Palace
Palace
(, from Lat. Praetorium)
St. Paul assured the Philippians (Php 1:13) that the fact of his imprisonment had become known, and its cause understood, in all the palace (AV_), or throughout the whole praetorian guard (RV_). The interpretation of the phrase has long been a vexed question, and no consensus of opinion has yet been reached.
The term praetorium had an interesting history. In the early Roman republic, when the praetor (prae-itor, leader) was the general in the field, the praetorium was his part of the camp-the headquarters-with the secondary meaning of a council of war, because thin was held in his tent. One of the gates of the camp was called the porta praetoria, and the generals bodyguard the cohors praetoria or cohortes praetoriae. In later times of peace, the praetors were the highest Roman magistrates, who, after administering justice for a year in the capital, were sent as propraetors to govern the provinces; and the praetorium was the official provincial residence, which might chance to be the palace of a former king (as in Mat 27:27, Mar 15:16, Joh 18:28; Joh 18:33; Joh 19:9; cf. Cic. Verr. II. v. 12 [30]). Under the Empire the cohortes praetoriae were the Imperial bodyguard. As constituted by Augustus, they were nine in number, each with 1000 men, and one or more of them always attended the emperor, whether in Rome or elsewhere. Tiberius made an important and permanent change by gathering into one camp all the praetorian cohorts then dispersed over the city; that, thus united, they might receive his orders simultaneously, and by continually beholding their own numbers and strength, and by familiar intercourse, conceive a confidence in themselves, and strike terror into others (Tac. Ann. iv. 2). The barracks formed a rectangle of 39 acres, and some parts of the ramparts, embedded in the later walls of Aurelian, can still be seen near the Porta Pia. The praetorians were recruited voluntarily, in Italy or in Italianized districts. They had better pay and shorter service than the regular army. On retiring each soldier received a bounty amounting to about 200. In the 2nd cent. the praetorian cohorts became ten in number, and in the time of Septimius Severus they consisted practically of barbarian soldiers, who were constantly in conflict with the people of Rome. The Praetorian Guard was suppressed by Constantine in 312.
On the supposition that the praetorium to which St. Paul alluded is a place, two interpretations have been offered. (1) The AV_ had the authority of the Greek commentators-e.g. Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodoret-for assuming that he had in view the Imperial residence on the Palatine. It is certain, however, that the term could not properly bear such a meaning. The Roman citizens would have keenly resented the use of a nomenclature suggestive of a military despotism, and the early Caesars, too wise to wound their susceptibilities, were careful to maintain the appearance of republican liberty even after the reality was gone. If the Emperor was absent from Rome, he was indeed technically in imperio; and in the post-Augustan Age any spacious country villa could be called a praetorium; but no classical writer ever applies the word to the palace in the city. The utmost that can be said in favour of the exegesis in question is that St. Paul, as a provincial writing to provincials, may have been guilty of a terminological inexactitude. But one of St. Pauls merits is his singular accuracy in the use of technical terms, and the colonia of Philippi to which he was writing was itself a miniature Rome, where fine shades of Imperial language were sure to be appreciated and mistakes at once detected. (2) The praetorium is often taken to denote the praetorian barracks at the Porta Viminalis on the east side of the city, in which Paul lay a prisoner at Rome (Lipsius, Hand-Com. zum NT, in loc.). But this use of the word would be equally incorrect; for while the barracks were called castra praetoria (Pliny, HN_ iii. 9; Suet. Tib. 37) and castra praetoria norum (Tac. Hist. i. 31), they were never designated Praetorium.
On the theory that the term is not local but personal, two meanings are again possible. (1) The word may collectively denote the Imperial Guards. J. B. Lightfoot (Philippians12, 1894, pp. 99-104) argues strongly for this interpretation, which has been adopted in the RV_. There is abundant evidence (e.g. Livy, xxvi. 15, xxx. 5; Tac. Hist. i. 20, iv. 46; Suet. Nero, 9; Pliny, HN_ xxv. 6; Jos. Ant. XIX. iii. 1; together with a number of inscriptions) that the word bore this meaning, which harmonizes with the that follows in Php 1:13, whereas the others is extremely awkward if it is conjoined with the name of a locality. If St. Paul, while abiding two whole years in his own hired dwelling (Act 28:30), was under praetorian custody, he would be able, owing to the frequent change of guards, to arouse an interest in his message throughout this famous body of soldiers.
