ART AMONG THE ANCIENT HEBREWS

The ancient Hebrews were an art-loving people, and occupied a fair

position among those Eastern nations of antiquity, who attained some

success in the production of works of artistic merit. Their success in

Music and Poetry was undoubted, and becomes even more striking when it is

remembered that it had been won by the Jewish nation at a time when in

Greece, for instance, the cultivation of these arts was still in its

infancy. The period of their artistic activity extended from the days of

Moses to the time of the destruction of the last Temple in Jerusalem by

Titus (70 A. D.). It is proposed in the present essay to deal, first with

the _Architecture_, then with the _Music_, and finally with the _Poetry_

of the ancient Hebrews.

Just as among other nations of antiquity architecture had its origin in

religion, and owed its development to religion, so it was among the Jews.

The first feeble attempt at architecture, though it is perhaps incorrect

to call it by that name, was the erection of the Tabernacle in the

wilderness. This was certainly nothing more than a large-sized movable

tent, and had no special beauty about it, but the fact that the original

design was retained and used on a larger scale at the construction of the

subsequent Temples of Jerusalem, invests it with more than ordinary

importance. From this it may also be seen that the Jewish architect, even

in those early times, had in the drawing up of its ground-plan some

glimmering of symmetry and purity of form. Noticeable also is the great

skill manifested at that time by the Jewish artisans in the manufacture of

the furniture of the Tabernacle, the beautiful covers and curtains with

their inwoven cherubims, the seven-branched golden candlestick of beaten

work, and the circular-shaped laver made by them from the metallic mirrors

presented by the women of the community (Exod. xxxviii. 8). The erection

of the Tabernacle was followed by some centuries of architectural and

artistic barrenness. This epoch includes the time of their sojourn in the

Arabian desert, and the period during which they were governed by the

Judges, and subsequently by King Saul. Those years were marked by internal

and external struggles, and consequently did not admit of the free

development of any of those arts which, generally speaking, flourish only

in times of undisturbed peace, and under the protection of a strong

government. In the reigns of David and Solomon, however, when the Jews

began to enjoy the first-fruits of peace and national prosperity, the

general spread of culture and architectural skill at once became manifest.

The sacred and royal buildings erected by the various Jewish kings, and

particularly the Temple of Solomon, show the pitch of artistic excellence

which they had attained.

There is no doubt much exaggeration in the statement made by some writers

that classical antiquity was largely indebted to the Temple for many

details of art, and that throughout the Middle Ages the form and shape of

all Christian churches were modelled after its design. Considering,

however, the attention and interest which the Temple has excited, there

can be little doubt of its extraordinary artistic value. Its original form

and mode of structure have already been so often and so minutely described

by learned men of all ages and countries that there is hardly anything new

left to be said about it. A few observations, however, concerning the

builders, and the difficulties encountered by them at its erection, may

not be out of place here. Some writers are of opinion that the fame and

magnificence of the Temple were entirely due to the skill of Phoenician

artisans, and not to the proficiency of Jewish workmen. The soundness of

this theory is, however, very questionable. In the first place, we have it

on the authority of the Biblical memorials that the assistance given by

the Phoenicians to the Jewish workmen at the erection of the Temple

consisted mainly in felling cedar-trees on Mount Lebanon, and in

manufacturing the artistic metal-work of the building. Next, the fact

already mentioned that the original Mosaic model of the Tabernacle had

been retained, and used on a larger scale in the construction of the

Temple, proves at once its purely Jewish character. We must also come to

the same conclusion when we consider that its internal and external

decoration consisted mostly of flowers and plants that only grew on

Palestinian soil.

