CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE 
 
 -ON' 
 
 Inaccuracy of Work 
 
 PRESENTED TO 
 
 GRAND LODGE OF IOWA, 
 
 A. F. & A. M. 
 
 COMMUNICATION 1904. 
 
 By J. W. BARRY. Chairman, 
 
 Crescent Lodge, No. 25, 
 
 Cedar Rapids. 
 
/+2 
 
 ^ 
 
 ct 
 
 7 
 
 « 6 
 
 ^ ° 
 
 c I 
 
 ±3 ^ 
 
 
 ■^ O 
 
 M5 
 
Report on Inaccuracy of Work. 
 
 One year ago, at Waterloo, Past Grand Master Granger, of the 
 Board of Custodians, introduced, on behalf of the Board, the follow- 
 ing resolution: 
 
 "Whereas, The work and teachings of Masonry involve a descrip- 
 tive account of the Pillars at the entrance of the porch of King 
 Solomon's Temple, known in Masonic and Biblical history as Jachin 
 and Boaz; and — 
 
 "Whereas, The Grand Jurisdictions vary in their teachings as to 
 the height of said pillars, showing a difference of understanding ad 
 to tlie height thereof to the extent of the difference between eighteen 
 and thirty-flve cubits; and — 
 
 "Whereas, It is important that the teachings in this Grand Juris- 
 diction should be in harmony with truth in this respect, or with the 
 best evidence of truth; therefore — 
 
 "Be it Resolved, That the Grand Master is hereby authorized 
 to appoint a committee to consist of one member of this Grand Lodge 
 to collect information, as best he can, as to the correct height of 
 said pillars, and make report of his findings and recommendations to 
 the next annual communication of this Grand Lodge." 
 
 The resolution was adopted unanimously, and Grand Master 
 Gardner having honored me with appointment as such committee. 
 I beg to submit my report at this time. 
 
 NOT one of the old LANDMARKS. 
 
 One of the characteristics of worthy Masons everywhere is their 
 fidelity to the "old landmarks," by which is meant those things that 
 are at the foundation of Masonry, and, therefore, inherent in every 
 lodge. The height of the pillars Jachin and Boaz, being given in 
 the Bible In four separate books, is an architectural fact in sacred 
 history, and, therefore, could in no proper, or even remote, sense be 
 classed with the revered landmarks. Yet out of respect for any one 
 that might at first think otherwise, but more particularly to learn 
 the height given in other jurisdictions, the question was submitted 
 to the Grand Secretary of each Grand Lodge of the United States 
 and Canada. The Secretaries replied as follows: 
 
 Jurisdiction. Reply. 
 
 Alabama 18 cubits. 
 
 Arizona No reply. 
 
 Arkansas 18 cubits. 
 
 California 35 
 
 Connecticut: 18, or 35 for the 
 
 united length. 
 
 Colorado 35 cubits. 
 
 Delaware 18 " 
 
 District of Columbia. . .18 
 
 Florida 35 " 
 
 Georgia 35 
 
 Idaho 35 
 
 Illinois 35 " 
 
 Indiana: "Not regulated by 
 
 edict." 
 
 Indian Territory 18 cubits. 
 
 Iowa 35 
 
 Kansas 35 
 
 Kentucky 18 
 
 Jurisdiction. Reply. 
 
 Louisiana No reply. 
 
 Maine 35 cubits 
 
 Manitoba 18 
 
 Maryland: "Matter we do not 
 present." 
 
 Massachusetts 35 cubits. 
 
 Michigan 35 
 
 Minnesota 35 
 
 Mississippi 18 
 
 Missouri 35 
 
 Montana 35 
 
 Nebraska 35 
 
 Nevada No reply. 
 
 New Hampshire 35 cubits. 
 
 New Jersey 18 " 
 
 New Mexico 35 " 
 
 New York 35 " 
 
 North Carolina 35 " 
 
 North Dakota No reply. 
 