(2) W. M. Ramsay, following Mommsen, holds at the praetorium is the whole body of persons connected with the sitting in judgment, the supreme Imperial Court, representing the Emperor in his capacity as the fountain of justice, together with the assessors and high officers of the court (St. Paul the Traveller, 1895, p. 357). There does not, however, appear to be any first or second century evidence for this use of the term. It is more probable that, on reaching Rome, St. Paul was handed over to the praefectus praetorii (called by St. Luke the ), who gave him for two years a large measure of liberty (always, of course, under the surveillance of a praetorian), and ultimately tried him, either in the castra praetoria at the Porta Viminalis, or more probably (see Php 4:22) in the guard-room of the Imperial palace. Certainly from the 3rd cent. onward, and apparently much earlier, the praefecti praetorio (usually two, sometimes three, rarely one) exercised jurisdiction for the Emperor. In a letter to Pliny (Ep. Plin. 65) Trajan decides regarding a prisoner who had appealed from the governors sentence: vinctus mitti ad praefectos praetorii mei debet. It seems probable that St. Paul was handed over to the same tribunal. Before writing Philippians he had been tried once, and made a favourable impression upon the minds of his judges. Ever since his arrival in Rome it had been recognized that he was no ordinary criminal and no political agitator. He was seen to be a prisoner for his faith in Christ (Php 1:13), and his bearing as well as his words commended him, and to a greater or less extent his message, to the praefectus praetorio (or -ii), to the whole Praetorium (Imperial Lifeguards), and to all the others with whom he was brought into contact. And some (especially ) were not only impressed but converted.
Literature.-T. Zahn, Introd. to the NT, 1909, vol. i. pp. 541 f., 551 ff.; M. R. Vincent, ICC_, Philippians and Philemon, 1897, p. 16 f.; H. A. A. Kennedy, in EGT_, Philippians, 1903, p. 423 f.
James Strahan.
Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church
Palace
(the rendering in the A.V. usually of , armon [, ha.rmn, Amo 4:3], a castle, as rendered only in Pro 18:19; and uniformly of , birah, a citadel, 1Ch 29:1; 1Ch 29:19; so in Nehemiah, Ezra, Esther, and Daniel; but prop. of , heykal, 1Ki 21:1; 2Ki 20:18; Psa 45:8; Psa 45:15; Psa 144:12; Pro 30:28; Isa 13:22; Isa 39:7; Dan 1:4; Nah 2:6; the Chald. , heykdl, Ezr 4:14; Dan 4:4; Dan 4:29; Dan 6:18, a regal edifice, esp. the temple of Jehovah, as elsewhere rendered; less prop. of , appeden, a fortress, Daniel 1:45; , tirah, Son 8:9; Eze 25:4; a castle, as elsewhere chiefly; also , bithadn, a large house, Est 1:5; Est 7:7-8; and , beth, a house, in certain combinations; in the N.T. , Mat 26:3; Mat 26:58; Mat 26:69; Mar 14:54; Mar 14:64; Luk 11:21; Joh 18:15, a court or hall, as elsewhere sometimes rendered; , Php 1:13. the prcetorium [q.v.], as rendered in Mar 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. Psa 48:4; Psa 122:7; Pro 9:3; Pro 18:19; Isa 23:13; Isa 25:2; Jer 22:14; Amo 1:7; Amo 1:12; Amo 1:14; Nah 2:6). In the N; T. the term palace () is applied to the residence of a man’ of rank (Mat 26:3; Mar 14:66; Luk 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 (Mar 15:16): the other passages above cited, except Luk 11:21, refer to the residence of the high-priest.
The particulars which have been given under the head HOUSE SEE 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.
1. The following is substantially the reconstruction of Solomon’s famous palace as proposed by Fergusson in his Handbook of Architecture, p. 202. It is impossible, of course, to be at all certain what was either the form or the exact disposition of such a palace, but, as we, have the dimensions of the three principal buildings given in the book of Kings, and confirmed by Josephus, we may, by taking these as a scale, ascertain pretty nearly that the building covered somewhere about 150,000 or 160,000 square feet. Less would not suffice for the accommodation specified, and more would not be justified, either from the accounts we have, or the dimensions of the citys in which it was situated. Whether it was a square of 400 feet each way, or an oblong of about 550 feet by 300, as represented in the annexed diagram (fig. 1), must always be more or less a matter of conjecture. The form here adopted seems to suit better not only the exigencies of the site, but the known disposition of the parts.
(a.) The principal building situated within the palace was, as in all Eastern palaces, the great hall of state and audience; here called the House of the Forest of Lebanon. Its dimensions were 100 cubits, or 150 feet long, by half that, or 75 feet in width. According to the Bible (1Ki 7:2) it had four rows of cedar pillars, with cedar beams upon the pillars; but it is added in the next verse that it was covered with cedar above the beams that lay on 45 pillars, 15 in a row. This would be easily explicable if the description stopped there, and so Josephus took it. He evidently considered the hall, as he afterwards described the Stoa basilica of the Temple, as consisting, of four rows of columns, three standing free, but the fourth built into the outer wall (Ant. 11:5); and his expression that the ceiling of the palace hall was in the Corinthian manner (Ant. 7:5, 2) does not mean that it was of that order, which was not then invented, but after the fashion of what was called in his day a Corinthian cecus, viz. a hall with a clerestory. If we, like Josephus, are contented with these indications, the section of the hall was certainly as shown in fig. 2, A. But the Bible goes on to say (1Ki 7:4) that there were windows in three rows, and light was against light in three ranks, and in the next verse it repeats, and light was against light in three ranks. Josephus escapes the difficulty by saying it was lighted by , or by windows in three divisions, which might be taken as an extremely probable description if the Bible were not so very specific regarding it; and we may therefore adopt some such arrangement as that shown in fig. 2 B. In short, Fergusson suggests a clerestory, to which he thinks Josephus refers, and shows the three rows of columns which the Bible description requires. Besides the clerestory, there was on this theory a range of openings under the cornice of the walls, and then a range of open doorways, which would thus make the three openings required by the Bible description. In a hotter climate the first arrangement (fig. 2, A) would be the more probable; but on a site so exposed and occasionally so cold as Jerusalem, it is scarcely likely that the great hall of the palace was permanently open even on one side.
