Commentaria in III Regum
Plan of the Temple
The temple of Solomon was like the tabernacle of Moses: for the tabernacle was as it were a movable temple of the Hebrews wandering in the desert: but the temple was as it were a fixed and stable tabernacle of the same people dwelling in rest in the promised land. Wherefore, as God gave the plan of the tabernacle to Moses, Exodus chapter 25 and following, so likewise He gave David the plan of the temple to be built, that he might hand it to Solomon, as is plain from 1 Paralipomenon chapter 28, verse 19. The temple, then, as well as the tabernacle, had properly two parts, the front one was called the Holy, the rear one the Holy of holies, that is the most holy, as the choir is in our churches. In the Holy there were three things: first, the seven-branched candlestick, shining with as many lamps placed upon it. Second, the table of the loaves of proposition, containing twelve loaves, which the twelve tribes offered to God in thanksgiving, as if protesting that they were fed by God in the promised land. Third, the altar of incense, near to and facing the Holy of holies, on which every morning and evening incense was offered to God residing in the Holy of holies. In the Holy of holies there was the ark of the covenant with its cover, that is the propitiatory, sustaining the two Cherubim, who with joined wings presented as it were a seat and throne to God, thence giving oracles and answers to what the pontiff, clad in the Rational of Urim and Thummim, inquired of Him. For into the Holy of holies none could enter but the pontiff, and into the Holy none but a priest: wherefore for the people an open-air court was added before the Holy, which was as it were the temple of the people or of the laity, that in it they might pray and watch the sacrifices.
This court was twofold. Its first part, near the Holy, belonged to the priests: for in it was the altar of holocausts, on which the priests immolated the victims, and the laver or brazen sea, in which the priests washed both themselves and the victims. The latter part of the court, more remote from the Holy, belonged to the laity, who from there watched the sacrifices which were made in the priests’ court; whence it was distinguished from it by a wall only three cubits high, so that the laity could see beyond it the priests and their actions. In this court Christ taught. For He could not enter the Holy, because He was not a Levitical priest. Into either court none could enter but one who was clean. Wherefore for the unclean and the Gentiles Herod added a third court, which was the outermost and farthest from the Holy, and separated from the court of the clean Jews.
Furthermore, at the walls or sides of these courts were exedrae, which are called treasuries and pastophoria, that is chambers of the priests, and of the furnishings of the temple, such as the sacred vestments, which the priests here put on, and afterwards put off and laid by.
The temple was larger and more magnificent than the tabernacle. For the tabernacle was thirty cubits long (the Holy was twenty cubits long, the Holy of holies ten), as many high; and ten cubits wide. Wherefore both in the tabernacle and in the temple the Holy was oblong, because it was twice as long as wide, but the Holy of holies was square, because it was as wide as long. The temple, however, was sixty cubits long (the Holy was forty cubits long, the Holy of holies twenty), twenty cubits wide, thirty high up to the first story, and from there upward by the floors it extended to ninety cubits, so that altogether it had in height a hundred and twenty cubits.
Again, in the tabernacle there was one candlestick and one table, but in the temple there were ten tables and as many candlesticks.
Moreover the courts in the temple were larger than in the tabernacle. For the courts were as it were very ample areas, partly open under the sky, partly roofed with porticoes at the sides, whence they are also called porches, so that in time of rain the people could withdraw to them. Theodoret, question 22, Angelomus, chapter 1, and Serarius think that the Levites also entered the priests’ court, because they assisted the priests in the immolation of victims; Serarius thinks the same of the Nathinites, for these had to bring in much wood and water for the immolation of so many victims, which took place in the priests’ court; John Budinius, book 1 On the Glory of Christ the Lord, chapter 5, holds that the priests’ court was a single one of four stadia, so that the whole circuit of the temple was five stadia. Adrichomius, book On Jerusalem, number 101, says the profane court was of four stadia.
Allegorically, the temple represented the Church militant; anagogically the Church triumphant in heaven; tropologically the holy soul, which by faith in this life, and by sight in the next, contemplates God face to face, and by this contemplation is made blessed.