Jurisdiction. Reply. 
 
 Ohio 18 cubits. 
 
 Oklahoma 35 " 
 
 Oregon 35 
 
 Pennsylvania: "Height of Jachln 
 and Boaz not given." 
 
 Rhode Island 35 cubits. 
 
 South Carolina 18 " 
 
 South Dakota 35 
 
 Tennessee 18 " 
 
 Texas 35 
 
 Jurisdiction. Reply. 
 
 Utah 30 cubits. 
 
 Vermont 35 " 
 
 Virginia: "It Is not proper to 
 print or write any esoteric 
 work." 
 
 Washington 18 cubits. 
 
 West Virginia : "Height not men- 
 tioned in West Virginia work." 
 
 Wisconsin 35 cubits. 
 
 Wyoming 35 " 
 
 Summarizing the foregoing, of the forty-four jurisdictions reply- 
 ing, in three the height of Jachin and Boaz is not given; in fourteen, 
 the height is eighteen cubits, and in twenty-seven it is thirty-flve 
 cubits, while in one the height is given as thirty cubits. Here is a 
 very wide variation, and among Masons, too, who, above all others, 
 are supposed to have correct information regarding Solomon's Tem- 
 ple. Now, the simple question; What was the correct height of 
 Jachin and Boaz? is the task assigned your committee, and were it 
 not for the fact that the resolution requires the compiling of the best 
 evidence in support of the answer, this paper would have been very 
 short, because eighteen cubits is the only height for which there is 
 any warrant of any kind in either sacred or profane records. 
 
 SOLOMON'S TEMPLE WAS LIKE CONTEMPORANEOUS BUILDINGS. 
 
 That Solomon's Temple corresponded with the architecture of hi.i 
 time is a self-evident proposition, but just what that architecture 
 was is not so easily determined. The evidence of what it was will 
 be covered by what may be classed as direct and circumstantial. 
 The circumstantial evidence consists of: 
 
 First. The influence of other countries and architecture on Solo- 
 mon's Temple. 
 
 Second. The influence of Solomon's Temple on succeeding build- 
 ings. 
 
 Third. Opinions of Masonic investigators, Bible students, and 
 architects. 
 
 While the direct evidence consists of Josephus and the Bible. 
 
 FIRST AS TO INFLUENCE OF OTHER COUNTRIES. 
 
 Palestine, Phcenicia, Kgypt, and Greece are all on the eastern 
 end of the Mediterranean sea, and a cruise of their various ports 
 might be likened to a cruise on Lake Michigan. The people of those 
 countries had intimate commercial relations in time of peace, and in 
 time of war invasions, and counter invasions were the rule. So that 
 each country was familiar with the architecture of the other coun- 
 tries. Indeed, one cannot read the history of Solomon's time with- 
 out being convinced that together Solomon, King of Israel, and 
 Hiram, King of Tyre, stood in much the same relation to the then 
 known world as do the United States and England to the world of 
 our day. In every port of every sea were the ships of Solomon and 
 
Hiram. Together they organized a fleet at the head of the Red sea to 
 sail to the land of Ophir for gold, ivory, and precious stones. To- 
 gether their crews traversed the Nile valley, where in the days of 
 Joseph the Jews had attained eminence and power. The Jews and 
 Phoenecians were the merchants, sailors, and artizans of the world in 
 the time of Hiram, and it was they who built Solomon's Temple. 
 What then are some of the evidences of — 
 
 EGYPTIAN INFIiXJENCE? 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 Ancient Egyptian Ark of Wood, 
 George Perrot. 
 
 from 
 
 In every Egyptian 
 
 temple was a sacred 
 room, or holy of 
 holies, in which was 
 deposited a minia- 
 ture tabernacle con- 
 taining the image of 
 the deity in whose 
 honor the temple 
 was erected. In the 
 smaller temples this 
 article was made of 
 wood, and but few 
 of them have been 
 preserved. There is 
 one of very great 
 age in the Museum 
 at Turin, Italy, 
 
 shown in cut No. 1. In the larger temples, the material used was 
 
 granite. In the temple at Edfou a little granite tabernacle of this 
 
 kind is still in place, but generally those little tabernacles have 
 
 been carried away^ 
 
 and may now be 
 
 seen in the various 
 
 museums of Europe. 
 
