lain
with some confidence the general meaning of the historical paragraphs,
yet when we come to technical words relating to architecture, even
with a very intimate acquaintance with the Assyrian tongue, we could
scarcely hope to ascertain their precise signification. On the other
hand, the materials, and the general plan of the Assyrian palaces are
still preserved, whilst of the great edifices of the Jews, not a
fragment of masonry, nor the smallest traces, are probably left to
guide us. But, as Mr. Fergusson has shown, the architecture of the one
people may be illustrated by that of the other. With the help of the
sacred books, and of the ruins of the palaces of Nineveh, together
with those of cotemporary and after remains, as well as from customs
still existing in the East, we may, to a certain extent, ascertain the
principal architectural features of the buildings of both nations.

Before suggesting a general restoration of the royal edifices of
Nineveh, we shall endeavor to point out the analogies which appear to
exist between their actual remains and what is recorded of the temple
and palaces of Solomon. In the first place, as Sennacherib in his
inscriptions declares himself to have done, the Jewish king sent the
bearers of burdens and the hewers into the mountains to bring great
stones, costly stones, and hewed stones, to lay the foundations, which
were probably artificial platforms, resembling the Assyrian mounds,
though constructed of more solid materials. We have the remains of
such a terrace or stage of stone masonry, perhaps built by King
Solomon himself, at Baalbec. The enormous size of some of the hewn
stones in that structure, and of those still remaining in the
quarries, some of which are more than sixty feet long, has excited the
wonder of modern travelers. The dimensions of the temple of Jerusalem,
threescore cubits long, twenty broad, and thirty high, were much
smaller than those of the great edifices explored in Assyria.
Solomon's own palace, however, appears to have been considerably
larger, and to have more nearly approached in its proportions those of
the kings of Nineveh, for it was one hundred cubits long, fifty broad
and thirty high. "The porch before the temple," twenty cubits by ten,
may have been a propylaeum, such as was discovered at Khorsabad in
front of the palace. The chambers, with the exception of the oracle,
were exceedingly small, the largest being only seven cubits broad,
"for with