y (ver. 23

(9) While the above passages presuppose thirty years of age as the period at which official duties were to begin, 1 Chron. xxiii. 25 sqq. tells us that the enactment that the functions of the Levites were to begin at their twentieth year-an enactment made in consideration of the circumstance that, since the transference of the sanctuary to Jerusalem, the bearing of the tabernacle and its vessels had ceased, and the service had thus been lightened-is to be attributed to David. On the relation of this passage to those cited above, see Bertheau in loc. The twentieth year was henceforth adopted as the terminus a quo; comp. 2 Chron. xxi. 17, Ezra iii. 8.

(10) The functions assigned to those classes at least who served at the sanctuary, seem for the most part to have been hereditary in the same families.

(11) These also seem to have merely borne the name

,ליים

comp. Neh. xiii. 5, xii. 47; yet see, on the other hand, 1 Chron. ix. 14, where the musicians are called simply Levites. They assisted the priests in the offices enumerated in the 23d, 28th sq., and 31st sq. verses. See particulars in the article quoted in Herzog's Realencyclop. viii. p. 355.

(12) The guardians of the treasures of the sanctuary, enumerated 1 Chron. xxvi. 20-28, were probably chosen from this

class.

(13) Of the choir leaders, four were sons of Asaph, of the house of Gershon (comp. 1 Chron. vi. 14-28); six sons of Jeduthun, who is correctly identified with Ethan, and therefore of the house of Merari (ver. 29); and fourteen sons of Heman of the Korahites, and therefore of the house of Kohath (vi. 18). The times of service of these choirs were probably interchanged in the same manner as those of the classes of priests. The share of the congregation in the musical service of the sanctuary seems to have been generally limited to saying Amen and praising the Lord (comp. xvi. 36), which latter refers to such doxological formulæ as "Hallelujah," "O give thanks unto the Lord, for He is gracious," etc., and the like (comp. Jer. xxxiii. 11). On the other hand, psalms were sung by the people themselves in festal processions (comp. Ps. lxviii. 26 sq.), and on the occasion of their pilgrimages to the sanctuary; for which latter purpose fifteen of the Psalms (Ps. cxx.—cxxxiv.), according to the most probable explanation of their titles, combine to form a special group. Some of these psalms are certainly of later origin, but the great antiquity of the custom is confirmed by Isa. xxx. 29. The last-named passage shows that such songs were especially connected with the celebration: of the Passover (compare § 153 on the later ritual).

(14) The appointments with respect to these classes, 1 Chron. xvi. 1-19, presuppose throughout the existence of the temple (see Stähelin, Versuch einer Geschichte der Verhältnisse des Stammes Levi, in the Zeitschr. der deutschen morgenl. Gesellsch. 1855, p. 720), but the families in question had been already employed in these services. For three families of doorkeepers are mentioned,-one a Korahite, and therefore of Kohath, at the head of which were Meshelemiah or Shelemiah, and Zachariah his first-born, for the eastern and northern sides, Obed-edom for the southern, and Hosah for the western side. Obed-edom

and Hosah have already been mentioned above. Of Shelemiah, moreover, who is called Shallum, ix. 19, and his son Zachariah, we are told, ix. 22, that Samuel and David appointed this family as doorkeepers to the tabernacle; nay, the remarkable information is appended, that their ancestors were guardians of the entrance under Moses and Joshua, and were in this capacity placed under the rule of Phinehas,—a statement concerning which nothing is found in the Pentateuch, but which is entirely in harmony with the Mosaic appointment, which committed to the race of Kohath the general care of the tabernacle. On the services of the families here mentioned, see Herzfeld, id. p. 390 sqq.; Bertheau in loc.; and the article Levi, Leviten, p. 355; the same on the three keepers of the threshold, mentioned 2 Kings xxv. 18, Jer. lii. 24, and p. 356 on the designation of priests as keepers of the threshold in 2 Kings xii. 10. The fourth class of Levites, the officers and judges, are but briefly spoken of, 1 Chron. xxvi. 29 sqq. They were of the race of Kohath, of the lines of Izhar and Hebron, and were, as we are told vers. 30 and 32, employed in the service of both the Lord and the king.