 A most perfect one 
 
 is in the museum of 
 
 the Louvre, and 
 
 bears the name 
 
 Amasis, who founded 
 
 the eighteenth dy- 
 nasty, 1700 B. C. 
 
 See cut No. 2. They 
 
 are described by He- 
 rodotus, Volume II., 
 
 page 175, who trav- 
 
 elea in and wrote of 
 
 Egypt 450 B. C. Xo. 2. Egyptian Granite Arli, 1700 B. C, from 
 
 George Perrot. 
 
 •■m^** 
 
ivfC^.-.-' 
 
 u .A- :-.':■ 
 
 ■■*(--.-:: 
 
 Now, compare the central idea of Solomon's Temple with this of the 
 Egyptian. The holy of holies in Solomon's Temple was the sacred 
 chamber to contain the Ark of the Covenant, just as the sacred 
 chambers in Egyptian temples were devoted to a very similar pur- 
 pose. 
 
 Again, Egyptian temples were surrounded by walled-in courts, 
 providing open air meeting places for the people, the priests alone 
 
 being admitted to 
 the temple itself. 
 To this general rule 
 Solomon's Temple 
 corresponded i n 
 
 every particular, in- 
 cluding the small 
 rooms for the 
 priests. Inasmuch 
 as Solomon's Temple 
 corresponded in pur- 
 pose and in form 
 with the Egyptian, 
 is it not reasonable 
 to conclude that it 
 corresponded in ele- 
 vation also? There 
 is much direct and 
 indirect evidence 
 that it did. The excavations made by the Palestine Exploration 
 Fund have demonstrated intimate relations between Palestine and 
 Egypt, and there are 
 numerous records to 
 show that the build- 
 ers of Solomon's 
 Temple were famil- 
 iar with the temples 
 on the Nile. Indeed 
 there are existing 
 architectural r e- 
 
 mains, which though 
 of a little later time, 
 yet confirm beyond a 
 doubt the proposi- 
 tion that the Jews 
 and Phoenecians con- 
 structed with full 
 knowledge of what 
 had gone before on 
 the banks of the Nile, 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 Tombs at Beiii Hassau, 3000 B. C. 
 Mode] Doric Perch. 
 
 Thfl 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 Tomb ol Ameri, made about 2500 years 
 B. C. 
 
 Let the tombs at Beni Hassan and al 
 
Jerusalem illustrate. Figure No. 3 shows the tombs cut into the 
 rocky cliffs of the Nile as they appear now, dating from 3000 years 
 B. C. There are forty such tombs at Beni Hassan alone, entered 
 by a porch-like structure. The pillars are not set in, but cut out 
 of the rock, or rather the rock is all cut away, leaving only so 
 much of it as is now seen in the pillars. 
 
 Cut No. 4 is a near view of Ameni's tomb, made about 2500 years 
 B. C. The modern iron grating shows that it is now carefully cared 
 for, for the reason that it contains a record of the famine in the time 
 of Joseph, 1700 B. C. 
 
 When the Egyptian died he began to live, and so long as his 
 mummified body, or a stone image, or painted likeness thereof ex- 
 isted he continued to live. He took an active part in the hunting, 
 fishing, racing, sowing, harvesting, and other scenes depicted on 
 the walls of his tomb. The familiar salutation: "0, King, live 
 forever," here finds its true meaning, for should the body or its 
 image be destroyed, then, and then only, did life end. Prom Beni 
 Hassan down, every rock-cut tomb and every temple is a memorial 
 to the belief of man that he shall live beyond the grave, or rather 
 that he shall never, no never, die. 
 