Another difficulty in attempting to restore this hall arises from the number of pillars being unequal (15 in a row), and if we adopt the last theory (fig. 2, B), we have a row of columns in the centre both ways. Fergusson holds that it was closed, as shown in the plan, by a wall at one end, which would give 15 spaces to the 15 pillars, and so provide a central space in the longer dimension of the hall in which the throne might have been placed. If the first theory be adopted, the throne may have stood either at the end, or in the centre of the longer side, but, judging from. what we know of the arrangement of Eastern palaces, we may be almost certain that the latter is the correct position.
(b.) Next in importance to the building just described is the hall or porch of judgment (1Ki 7:7), which Josephus distinctly tells us (Ant. 8:5, 2). was situated opposite the centre of the longer side of the great hall an indication that may be admitted with less hesitation,, as such a position is identical with that of a similar hall at Persepolis, and with the probable position of one at Khorsabad. Its dimensions were 50 cubits long and 30 wide (Josephus says 30 in one direction at least), and its disposition can easily be understood by comparing the descriptions which we have with’ the remains of the Assyrian and Persian examples. It is thought by Fergusson to have been supported by four pillars in the centre, and to have had three entrances; the principal one opening from the street and facing the judgment-seat, a second from the court-yard of the palace, by which the councillors and officers of state might come in (fig. 1, in the direction M), and a third from the palace, reserved for the king and his household, as shown above (fig. 1, in the direction N).
(c.) The third edifice is merely called the Porch. Its dimensions are not all given in the sacred text. Josephus does not describe its architecture; and we are unable to understand the description contained in the Bible, owing apparently to our ignorance of the synonyms of the Hebrew architectural terms. Its use, however, cannot be considered as doubtful, as it was an indispensable adjunct to an Eastern palace. It was the ordinary place of business of the palace, and the receptionroom the Guesten-Hall where the king received ordinary visitors, and sat, except on great. state occasions, to transact the business of the kingdom.
(d.) Behind this, we are told, was the inner court, adorned with gardens and fountains, and surrounded by cloisters for shade; and besides this were other courts for the residence of the attendants and guards, and, in Solomon’s case, for the three hundred women of his harem: all of which are shown in the plan (fig. 1) with more clearness than can be conveyed by a verbal description.
(e.) Apart from this palace, but attached, as Josephus tells us, to the Hall of Judgment, was the palace of Pharaoh’s daughter too proud and important a personage to be grouped with the ladies of the harem, and requiring a residence of her own.
(f.) There is still another building mentioned by Josephus, as a naos or temple, supported by, massive columns, and situated opposite the Hall of Judgment. It may thus have been outside, in front of the palace in the city; but more probably was, as shown in the plan, in the centre of the great court. Fergusson thinks it could not have been a temple, in the ordinary acceptation of the term, as the Jews had only one temple, and that was situated on the other side of the valley; but it may have been an altar covered by a baldachino. This would equally meet the exigencies of the description as well as the probabilities of the case; and so it has been represented in the plan above (fig. 1 altar).
If the site and disposition of the palace were as above indicated, it would require two great portals: one leading from the city to the great court, shown at N; the other to the Temple and the king’s garden, at N. This last, Fergusson supposes, was situated where the stairs then were which led up to the City of David, and where the bridge afterwards joined the Temple to the city and palace.
The recent discoveries at Nineveh have enabled us to understand many of the architectural details of this palace, which before they were made were almost wholly inexplicable. (See the Jour. of Sac. Lit. Jan. 1852, p. 422.) We are told for instance, that the walls of the halls of the palace were wainscoted with three tiers of stone, apparently versicolored marbles, hewn and polished, and surmounted by a fourth course, elaborately carved with representations of leafage and flowers. Above this the walls were plastered and ornamented with colored arabesques. At Nineveh the walls were, like these, wainscoted to a height of about eight feet but with alabaster, a peculiar product of the country, and these were separated from the painted space above by an architectural band; the real difference being that the Assyrians revelled in sculptural representations of men, and animals, as we now know from the sculptures brought home, as well as from the passage in Ezekiel (23:14), where he describes men portrayed on the wall, the images of the Chaldaeans portrayed with vermilion, etc. These modes of decoration were forbidden to the Jews by the second commandment, given to them in consequence of their residence in Egypt and their consequent tendency to that multiform idolatry. Some difference may also be due to the fact that the soft alabaster, though admirably suited to bass-relief, was not suited for sharp, deeply cut foliage sculpture, like that described by Josephus, while, at the same time, the hard material used by the Jews might induce them to limit their ornamentation to one band only. It is probable, however, that a considerable amount of color was used in the decoration of these palaces, not only from the constant reference to gold and gilding in Solomon’s buildings, and because that as a color could hardly be used alone, but also from such passages as the following: Build me a wide house and large or through-aired chambers, and cutteth out windows; and it is ceiled with cedar, and painted with vermilion (Jer 22:14). It may also be added that in the East all buildings, with scarcely an exception, are adorned with color internally, generally the three primitive colors used in all their intensity, but so balanced as to produce the most harmonious results. SEE ASSYRIA.