As for the structure itself, it may be mentioned that many difficulties

had to be overcome before the actual building operations began. The summit

of Mount Moriah, on which King David had decided to erect the Temple, was

too narrow to permit of large buildings being established thereon. Thus

gigantic supports and walls had to be erected, which, owing no doubt to

their great strength and durability, have been preserved to the present

day. They bear a great similarity to the Cyclopean walls built by the

oldest races of Greece in Asia Minor, and the immensity of each block of

stone is such that it has excited the wonder of various modern travellers

(cp. Layard, _Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 62). These enormous stones were,

strange to say, put together without the aid of tools. The latter, made as

they were out of a material from which weapons of war are manufactured,

were used as little as possible at the erection of a building which was

intended, in conformity with the true spirit of Judaism, to serve as a

symbol of Peace. There is another noticeable feature in connexion with the

building, namely, that all its bronze works were cast in earthen moulds in

the valley of the Jordan. This spot was specially selected for the

purpose, on account of its fine clay soil. Thus it will be seen that even

at this early period in the history of architecture the Jews must have had

some knowledge of mining. Later on, at the time when the Romans were the

masters of the land, the mines of Phaino enjoyed a very great reputation

(cp. Ewald, _History of Israel_, ed. Carpenter, vol. IV, p. 192). A modern

writer of note (James Fergusson), in referring to the Temple of Solomon,

expresses himself thus:—“Whatever the exact appearance of its details may

have been, it may safely be asserted that the triple Temple of

Jerusalem—the lower court, standing on its magnificent terrace—the inner

court, raised on its platform in the centre of this—and the Temple itself,

rising out of the group and crowning the whole—must have formed, when

combined with the beauty of its situation, one of the most splendid

architectural combinations of the old world” (cp. Smith's _Bible

Dictionary_, _sub_ Temple).

In connexion with the Temple two other branches of architecture may be

mentioned here—the water conduits and bridges, or rather viaducts, built

by King Solomon. The former must have been of some importance; they are

quoted by Tacitus, who speaks of _Fons perennis aquae, cavati sub terra

montes_ (cp. _Hist._ vol. 12). As for the bridges or viaducts, it is said

that they were four in number, and of a peculiar construction. One led

over the valley of Gihon; another, called by Josephus _gerupha_, connected

Mount Zion with Mount Moriah, and served as a viaduct for the king on his

visiting the Temple (cp. _Ant._ xv. 11. 5). The third and fourth are

referred to in Talmud _Jer. Shekalim_, 4. 4, and in _Yomah_, 4 _b_.

In subsequent times two more Temples were built after the design of

Solomon's—one by Zerubbabel with the permission and assistance of the

Persian king Cyrus (558 B. C.), and another by King Herod (16 B. C.), who,

next to Solomon, was the most art-loving monarch the Jews ever had. During

his reign the influence of Greek taste began to make itself felt in

Palestine, and we are told that, in addition to the temple, he also built

colonnades, theatres, and castles (cp. Jos. _Ant._ xv. 8. 1). According to

the same authority (_Bell. Jud._ 5. 44), the beauty of King Herod's

residential palace was beyond all description. It consisted of a block of

various marble buildings, with artistically formed roofs, each building

having magnificent halls and colonnades. Pleasure grounds, tiny forests,

and gardens of every kind surrounded it, and elaborate waterworks were

built to give these grounds a never-failing freshness of appearance. The

Greek style did not, however, altogether supersede the Phoenician, for

even as late as the _Mishna_, mention is made of Tyrian windows and

porches (cp. Talmud, _Baba Bathra_, p. 36).

It would not be easy to describe here all the other architectural works of

Solomon and the rest of the Jewish kings. The former's palace ought not,

however, to be passed over unnoticed, especially as in splendour and

architectural beauty it rivalled the Temple itself. It consisted of a row

of large buildings, among which the king's private residence, that of the

Egyptian princes, and the so-called house of the forest of Lebanon, were

the most prominent. With the aid of his great waterworks in the

neighbourhood of the city, Solomon laid out all kinds of gardens and

pleasure-grounds, the beauty of which was enhanced by the addition of

fountains and artificial lakes (cp. Cant. iv. 13–15). At Etam he had a

magnificent park and gymnasium, which he occasionally visited. Not far

from Lebanon he erected some lofty towers ornamented largely with gold and

ivory (Cant. viii. 11; _Ant._ iii. 7. 3).

That the Greeks used ivory for the ornamentation of houses and public

buildings, may be seen from the passage in Eurip. _Iph. Aul._, where

ἐλεφάντινοι δόμοι (houses made of ivory) are mentioned.