 These pillars, cut from the living rock, are almost true Doric, 
 with sixteen flutes or sides. They are sixteen feet eight inches in 
 
 height. The d i s- 
 tance between the 
 pillars is about 
 seven feet, and the 
 diameter of the pil- 
 lars is three feet 
 eight inches, making 
 the porch nearly the 
 exact length of Solo- 
 mon's. Cut No. 5 is 
 an interior view of 
 the audience room, 
 which is forty feet 
 square and about 
 eighteen feet high. 
 Every inch of its 
 walls and ceiling is 
 covered by Egyptian 
 writing or painting. 
 Go now with me to Jerusalem, which is but a comparatively short 
 distance. A map of the city is shown in cut No: 6. The square 
 portion to the right is the top of Mt. Moriah, now known as the 
 Temple area, and contains about thirty-five acres. The Tyropoean 
 valley is on the west, and the Kedron, or "Valley of the Jehoshaphat, 
 is on the east, forming a deep gulch between the Mt. of Olives and 
 
 No. 
 
 Audience Chamber. Tomb of AmenI, Beni 
 Hassan. 
 
the Temple area. 
 
 Cut No. 6a is a view from the Mt. of Olives. The 
 dome - like building is the 
 Dome of Rock on the site of 
 the Temple. On the eastern 
 side of the Kedron, facing the 
 Temple, are ancient rock-cut 
 tombs, duplicates of those at 
 Beni Hassan, on the Nile. 
 Their position is shown by 
 plat No. 7, the center group 
 being opposite the Temple 
 altar. Two of them are 
 shown in cut No. 8. The one 
 with the pyramid roof is the 
 Tomb of Zachariah, and cor- 
 responds with that of Absa- 
 lom, about equally distant to 
 the left. In the center is the 
 Tomb of St. James, the du- 
 plicate of Ameni, at Beni 
 Hassan on the Nile. 
 
 Map of Jerusalem 
 
 These tombs, together with the tombs of the Kings of Juda, are 
 held by Canina and other archaeologists to prove to a demonstration 
 that those who cut 
 the tombs about 
 Jerusalem knew of 
 the corresponding 
 tombs at Beni Has- 
 san, and that Jewish 
 architecture in gen- 
 eral and the archi- 
 tecture of Solomon's 
 Temple in particular 
 are based upon the 
 architecture of 
 Egypt. Certain it is 
 that Beni Hassan 
 was the model for 
 temple porches on 
 the Nile and else- 
 where. 
 
 Using the short cubit of eighteen inches, Solomon's Temple was 
 thirty feet wide, ninety feet long, and forty-five feet high. If the 
 pillars of the porch were forty cubits, or sixty feet high, then they 
 projected above the roof of the Temple fifteen feet, and the porch 
 was relatively higher than the Temple itself. 
 
 No. 6a. Jerusalem, from Mt. of Olives. 
 
Now in none of the remains of temples on the Nile is there the 
 
 remotest suggestion of a building so constructed. Numerous ex- 
 amples might be given, but, 
 as they are all to the same 
 effect, a few will answer. 
 
 Cut No. 9 is a front view 
 of the porch of the Temple 
 of Amenhotep III, at Luxor, 
 as it now appears. Previous 
 to 1885 this temple was buried 
 to the depth of forty feet, 
 and upon this debris stood a 
 modern village, the "House 
 of the Mission Defrance" 
 standing above the part here 
 shown. In January, Mas- 
 pero, with at force of one 
 hundred and fifty men, be- 
 gan to dig, and finally un- 
 earthed this, the most beau- 
 tiful porch of Egypt. The 
 pillars represent a bundle of 
 lotus plants, stalks, and buds; 
 the stalks bound together at 
 the top by a ligature, and the 
 cluster of buds forming the 
 
 capital. Twelve of them remain standing, six in each row. The 
 
 pillars support the architrave, and, therefore, are not higher than 
 
 the temple Itself. 
 