2. Quite different is the scheme proposed by Thenius in the Exeg. Handb. zum. A. T., of which the following is substantially a reproduction:
(a.) On this plan, proceeding from without, the first part was the House of the Forest of Lebanon, so called, probably, because it was constructed of cedarwood from Lebanon. This served as an audience chamber or hall of state (Joseph. l.c.), and was hung around with costly armor (1Ki 10:16-17). The Targum calls it the house of the cooling of the king, probably because of the refreshing air which its size, its elevated site, and its open construction secured for it. Some have thought it was a sort of winter-garden or conservatory; but this is less probable. Its proportions, 100 cubits of length, 50 of breadth, and 30 of height, must be understood of the inner measurement; so that the area of this hall was larger than that of the temple, the height of both being the same (6, 2). A solid wall of masonry enclosed the woodwork (1Ki 10:9). The area of this hall was surrounded by four rows of cedar pillars. The statement in 1Ki 10:2 is commonly taken to indicate four straight lines of pillars, and much perplexity has been caused on this supposition by the subsequent statement (1Ki 10:3) that there were 45 pillars, 15 in a row. If there were 4 rows, intersecting the hall lengthways, and 15 intersecting its breadth, there must have been 60 pillars in all. This has led some arbitrarily to read three for four, contrary to all the codices and all the versions, the Sept. excepted.: But does not signify a series in line, but a series surrounding or enclosing (comp. 1Ki 6:36; 1Ki 7:18; 1Ki 7:20; 1Ki 7:24; 1Ki 7:42; Eze 46:23); so that the four rows of pillars went round the hall, forming four aisles inside the wall, or, as the Vulgate renders the passage, quatuor deambulacra inter columnas cedrinas (fig. 3). On these pillars beams of cedar-wood rested, running from the front to the wall, and forming a substantial rest for the upper story. This consisted of side chambers or galleries (, comp.1Ki 6:5; 1Ki 6:8), and it is to the number and order of these that the statement in Eze 46:3 refers: And the chambers which were upon the beams, forty-five [in number]; fifteen in each row [circuit], were wainscoted with cedar-wood (fig. 4, a a). These were roofed with beams ( A.V. windows, which the word never means) in three rows, i.e. there were three stories of galleries, and in these sights (; Sept. ) over against each other in three ranks, i.e. each chamber in the three stories had an opening to the interior, facing a corresponding opening in the opposite chamber (fig. 4, b b). The different compartments of the galleries communicated with each other by means of doors. These, as well as the windows (the Sept., has in Eze 46:5, which shows that it read where the present reading is , of which it is impossible to make sense), were square with an over beam. These galleries were probably reached by a winding stair in the outer wall (figs. 3 and 4, d d), as in the Temple (6, 8).
From this description, the idea we form of the House of the Forest of Lebanon is that of a large hall, open in the centre to the sky, the floor of which was surrounded with four rows of pillars, affording a promenade, above which were three tiers of galleries open to the interior, divided each into fifteen compartments like the boxes in a theatre, but, with doors communicating with each other. As the height of the entire building was thirty cubits, we may divide this so as to allot eight feet to the supporting pillars, eighteen to the galleries, and four to the beams and flooring of the galleries. The building, thus conceived, answers to. the description of it by Josephus, as , by which he means, not that it was in the Corinthian style of architecture (Keil), but that it was built after the Corinthian fashions that of a hall, surrounded by a row of pillars with heavy architraves, on which rested beams running to the wall, and supporting a floor, which again supported shorter pillars, between which were windows, the whole being hypoethral (Vitruv. 6:3, 1).
(b.) If now we regard this building (fig. 5, B) as placed lengthwise in the middle of a court (A), it is easy to understand the arrangement of the portico of pillars (D), the length of which was the same as the breadth of the building (Eze 46:6). These did not run along the side of it, but were behind it, forming a colonnade fifty cubits long by thirty wide, conducting to the residence of the king. This terminated in a. porch, or entrance-hall, which had pillars and an , i.e. a threshold or perron (A.V. thick beam; Targ. , limen). By this was the entrance to the throne-room or hall of judgment (E), which was wainscoted with cedar from floor to ceiling ( [this is the reading followed by the Vulg. and Syr. instead of the second , which is a manifest error], 7:7). Then came the king’s residence in another court (F) behind the throne-room; and of this the residence of the queen, which may or may not have been the harem, formed a (probably the back) part. The space G is added conjecturally, for the court containing the offices of the palace, and perhaps the king’s prison. All these buildings Were externally of hewn stone, and the whole was surrounded by a solid wall enclosing a court.