Referring to the great taste for landscape culture displayed by the

Hebrews of old, Humboldt says that nowhere in antiquity, and not even

among the Greeks, is so much sense for the beauties of nature met with as

in the Bible. With regard to sculpture it ought to be mentioned that the

ancient Hebrews did not to any great extent cultivate this art. This was

in consequence of the law which forbade them to introduce any kind of

graven image in their places of worship. A few monuments, however, are

mentioned as having been erected by them, such as the one built by

Absalom, which, according to Josephus (_Ant._ vii. 10. 3), was a marble

column. Another, erected in memory of Queen Helena, consisted of three

small pyramids, and was considered a beautiful work of art (ibid. xx. 4.

3).

The tools that were used in those times by Hebrew artisans were, in

addition to the more common ones, such as the axe, saw, and others, the

compass (_Mechugah_) (Isa. xliv. 13), the plumb-line (_Anach_) (Amos vii.

7), and the measuring-reed (_Kav_) (cp. Job xxxviii. 5).

As for the artisans' position it may be said that they were not merely

servants and slaves as among the Greeks and Romans, but men holding some

rank in society. For instance, of Bezaleel and Aholiab, the principal

architects of the Tabernacle, it is said that “they were filled with the

spirit of the Lord” (Exod. xxxvi. 1), and had they not been classed among

the wisest men of their time, and held in high esteem by the community at

large, no respect would have been paid to them by the Biblical memorials.

The number of Jewish artisans of every description appears to have been

considerable, and this was specially the case during the time when the

national prosperity was advancing (Jer. xxix. 2). Even during the

Captivity, and later on when the Jews were finally scattered over the

world, their Rabbis urgently recommended them to teach their children some

art or handicraft.

The same exaggeration in respect of the achievements of the ancient

Hebrews in the art of architecture is also found in reference to the

perfection which they attained in science and the art of music. However

that may be, it can hardly be denied that they were, on the whole, an

eminently musical people. This can be seen from the comparatively large

number of Hebrew words denoting song and chanting, as well as from Hebrew

poetry, a considerable portion of which has been conceived in the form of

psalmody or sacred lyric song. As among the Greeks, Jewish tradition

ascribes the invention of the first musical instrument to shepherds. Jubal

is designated in the Bible as the father of all such as handle the harp or

organ (Gen. iv. 21). Other passages in the same book relating to musical

instruments and to their use, are found in connexion with Laban, Miriam,

and Jephthah. But a real and systematic cultivation of the art of music

did not begin before the days of Samuel and Saul; the former of whom seems

to have been the founder of a regular school of music (1 Sam. x. 5). There

a great number of students received their training, and the most able

among them were subsequently selected for the choir of the Temple. Already

in the time of David 4,000 singers, mostly Levites, assisted in the

service of the Lord, being presided over by the sons of Asaph, Heman, and

Jeduthun. In subsequent ages their services are recorded in connexion with

the laying of the foundation of the second Temple (Ezra iii. 10), and

again, after the great victory of the Maccabean army over Gorgias (1 Macc.

iv. 24).

The instruments used by the ancient Hebrews were of three different

kinds—percussion instruments, such as tambourines, drums, and cymbals;

wind instruments, such as trumpets, horns, and flutes; and stringed

instruments, such as harps, psalteries, and guitars. Another peculiar

instrument is mentioned in the Talmud (_Erachin_, ii _a_) as having been

used in the Temple service, which was called _Magrepha_ (‪מגרפה‬). This is

said to have had about a hundred different tones, and was audible at a

very long distance. These instruments seem to have been used in the Temple

service after a pause in the singing. Such a pause was perhaps notified by

the word _Selah_ (‪סלה‬), which is so often met with in the Psalms, and is

translated in the Septuagint by _diapsalma_ (διαψάλμα) (cf. Bötticher, _De

inferis rebusque post mortem futuris Hebraeorum et Graecorum opiniones_,

Dresden, 1868, p. 198). That the Temple music must have exercised a vast

influence on the cultivation and development of the Church songs and music

can hardly be doubted. Martini, who was a great authority on such matters,

maintains that the first Christian choral songs were taken from the songs

of the Temple. It is quite natural, he says, that the Apostles should have

introduced into the Church services only those melodies that had been

familiar to them from their earliest infancy (cp. _Storia della Musica_,

p. 350).