 Though the c o m- 
 
 pleted temple was 
 
 eight hundred feet 
 
 long and many times 
 
 the width of that of 
 
 Solomon's, its pillars 
 
 did not reach sixty 
 
 feet, the erroneous 
 
 height now assigned 
 
 to Jachin and Boaz. 
 In cut No. 10 is a 
 
 view through the 
 
 porch of the Temple 
 
 of Kurneh, Thebes, 
 
 showing the five re- 
 maining pillars. 
 
 Here, as in all, the 
 
 pillars support the facade, and, therefore, the porch is relatively 
 
 lower than the temple. Both these temples date from 1500 years B. C. 
 
 No. 7. Plat showing Tombs. On the 
 eastern side of the Kedron, facing 
 the Temple, are ancient rock cut 
 Tombs, duplicates of those at Beni 
 Hassan on the Nile. 
 
 No. 8. Tombs of St. James and Zachariah. 
 
lO 
 
 No. 9. 
 
 Porch, 
 front 
 
 Temple of Amenhotcp at Luxor, 
 view as it now appears. 
 
 Cut No. 11 is a porch of a Nubian Temple looking from within. 
 This cut was used by Past Grand Master George C. Connor, Grand 
 
 Custodian of the 
 Grand Lodge o f 
 Tennessee, of which 
 he wrote as follows: 
 "I am fully per- 
 suaded in my own 
 mind that the front 
 or eastern side of the 
 porch was open, and 
 that the pillars 
 .Jachin and B o a z 
 supported ..he wall of 
 the facade. The 
 picture gives, in a 
 general way, our ir'sa 
 of the eastern side 
 of Solomon's Tem- 
 ple — its porch." In 
 cut No. 11a (see page 26 j is another Egyptian temple erected after 
 Solomon's, 320 B. C. It is the Temple of Dekkeh. 
 
 It will be noticed that the porches are relatively lower than the 
 main building, in 
 that the pillars sup- 
 port the root or 
 ceilings. Note this 
 also in cut No. 12, in 
 which the two round 
 pillars represent 
 Jachin and Boaz. 
 
 This temple was 
 built by Amenhotep 
 III., 1500 B. C, and 
 its remains endured 
 until 1822 A. D., 
 when it was totally 
 destroyed by the 
 Turkish Governor of 
 Assoun. It was lo- 
 cated at Elephan- 
 tine, in which im- 
 mediate section temples of this kind were numerous. They were 
 usually small, the one shown being 31x40 and 21 feet 6 inches above 
 grade. 
 
 EXAIIPLE.S I.\ THE HOLY LAKD. 
 
 Nor was Solomon without examples in the Holy Land, for ac- 
 cording to I. Samuel, III., 3-15, the Ark was housed in a temple 
 
 Xo. 10. View througii porch of Temple of Kurneh, 
 Thebes, showing the Ave remaining pillars. 
 1500 years B. C. 
 
II 
 
 at Shilo. The Canaariltes had large temples in the time of the 
 Judges. The Temple of El-Berith, at Shechem, was a place of 
 
 refuge for a thousand men. 
 (See Judges IX., 46.) There 
 was a large temple of Dagon 
 at Gaza, supported on pillars, 
 for which see Judges XVI., 
 23:29, and one at Asdod (I. 
 Sam. v., 5:6, and I. Chron. 
 X., 10. ) In the land of Hiram 
 were many temples, as re- 
 lated by Josephus. A single 
 illustration will suffice. On 
 page 257 of Antiquities of the 
 Jews is the following: "Me- 
 ander, also, who translated 
 the Tyrian archieves out of 
 the dialect of the Phoeneclans 
 into the Greek language, 
 makes mention of these two 
 kings, where he says thus: 
 ' When Abibalus was dead, 
 his son Hiram received the 
 kingdom from him. He 
 raised a bank in the large 
 palace, and dedicated the golden pillar which is in Jupiter's Tem- 
 Temple. He also went and cut down materials of timber out of the 
 mountain called Li- 
 banus for the roof of 
 temples, and when 
 he had pulled down 
 the ancient temples 
 he both built the 
 temples of Hercules 
 and that of As- 
 tarte.' " And why, 
 it may be asked, are 
 there few or no re- 
 mains of those tem- 
 ples as compared 
 with temples built 
 long before on the 
 Nile? Largely be- 
 cause they were of 
 wood construction. 
 The columns were wood, covered with metal or wound with hemp, 
 and coated with stucco. Layard's men, at Nineva, during his dig- 
 