3. Very different again is the reconstruction proposed by Prof. Paine, in his Solomon’s Temple, etc., of whose scheme we here subjoin a brief outline. He maintains that the structure was situated on the north side of the Temple, immediately adjoining its area, where the tower of Antonia eventually stood, adducing 2 Kings 11 in proof of this position. He holds that the entire structure was one, the palace being the same elsewhere called the House of the Forest of Lebanon. The pillars are by him distributed on the outside of the building, in successive rows of different heights, supporting the walls in terrace style. There is thus in reality but one story, although there is the appearance externally of several, while within there is a series of benchings like the tiers of a modern gallery. This entire scheme is remarkable for its simplicity. It is altogether congruous with its author’s idea of the structure of Solomon’s Temple, the essential difference from all other proposed restorations being the gradual enlargement of the building upward. SEE TEMPLE.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Palace (2)
in ecclesiastical phraseology is used for a bishop’s house, called before the Norman invasion the minster-house, in which he resided with his family of clerks. It was provided with a gatehouse at Chichester and Hereford; at Wells it is moated and defended by walls; at Durham it is an actual castle; at Lincoln and St. David’s it exists only as a magnificent ruin; the chapels remain at York, Winchester, Chichester, Durham, Wells, and Salisbury; and the hall is preserved at Chichester; a few portions remain at Worcester. There is a very perfect example at Ely. Bishops had town houses mostly along the Strand, as el as numerous country houses, like Farnham Rose, Hartlebury, and Bishop’s Auckland. The chapels of Lambeth and Ely Place (Holborn), the abbots’ houses at Peterborough and Chester, converted at the Reformation into palaces, retain many ancient portions, like those of Bayeux, Sens, Noyon, Beauvais, Auxerre, Meaux, and Laon. See Walcott, Sacred Archceol. s.v.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Palace
Used now only of royal dwellings, although originally meaning simply (as the Latin word palatium, from which it is derived, shows) a building surrounded by a fence or a paling. In the Authorized Version there are many different words so rendered, presenting different ideas, such as that of citadel or lofty fortress or royal residence (Neh. 1:1; Dan. 8:2). It is the name given to the temple fortress (Neh. 2:8) and to the temple itself (1 Chr. 29:1). It denotes also a spacious building or a great house (Dan. 1:4; 4:4, 29: Esther 1:5; 7:7), and a fortified place or an enclosure (Ezek. 25:4). Solomon’s palace is described in 1 Kings 7:1-12 as a series of buildings rather than a single great structure. Thirteen years were spent in their erection. This palace stood on the eastern hill, adjoining the temple on the south.
In the New Testament it designates the official residence of Pilate or that of the high priest (Matt. 26:3, 58, 69; Mark 14:54, 66; John 18:15). In Phil. 1:13 this word is the rendering of the Greek praitorion, meaning the praetorian cohorts at Rome (the life-guard of the Caesars). Paul was continually chained to a soldier of that corps (Acts 28:16), and hence his name and sufferings became known in all the praetorium. The “soldiers that kept” him would, on relieving one another on guard, naturally spread the tidings regarding him among their comrades. Some, however, regard the praetroium (q.v.) as the barrack within the palace (the palatium) of the Caesars in Rome where a detachment of these praetorian guards was stationed, or as the camp of the guards placed outside the eastern walls of Rome.
“In the chambers which were occupied as guard-rooms,” says Dr. Manning, “by the praetorian troops on duty in the palace, a number of rude caricatures are found roughly scratched upon the walls, just such as may be See n upon barrack walls in every part of the world. Amongst these is one of a human figure nailed upon a cross. To add to the ‘offence of the cross,’ the crucified one is represented with the head of an animal, probably that of an ass. Before it stands the figure of a Roman legionary with one hand upraised in the attitude of worship. Underneath is the rude, misspelt, ungrammatical inscription, Alexamenos worships his god. It can scarcely be doubted that we have here a contemporary caricature, executed by one of the praetorian guard, ridiculing the faith of a Christian comrade.”