But it was not in the service of religion alone that music was performed

among the ancient Hebrews: it permeated their whole public and private

life. Following the example of David and Solomon, who had attached to

their courts “singing men and singing women” (2 Sam. xix. 36; Eccles. ii.

8), the rich men in Israel often, employed music and song at their

banquets (Amos vi. 4–6). When bridal processions passed through the

streets, they were accompanied with music and song (Jer. vii. 34). The

same was the case when victories were celebrated, or when the Jewish

armies went to battle (Exod. xv. 20; xx. 19). There seems also to have

existed a kind of Jewish troubadours, who sang love-songs before the

windows of their chosen ones (Ps. xlv, title). The harvest was gathered in

to the tunes of merry songs (Isa. xvi. 10), and at funeral processions

mournful music was played (Jer. ix. 17–20).

That a high position must have been assigned by the ancient Hebrews to

those who were skilled in song and music, may be seen from the term

applied to them in the Hebrew writings. There they are frequently called

_Nebiim_ (‪נביאים‬), “Prophets,” and of Jahaziel, a Levite of the sons of

Asaph, it is said that “the spirit of the Lord came over him” (2 Chron.

xx. 14). Thus the art of music was looked upon by the Hebrews as being the

outcome of divine inspiration, and its disciples were consequently held in

great esteem by them. But music and song only flourished among them so

long as they were masters in their own country, and were free men in a

free land. When their nationality had ceased to exist, and they were led

into captivity, they hung their harps on the willows by the streams of

Babylon, and uttered those memorable and touching words: “How shall we

sing the song of the Lord in a foreign land?” (Ps. cxxxvii. 4).

The third branch of the arts to which I now pass is Hebrew Poetry. Martin

Luther, in his _Table Talk_, compares it with the sweet melody of a

nightingale, and it is frequently admitted that, the Greeks and Romans

perhaps excepted, no nation of antiquity has produced anything in the

shape of poetry that can be compared with that of the Hebrews. There are

three kinds of poetry in the Hebrew literature—_dramatic_, _gnomic_, and

_lyrical_. The latter occupies the most prominent position. The drama is

represented by two pieces, the Book of Job and the Song of Songs. The Book

of Job is considered by many as the masterpiece of Hebrew poetry. Its fine

introduction with its double scene in heaven and on earth, in which Satan

plays so prominent a rôle, was imitated by Goethe in his “Faust.” Equally

grand, though in a different style, is the Song of Songs. Herder, in

referring to it, says that it is the most beautiful piece of poetry that

has ever been produced by any poet of ancient or modern times. He is of

opinion that in no other poem has love been so charmingly depicted as

there, and even now, in spite of its great age, it has lost none of its

freshness of colouring and beauty of diction. It is a true monument of

genuine pastoral and idyllic poetry.

The gnomic poetry comprises that section of Hebrew literature which

contains pithy maxims or proverbs. To this class of poetry belong the Book

of Proverbs, the Book of Ecclesiastes, and the Proverbs of Jesus ben

Sirach, better known under the name of Ecclesiasticus. Though the

religious element is not entirely excluded from these books, yet they

chiefly treat of worldly subjects. Some passages therein contain humorous

descriptions of various human characters. The bookworm, the scribbler, the

miser, the dull preacher, the quarrelsome woman, the drunkard—they are all

referred to, and spoken of with good-natured humour and irony^[33-1].

The lyric poetry of the Jews is almost entirely of a religious nature. To

this class belong the Psalms, which are confessedly the peculiar product

of Hebrew Art. They have never been surpassed in any other literature in

simplicity of diction and originality of sentiment. Being the classical

expression of the speech of the religious mind, they have naturally become

a treasure-house for the language and thought of the Christian world. The

Christian liturgy and the songs of the Church abound with beautiful

sentences borrowed from them.