Josephus, book 8 of the Antiquities, chapter 2; Pineda, book 5 On the Things of Solomon; Francis Ribera, book On the Temple; John Baptist Vilalpandus, Abulensis, Arias Montanus, Christian Adrichomius, Richard of St. Victor, and Cajetan describe the building of the temple fully and carefully. Bede in three books On the Tabernacle, Eucherius, Angelomus, Rupert and Francis Ribera, book 5 On the Temple, give the mystical explanation of the temple at length. See also, if you wish, what I noted at Exodus 25 and following, where I explained the tabernacle and all its parts both literally and mystically. I have also added many things at Ezechiel chapter 40 and following.
How great and how exceptional the magnificence of the temple was can be gathered from various things. First, that the temple was the work of Solomon, who was the wisest, most opulent and most magnificent king.
Second, that the temple was made after the plan not of a man but of God Himself, who gave it to David that he might hand it to Solomon, as I said. For God willed that to the Jews and rude men, who do not know how to esteem and weigh God and divine things, the divine majesty should be represented in the magnificence of the temple, that from it they might learn to esteem, revere and admire Him. Solomon gives this reason, 2 Paralipomenon 2:5, saying: “The house which I desire to build is great. For our God is great above all gods.”
Third, from the fact that this temple was held by all to be the wonder of the world. Moreover its walls and ceilings were covered with gold, so that all things shone with gold, and the splendor meeting the eyes of those entering on every side dazzled them, says Josephus, book 8. Fourth, from the number of workmen and overseers: for two hundred thousand men and more labored in it for seven continuous years, as I showed at chapter 5, verse 15.
Fifth, from the wealth left to Solomon for the building of the temple. For his father David left him, as is said in 1 Paralipomenon 22:14, a hundred thousand talents of gold, which reduced to our money make twelve hundred millions. I call a million ten times a hundred thousand gold pieces. Moreover he left him a thousand thousand talents of silver, which amount to as much, namely twelve hundred millions of gold. For one pound of gold was once worth ten pounds of silver. Altogether, then, he left him twice twelve hundred, that is two thousand four hundred millions of gold pieces, besides brass, timber, stones and the innumerable rest of the material for the building. Whence in 1 Paralipomenon 22:14 it is added: “Of brass also and iron there is no weight: for the quantity exceeds number.”
Sixth, “neither hammer nor axe, nor any tool of iron was heard in the house while it was building.” Josephus adds at the end of book 15 that “during the whole time” that the temple was being built, it never rained by day, but only by night with showers falling, that the building might not be interrupted, although Josephus there speaks properly of the temple of Herod.
Seventh, the Hebrews recount ten wonders and as it were miracles of the temple, for which let the credit rest with them. First: “Never did a woman miscarry because of the smell of the flesh in the sanctuary. Second, never did the flesh of the sanctuary putrefy. Third, nor was a fly seen in the house of slaughter. Fourth, no nocturnal mishap befell the high priest on the day of atonement. Fifth, the rains did not extinguish the fire that was on the pile of wood. Sixth, the wind did not overcome the column of smoke. Seventh, no defect was found in the omer, nor in the two loaves, nor in the loaves of proposition. Eighth, they stood crowded and worshipped with room to spare. Ninth, never did a serpent or scorpion hurt anyone in Jerusalem. Tenth, nor did a man say to his fellow: The place is too narrow for me to lodge the night in Jerusalem.”
1. IN THE FOUR HUNDRED AND EIGHTIETH YEAR AFTER THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL CAME OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT, IN THE FOURTH YEAR, IN THE MONTH ZIO (THE SAME IS THE SECOND MONTH) OF THE REIGN OF SOLOMON OVER ISRAEL, THE HOUSE WAS BEGUN TO BE BUILT TO THE LORD.—Wrongly, then, does Josephus count 592 years from the departure of the Hebrews to the building of the temple (for so must Josephus be read, as Ribera shows, book 1 On the Temple, chapter 1, not 612 as the Latin codices of Josephus now have), and Bede counts 490 years, Sulpicius 588, Theophilus 602, Cedrenus 672, Philastrius 713, Serarius here in chapter 7 counts 680 years. For all these contradict this place, where the Hebrews, Septuagint, Chaldees and the Latin constantly count only 480 years, the reckoning of which I assigned precisely by the years of the Judges at Judges chapter 3. Where note that the Roman Septuagint here has only 440 years, but does not count the 40 years in which the Hebrews wandered in the desert; wherefore they understand the departure from Egypt as completed, and include under it the entrance into the promised land, which happened in the fortieth year from the departure out of Egypt. But the Complutensian and Royal Septuagint have, like ours and the Hebrew, 480 years.