Palace

Palace (the rendering in the A.V. usually of אִרמוֹן, armon [הִרמוֹן, ha.rmn, Am 4:3], a castle, as rendered only in Pr 18:19; and uniformly of בַּירָה, birah, a citadel, 1Ch 29:1,19; so in Nehemiah, Ezra, Esther, and Daniel; but prop. of הֵיכָל, heykal, 1Ki 21:1; 2Ki 20:18; Ps 45:8,15; Ps 144:12; Pr 30:28; Isa 13:22; Isa 39:7; Da 1:4; Na 2:6; the Chald. הֵיכִל, heykdl, Ezr 4:14; Da 4:4,29; Da 6:18, a regal edifice, esp. the temple of Jehovah, as elsewhere rendered; less prop. of אִפֶּדֶן, appeden, a fortress, Da 1:21; טַירָה, tirah, Song 8:9; Eze 25:4; a castle, as elsewhere chiefly; also בַּיתָן, bithadn, a large house, Es 1:5; Es 7:7-8; and בֵּית, beth, a house, in certain combinations; in the N.T. αὐλή, Mt 26:3,58,69; Mr 14:54,64; Lu 11:21; Joh 18:15, a court or hall, as elsewhere sometimes rendered; πραιτώριον, Php 1:13. the prcetorium [q.v.], as rendered in Mr 15:16), in Scripture, denotes what is contained within the outer enclosure of the royal residence, including all the buildings, courts, and gardens (2Ch 36:19; comp. Ps 48:4; Ps 122:7; Pr 9:3; Pr 18:19; Isa 23:13; Isa 25:2; Jer 22:14; Am 1:7,12,14; Na 2:6). In the N; T. the term palace (αὐλή) is applied to the residence of a man' of rank (Mt 26:3; Mr 14:66; Lu 11:21; Joh 18:15). The specific allusions are to the palace built by Herod, which was afterwards occupied by the Roman governors, and was the praetorium, or hall, which formed the abode of Pilate when Christ was brought before him (Mr 15:16): the other passages above cited, except Lu 11:21, refer to the residence of the high-priest.

The particulars which have been given under the head HOUSE (q.v.) require only to be aggrandized to convey a suitable idea of a palace; for the general arrangements 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 1Ki 7:1-12; and if that passage be read along with the description which Josephus gives of the same pile (Ant. v, 5), a faint idea may be formed of it, as a magnificent collection of buildings in adjoining courts, connected with and surrounded by galleries and colonnades. To the same Jewish historian we are also indebted for an account of Herodis palace, doubtless drawn from personal knowledge (War, v, 4:4). The two buildings apparently occupied the same site, namely, the eminence of Zion, doubtless immediately adjoining and including the castle of David, or the present citadel of the metropolis. See JERUSALEM.

"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. Notwithstanding this, the palace which Solomon occupied himself 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 Biblical 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 careful examination of those at Persepolis, have thrown a flood 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 exact form, of the buildings in question." "Although incidental mention is made of other palaces at Jerusalem and elsewhere, they are all of subsequent ages, and built under the influence of Roman art, and therefore not so interesting to the 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 itself so as to render its elucidation indispensable in such an article as the present." See ARCHITECTURE.