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Palace
Solomon’s palace is illustrated by those of Nineveh and Persepolis lately discovered. The great hall of state was “the house of the forest of (pillars of cedar of) Lebanon,” 150 ft. long (100 cubits) by 75 broad (1Ki 7:2). There were “four rows of cedar pillars with cedar beams upon the pillars. It was covered with cedar above upon the beams, that lay on 45 pillars, 15 in a row.” Three rows stood free, the fourth was built into the outer wall (Josephus, Ant. 7:5, section 2, 11:5). “There were windows in three rows, and light against light in three ranks”; namely, clerestory windows. The throne was in the center of the longer side. The porch of judgment, 75 ft. square, was opposite the center of the longer side of the great hall (Josephus, Ant. 7:5, section 1): 2Ki 7:7. The position of a like hall at Persepolis is the same. The porch of pillars, 75 ft. by 45 ft. (50 by 30 cubits): 1Ki 7:6. The ordinary place for the king to receive visitors and to transact business. Behind was the inner court (1Ki 7:8) with gardens, fountains, and cloisters, and courts for residence of attendants and guards, and for the 300 women of the harem.
On the side of the great court opposite the inner court was the palace of Pharaoh’s daughter. “The foundation” (1Ki 7:10) was an artificial platform of masonry, as at Sennacherib’s palace at Koyunjik and at Baalbek, some stones being 60 ft. long. The halls of the palace were wainscoted with three tiers of polished stone, surmounted by a fourth, elaborately carved with leaves and flowers (1Ki 7:12). Above this the walls had plaster with colored arabesque. At Nineveh, on the eight feet high alabaster wainscoting were sculptured men and animals (Eze 23:14), whereas the second commandment restrained the Jews from such representations. But coloring was used freely for decoration (Jer 22:14). “The palace” in Phi 1:13 is the barrack of the Praetorian guards attached to Nero’s palace on the Palatine hill at Rome. So “Caesar’s household” is mentioned (Phi 4:22).
The emperor was “praetor” or “commander in chief”; so the barrack of his bodyguard was the “praetorium”. The “all the praetorium” implies that the whole camp, whether inside or outside the city, is included. The camp of the Praetorians, who became virtual masters of the empire, was outside the Viminal gate. Paul was now no longer “in his own hired house” chained to a soldier, by command (probably) of Burrus, one of the two prefects of the praetorium (Act 28:16; Act 28:20; Act 28:30-31), but in strict custody in the praetorium on Tigellinus becoming prefect. The soldiers relieving one another in guard would naturally spread through the camp the gospel story heard from Paul, which was the occasion of his imprisonment. Thus God overruled what befell him “unto the furtherance of the gospel” (Phi 1:12).
A recent traveler, Dr. Manning, describes a remarkable illustration of the reference to “Caesar’s household”: “in the chambers which were occupied as guard rooms by the Praetorian troops on duty in the palace, a number of rude caricatures are found roughly scratched upon the walls, just such as may be seen upon barrack walls in every part of the world. Among these is one of a human figure nailed upon a cross. To add to the ‘offense of the cross’ the crucified one is represented with the head of an animal, probably that of an ass. Before it stands the figure of a Roman legionary, with one hand upraised in the customary attitude of worship. Underneath is the rude, misspell, ungrammatical inscription, Alexamenos worships his god. It can scarcely be doubted that we have here a contemporary caricature, executed by one of the Praetorian guard, ridiculing the faith of a Christian comrade.”
Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary
Palace
PALACE.In the Gospels the word is used in the text of Mat 27:27 and Joh 18:28; Joh 18:33; Joh 19:9, and in the margin of Mar 15:16. In all cases it is the representative of (see Praetorium), which was a term wide enough to include what would now be called a guard-room or the barrack-square adjoining (Mat 27:27, Mar 15:16), as well as the actual place (referred to in the Johannine passages) in which a case was tried and the sentence pronounced.
R. W. Moss.
Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels
Palace
PALACE.Primarily palace denotes simply a large house; so the Egyptian royal title Pharaoh or Palace (cf. Sublime Porte) means great house; and the ordinary OT term for palace, in its strict sense of royal residence, is the kings house or his house, 1Ki 7:1; 1Ki 9:10. The only royal residence of which we have any details in the Bible is Solomons palace, 1Ki 7:1-12, which took thirteen years to build. This included the House of the Forest of Lehanon, a great hall, 100 cubits long, 50 broad, 30 high, with four rows of pillars; a porch of pillars, 50 cubits by 30; the porch of the throne for a court of justice; a dwelling-house for himself, and another for Pharaohs daughter. Round about the whole was a great court of hewn stones and cedar beams.
In Egypt the palace was not only the royal residence, but also the seat of government. The royal apartments were in an inner, the halls of audience in an outer, court. If we include all the buildings required for courtiers and officials, the palace becomes not a house, but a royal city. A characteristic feature was a balcony on which the king would show himself to his people.
The Assyrian and Babylonian palaces were large and magnificent. In Babylonia, the palaces, like the temples, were built on the top of artificial mounds of crude bricks; and were groups of buildings forming a great fortress.
