Footnotes

1.

The Mishnah is the compilation of Jewish oral law redacted, arranged and revised by Rabbi Judah HaNasi about 200 A.D. The Mishnah is divided into six orders; each order divided into tractates.

2.

The Aramaic word tanna (plural, tannaim) generally designates a teacher mentioned in the Mishnah, or a sage who lived in mishnaic times, about 20–200 A.D.

3.

Mishnah translations follow Herbert Danby, The Mishnah (London, 1933).

4.

One cubit equals 52.5 centimeters (20.67 inches). This cubit is called the long or royal cubit to distinguish it from the short cubit, which was about 45 centimeters. The use of two different cubits is reflected in the Bible. For a discussion of cubits mentioned in the Bible, see Gabriel Barkay, “Measurements in the Bible,“ in sidebar to “Jerusalem Tombs from the Days of the First Temple,” BAR 12:02.

5.

Alternatively, one could pass through the wicket, then through a passage within the wall, into the space between the two sets of main doors to the Sanctuary.

6.

The length of the cells is not mentioned in Middot. The present reconstruction assumes a barrier wall 4 cubits (7 feet) wide between the cells, and an overall length, on the north and south, equal to the length of the interior of the building; that is, 61 cubits (105 feet). The total length of the western cells was limited on the north and on the south by the cell walls, giving them a total length of 44 cubits (76 feet). Thus by subtracting the thickness of the divider walls from the proposed total length of the cells on the north and south and on the west and dividing by the total number of cells on each side, we arrive at 9 cubits (16 feet) for the length of the northern and southern cells in the three stories and 12 cubits (21 feet) for the length of the western cells on the first and second stories. It is not clear how the two cells of the western third story were divided; it may be that the division was asymmetrical so that they had different lengths.

The height of the cells is not recorded in Middot. It is possible to deduce from Middot 4:5 that the cells encompassed the entire height of the Sanctuary, since the roof surface of the cells is on exactly the same level as that of the floor the Upper Chamber. Presumably, the entire roof structure the third-story cells formed a continuation of the roof structure separating the lower level of the building from the Upper Chamber. This roof structure was 5 cubits (9 feet) thick. If we assume that the ceilings of the first and second cell-stories were 2 cubits (3 feet) thick each, then we are left with a space 12 cubits (21 feet) high for each cell. These are the measurements adopted in the present reconstruction. According to our assumption, these ceilings, which rested upon the walls of the Sanctuary, consisted of wooden beams that ran across the cells.

7.

The golden spikes are mentioned by Josephus. In construct, there is a suggestion in the Gemarah (Babylonian Talmud Shabbat 90a; Menahot 107b) that the “scarecrow” consisted of iron plates.

Endnotes

1.

Many scholars, such as Emil Schürer, Kurt Watzinger, Abraham Schalit, Michael Avi-Yonah and others, find the Middot descriptions of the Temple preferrable to that provided by Josephus.

2.

Braitha in Babylonian Talmud Sukkah 51b.

3.

Babylonian Talmud Baba Batra 4a.

4.

I am indebted to Prof. Dan Barag for bringing this coin to my attention. See also: Barag, “The Table for Shewbread and the Facade of the Temple on the Bar-Kokhba Coins,” Qadmoniot 20 (1987), pp. 22–25.

5.

Josephus, The Jewish Wars 1.33, 2–3 (648–653) and Antiquities of the Jews 18.149–155.

6.

Kurt Watzinger. Michael Avi-Yonah, Yaakov Meshorer, Leo Mildenberg and Dan Barag, to mention just a few of them.

7.

This translation by Lea Di Segni is from the Latin version, which, in this instance, is better than the corrupt Greek version.

8.

Tacitus, Histariae 5.5.5; Florus, Epitoma 1.40:30.

9.

Tosefta Kelim, Baba Qama 1, 7.

10.

For details see Joseph Patrich, “The Mesibbah of the Temple According to the Tractate Middot,” Israel Exploration Journal 36 (1986), pp. 215–233, Pl. 27A