(15) That these arrangements, as above described, actually existed in the pre-Babylonian temple, and were in all essential points introduced by Solomon, cannot on adequate grounds be disputed (comp. Ewald, Gesch. Israels, i. sec. 3, p. 57, iii. sec. 3, p. 338). For where in succeeding centuries could a period be found to which the reorganization of the Levitical orders could be reasonably transferred?

(16) Josh. ix. 27 cannot be understood of the employment of the Nethinim in the service of individual Israelites, but only as stating that they served the congregation by the offices they performed for the sanctuary. Deut. xxix. 10 has induced some to transfer the origin of the Nethinim to the Mosaic period, though this passage does but speak in a general manner of the strangers in the Israelite camp, upon whom the lowest services were imposed.

(17) All these were undoubtedly bound to observe the Mosaic law, for the uncircumcised would in no case have been suffered in the sanctuary. At all events, this was certainly the case in post-Babylonian times, Neh. x. 29 sq. On the numbers, dwelling-places, and maintenance of the Nethinim after the

captivity, and on the question whether the intermarriage of Israelites and Nethinim was allowed, see the article in Herzog's Realencyklop. x. p. 296 sq.; on the latter point, see also Carpzov. app. p.

112.

III. SOLOMON.

§ 167.

The Building of the Temple

The first fulfilment of the promise given to David (comp. 1 Kings viii. 20) appeared in Solomon, the son of Bathsheba, who (according to 2 Sam. xii. 25) was educated by the prophet Nathan, and raised mainly by his influence to the throne, in opposition to the claims of his elder brother Adonijah. During a long period of peace, undisturbed till towards the close of his long reign, and living in the memory of the people as a type of the Divine peace of Messianic times (comp. with 1 Kings v. 5, iv. 25, the prophetic passages Mic. iv. 4, Zech. viii. 10 sqq.), he enjoyed the glory which the wars of his father had obtained for the kingdom.

Among Solomon's works, the temple (1) offers special matter for consideration with respect to biblical theology. It was seven years in building, and stood upon the plateau of Moriah (2), enlarged for the purpose by foundations to an extent of 80,000 square cubits. It was thus built on the very spot on which David, in conformity with the directions of the prophet Gad, had formerly reared an altar (2 Chron. iii. 1, comp. with 2 Sam. xxiv. 18). The description of the temple given 1 Kings vi. sq. is evidently derived from a document compiled. by an eye-witness, though the text seems in some few instances to have been incorrectly transmitted. The account in 2 Chron. iii. sq. differs in some respects, and is not free from objections. The description of the new temple Ezek. xl.-xlii. must be

cautiously used in elucidation; for though the visionary delineation of the priestly prophet is founded upon the image of the old temple, yet the latter is idealized, and even altered in some particulars, to suit the predicted forms of worship. Josephus, too (Antiq. viii. 3), who frequently follows the leadings of his imagination, can only be appealed to with reservation. The proportions of the tabernacle were in all essential respects followed in the temple building, in na, which was constructed of hewn stone. The dimensions were, however, doubled,—the temple being, according to 1 Kings vi. 2, sixty cubits long, twenty wide, and thirty high (3). It was divided into two parts, of which the foremost, called in the stricter sense S, was forty cubits long; the hindmost, the holy of holies, called

, twenty cubits long and as many high and broad, thus forming a cube (4). According to this statement, the temple would be externally ten cubits lower at the holy of holies than at the holy place, just as in Egyptian temples the sanctuarium is lower than the temple itself, and in Christian churches the choir lower than the nave. This is, however, generally doubted; and ni, i.e. upper chambers, being mentioned 1 Chron. xxviii. 11, 2 Chron. iii. 9, it is supposed either that these were over the holy of holies, or (as by Kurtz and Merz) that the holy place also was only twenty cubits high, and that these upper chambers extended over the whole length of the building (5). The interior of the temple was overlaid with wood, upon which were representations in carved work of cherubim, palms, and flower cups. Before the east side of the temple was a porch, obs, the whole breadth of the house, and therefore twenty cubits long and ten wide. Its height is not stated in 1 Kings vi., but 2 Chron. iii. 4 declares it to have been 120 cubits, a height which cannot be justified by referring to the propyle of Egyptian temples, and which, on such a foundation and before such an edifice, was impossible. There can be no doubt that we have here, as is frequently the case in Chronicles, a textual error; and a height of twenty (Movers reads ), or more