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Palace
palas: In Hebrew chiefly , ‘armon, in the Revised Version (British and American) text translated castle in 1Ki 16:18; 2Ki 15:25; , brah, , hekhal, the same word often rendered temple; in Greek , aule, in the Revised Version (British and American) translated court (Mat 26:3, Mat 26:18, Mat 26:69; Mar 14:54, Mar 14:66; Luk 11:21; Joh 18:15). On the other hand, palace takes the place in the Revised Version (British and American) of the King James Version common hall or judgment hall (praitorion, Mat 27:27; Joh 18:28, Joh 18:33; Joh 19:9; Act 23:35). See JUDGMENT, HALL OF. A description of Solomon’s palace is given in 1Ki 7:1-12 (see TEMPLE). Archaeology has brought to light the remains of great palaces in Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria (Sargon, Sennacherib, Assurbanipal, etc.), Susa, etc. See HOUSE.
Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Palace
Palace, 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. Psa 48:3; Psa 122:7; Pro 9:3; Pro 18:19; Isa 23:13; Isa 25:2; Jer 22:14; Amo 1:7; Amo 1:12; Amo 1:14; Nah 2:6). In the New Testament the term palace is applied to the residence of a man of rank (Mat 26:3; Mar 14:66; Luk 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 prtorium, or hall, which formed the abode of Pilate when Christ was brought before him (Mar 15:16): the other passages above cited, except Luk 11:21, refer to the residence of the high-priest.
The particulars which have been given under the head House, 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, called ‘the house of the forest of Lebanon,’ of which some particulars are given in 1Ki 7:1-12; and if read along with the description which Josephus gives of the same pile (Antiq. viii. 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.
Fuente: Popular Cyclopedia Biblical Literature
Palace
This term represents several Hebrew words, and may signify castle, fortress, the king’s residence, or any large building. Thus the expression occurs, “the palace of the king’s house.” 2Ki 15:25. Solomon built several for himself and for his wives. 2Ch 36:19. The temple built by Solomon is also called ‘the palace.’ 1Ch 29:1; 1Ch 29:19. In the N.T. the palace of the high priest, , signifies his court. Mat 26:3; Mat 26:58; Mat 26:69. In Php 1:13 the word is , ‘the court of the praetor,’ or governor, or perhaps ‘the praetorian guard,’ from which Paul’s keepers were taken. Called PRAETORIUM in Mar 15:16.
Fuente: Concise Bible Dictionary
Palace
For kings
1Ki 21:1; 2Ki 15:25; Jer 49:27; Amo 1:12; Nah 2:6
Of David
2Sa 7:2
Of Solomon
1Ki 7:1-12
At Babylon
Dan 4:29; Dan 5:5; Dan 6:18
At Shushan
Neh 1:1; Est 1:2; Est 7:7; Dan 8:2
Archives kept in
Ezr 6:2
Proclamations issued from
Amo 3:9
Figurative, of a government
Amo 1:12; Amo 2:2; Nah 2:6
Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible
Palace
Palace. Palace in the Bible, in the singular and plural, is the rendering of several words of diverse meaning. 1Ch 29:1; Ezr 4:14; Amo 4:3; etc. It often designates the royal residence, and usually suggests a fortress or battlemented house. The word occasionally included the whole city as in Est 9:12, and again, as in 1Ki 16:18, it is restricted to a part of the royal apartments. It is applied, as in 1Ch 29:1, to the Temple in Jerusalem.
The site of the palace of Solomon was, almost certainly, in the city itself, on the brow opposite to the Temple, and overlooking it, and the whole city of David. It is impossible, of course, to be at all certain what was either the form, or the exact disposition of such a palace; but, as we have the dimensions of the three principal buildings given in the book of Kings and confirmed by Josephus, we may, by taking these as a scale, ascertain pretty nearly that the building covered somewhere about 150,000 or 160,000 square feet. Whether it was a square of 400 feet each way, or an oblong of about 550 feet by 300, must always be, more or less, a matter of conjecture.
The principal building situated within the palace was, as in all eastern palaces, the great hall of state and audience, called “the house of the forest of Lebanon,” apparently from the four rows of cedar pillars by which it was supported. It was 100 cubits (175 feet) long, 50 cubits (88 feet) wide, and 30 cubits (52 feet) high. Next in importance was the hall or “porch of judgment,” a quadrangular building supported by columns, as we learn from Josephus, which apparently stood on the other side of the great court, opposite the house of the forest of Lebanon. The third edifice is merely called a “porch of pillars.” Its dimensions were 50 cubits by 30 cubits.
Its use cannot be considered as doubtful, as it was an indispensable adjunct to an eastern palace. It was the ordinary place of business of the palace, and the reception-room, when the king received ordinary visitors, and sat, except on great state occasions, to transact the business of the kingdom.
Behind this, we are told, was the inner court, adorned with gardens and fountains, and surrounded by cloisters for shade; and there were other courts, for the residence of the attendants and guards, and for the women of the harem. Apart from this palace, but attached, as Josephus tells us, to the hall of judgment, was the palace of Pharaoh’s daughter: too proud and important a personage to be grouped with the ladies of the harem, and requiring a residence of her own.
The recent discoveries at Nineveh have enabled us to understand many of the architectural details of this palace, which, before these discoveries were made, were nearly wholly inexplicable. Solomon constructed an ascent from his own house to the Temple, “the house of Jehovah,” 1Ki 10:5, which was a subterranean passage 250 feet long by 42 feet wide, of which the remains may still be traced.