The Book of Psalms contains 150 songs, most of which are said to have been

composed by King David. Psalms occur also here and there in other parts of

the Bible, such as those of Samuel's mother (1 Sam. ii), of Isaiah (chap.

xii), of Hezekiah (ibid. xxxviii. 9), and of Habakkuk. There are also

Hebrew songs which are similar to the Psalms in respect of form, but not

of subject. To this class of Psalms belong, for instance, Jacob's last

blessing, Balaam's prophecies, the Song of Deborah, and the Lamentations

of Jeremiah. In the Psalms songs are also met with which are of a joyful

nature, such as wedding songs, love songs, and wine songs.

Hebrew poetry has many characteristics of its own, the most prominent of

which are national and local colouring, and, secondly, its profound

humility and reverence. Its writers never lose sight of the grand idea of

their nation, which subordinates all and everything in the universe to one

supreme power called God, the Creator of heaven and earth. Even man, the

crown of the creation, is, according to them, only an _Adam_ or _Enosh_

(‪אדם‬, ‪אנוש‬), an insignificant, helpless being, in comparison to

_Eloha_ (‪אלוה‬, Arab. _Allah_), the most powerful Lord of the universe.

Thus man is compared by them to a flower that withers, to a shadow that

passes by, and to a cloud that vanishes in the air; while at the same time

they call the thunder “the voice of the Lord,” the wind “his messenger,”

the clouds “the cover of his brightness,” the lightning “his servant,” and

the sun “the herald of his majesty.” But though they let Nature be

subservient to and dependent on God, yet they preserve a loving attachment

to it, and endow it, as it were, with life and animation. They let it

share man's sentiments; it rejoices and trembles with man, and it laughs

and weeps with him.

Every extraordinary event in the life of the nation affects Nature as it

does the human mind. So, for instance, when the Hebrew exiles are

described by the prophet as returning to the land of their nativity, the

desert rejoices and changes into a beautiful garden filled with rose

blossoms, and fragrant with the perfume of sweet plants. The mountains and

the hills break forth into song, and the trees of the fields clap their

hands. In those happy days, neither the light of the sun nor the

brightness of the moon will be required by the liberated exiles, for the

Lord will be unto them an everlasting light (Isa. xxxv. 1; lv. 12; lx.

20). On the other hand, when God sits in judgment, and a great catastrophe

is imminent over the inhabitants of the land, then the earth shakes and

trembles, and the foundations of the hills move. The heaven becomes

clouded, and the brightness of the sun disappears; the moon and the stars

shine no more (Ps. xviii. 8; Ez. xxxii. 7).

The _form_ of Hebrew poetry has been widely discussed. Some writers, such

as Philo, Josephus, Eusebius, St. Jerome, and others, maintain that in

some Biblical poems the Iambic, Alcaic, and Sapphic metres were used, and

that in others the heroic metre was employed. Others, again, are rather

inclined to think that the Hebrews wrote in no regular metrical periods,

but only preserved a kind of parallelism of sentences. No one will deny

that the Greeks and the Romans have produced literary works, which in

elegance of expression and symmetry of form are much superior to those of

the Hebrews. But at the same time it will be conceded by those who have a

taste for genuine poetry, that in the freshness of colouring, depth of

thought, and vivacity of representation, the poetical pieces of the Bible

stand very high. Though written thousands of years ago, they still

preserve their sway over the human heart, and afford consolation and hope

to the afflicted and oppressed.

From what has been said it will be seen how unfounded the charge is, so

often made in certain quarters against the Jews, that they have never

rendered any particular service to the nations with whom they have come in

contact. Surely, if they had done nothing else but given them the sacred

volume, the Book of Books, which contains so many golden rules for the

cultivation of the human mind and heart, they would, for that reason

alone, be entitled to expect acknowledgment and gratitude, not only from

the present but also from all future generations.

Footnotes:

[33-1] Cp. above, p. 5.

Hebrew Humor and Other Essays · 第 10 / 58 题