Fuente: Smith’s Bible Dictionary
Palace
“a court, dwelling, palace:” see COURT.
signified originally “a general’s (praetor’s) tent.” Then it was applied to “the council of army officers;” then to “the official residence of the governor of a province;” finally, to “the imperial bodyguard.” In the AV the word appears only once, Mar 15:16, “the hall, called Praetorium” (RV, “within the court which is the Praetorium,” marg., “palace”); in the Greek of the NT is also occurs in Mat 27:27, AV, “the common hall,” marg., “the governor’s house;” RV, “palace,” see marg.; Joh 18:28 (twice), AV, “the hall of judgment;” and “judgment hall,” marg., “Pilate’s house,” RV, “palace,” see marg.; so in Act 23:35; in Phi 1:13, AV, “in all the palace,” marg., “Caesar’s court,” RV, “throughout the whole praetorian guard,” marg., “in the whole Praetorium.”
“In the Gospels the term denotes the official residence in Jerusalem of the Roman governor, and the various translations of it in our versions arose from a desire either to indicate the special purpose for which that residence was used on the occasion in question, or to explain what particular building was intended. But whatever building the governor occupied was the Praetorium. It is most probable that in Jerusalem he resided in the well-known palace of Herod. … Pilate’s residence has been identified with the castle of Antonia, which was occupied by the regular garrison. The probability is that it was the same as Herod’s palace. Herod’s palace in Caesarea was used as the Praetorium there, and the expression in Act 23:35, marg., ‘Herod’s praetorium,’ is abbreviated from ‘the praetorium of Herod’s palace.'” (Hastings’ Bib. Dic.).
In Phi 1:13, marg., “the whole Praetorium” has been variously explained. It has been spoken of as “the palace,” in connection with Phi 4:22, where allusion is made to believers who belong to Caesar’s household. Others have understood it of the barracks of the “praetorian” guard, but Lightfoot shows that this use of the word cannot be established, neither can it be regarded as referring to the barracks of the “palace” guard. The phrase “and to all the rest” in Phi 1:13 indicates that persons are meant. Mommsen, followed by Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveller, p. 357) regards it as improbable that the Apostle was committed to the “praetorian” guard and holds the view that Julius the centurion, who brought Paul to Rome, belonged to a corps drafted from legions in the provinces, whose duty it was to supervise the corn supply and perform police service, and that Julius probably delivered his prisoners to the commander of his corps. Eventually Paul’s case came before the praetorian council, which is the “praetorium” alluded to by the Apostle, and the phrase “to all the rest” refers to the audience of the trial.
Note: Some scholars, believing that this Epistle was written during an Ephesian imprisonment, take the “Praetorium” here to be the residence in Ephesus of the proconsul of the province of Asia, and “Caesar’s household” to be the local imperial civil service (Deissmann etc.).
Fuente: Vine’s Dictionary of New Testament Words
Palace
Psa 45:8 (b) This Scripture was probably fulfilled in the following passages: Mat 2:11, Luk 7:38, Mar 14:3, Joh 12:3, and Rev 5:8. This passage may refer to the Christian’s mouth from which there pours forth worship, praise, adoration, and thanksgiving, which are compared to the fragrant, sweet incense of the golden altar in the temple. It may also refer to the boundless wealth of the earth which will one day belong to the Lord JESUS and will be presented to Him when He comes to rule and reign.
Son 8:9 (b) Probably the wall represents the church, which is solid, substantial, strong and immovable. Since silver is usually a type of redemption, it must refer to the fact that the story of GOD’s redemptive power and the value of the redeeming Blood are a very part of the church and is upheld by the church. It is a permanent truth.
Pro 30:28 (b) The spider probably represents the sinner who desires to enter into the palace of Heaven. She watches at the window or the door seeking an opportunity to enter and is not discouraged nor hindered in her quest. So the sinner would be very earnest and persistent in his quest for the Door, which is the Lord JESUS. False doctrines will be offered as a hindrance, religious leaders will give false advice, the devil will bring up many competitors. The truly repentant soul will get past all these evil teachings and get right to the Lord JESUS Himself, for He is the Door, and the only entrance to Heaven.
Luk 11:21 (b) The strong man in this passage is the devil. His house refers to the world in all of its various characters. It refers to the religious world, the political world, the social world, the world of sports, the world of travel and beauty, the world of business, of arts and sciences. All of these are very attractive, very interesting, very delightful, and frequently very profitable. The devil uses these to keep his children, the unsaved, from JESUS CHRIST. He does not want them to find the Saviour, nor even to feel their need of the Saviour. But then the Saviour comes along their way, the Holy Spirit begins to work in the heart, and the friend sees that he is on the broad road and under the control of Satan. The Lord JESUS breaks the chains, loosens the bonds, removes the bands, and sets the prisoner free by means of the Gospel of His grace.