 No. 11. 
 from 
 
 Nubian Temple Porcli, lookiag 
 within. 
 
 No. 12. View of Temple Elephantine, in which 
 two round pillars represent Pachin and Boaz. 
 Built 1.500 B. C. 
 
12 
 
 O- 
 
 ging there, found sufiicient of such encased wood columns to make 
 their camp fires. And such, with few exceptions, was the construc- 
 tion in the Holy Land before 
 Solomon. But as to founda- 
 tions of heavy masonry there 
 are early Hebrew remains 
 at Baalbec, Palmyra, and 
 other places. S'olomon's 
 Temple was, therefore, new 
 and exceptional in its con- 
 struction only in the extreme 
 richness of its decorations 
 and in making Jachin and 
 Boaz wholly of brass, and its 
 perpetuation in the memory 
 of men is due principally to 
 the fact that it was the first 
 great temple erected to the 
 Living God. As such it has 
 and will endure in the minds 
 of men. 
 
 For four hundred and 
 nineteen years it stood a 
 marked building. Because of 
 its fine workmanship, because 
 of its lavish wealth of decoration, and because it was the Temple 
 of the God of Abraham, it became well known not alone to priests, 
 princes, and kings, 
 but to builders 
 throughout the world 
 as well. Naturally 
 such a building 
 would be imitated 
 and duplicated by 
 other kings thirsting 
 for glory. Josephus 
 says it was dupli- 
 cated on Mt. Ger- 
 izim and also in 
 Egypt by n i a n. 
 Wilkins in his 
 learned treatise, 
 "The Temple of Jer- 
 usalem the Type of 
 Grecian Architec- 
 ture," shows that Grecian temples, built while Solomon's Temple 
 was still standing, are duplicates of that famous structure. This 
 
 No. 13. Plan of Courts, by T. 
 Paine, from Temple of Solomon. 
 
 . iiTv.n, 
 
 *u<m ..fth.- TiV 
 
 1 fip*u,%, ■, 
 
 
 J- 
 
 J :„}. .u\. ,, ^, 
 
 ..(-., I.J.. I::- . 
 
 
 r '- " 
 
 -- - 
 
 _ . _ ' . 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 J r ! 
 
 
 
 WC 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 .' 
 
 
 ■"■■ " ' , ' 
 
 " 
 
 No. 14. 
 E. C. 
 
 Ground plan 
 Hakewlll. 
 
 of Solomon's Temple, by 
 
13 
 
 No. 15. Front elevation of Solomon's Temple, bv 
 E. C. Hakewill. 
 
 view is lield by a number of careful investigators, who after long 
 years of study of the Temple of Solomon, have come to be regarded 
 
 as almost final au- 
 thorities. Among 
 this number is Ed- 
 ward Charles Hake- 
 will, an architect, 
 who has published 
 a work called "The 
 Temple." In this he 
 submits scale draw- 
 ings of Solomon's 
 Temple, and says 
 that the plans and 
 elevations apply ac- 
 curately to existing 
 temples that were 
 built while Solo- 
 mon's Temple yet 
 stood. It occurred 
 to me that a photo- 
 graph of the ruins of those old temples, together with Hakewill's 
 scale drawings would give the best possible idea of the actual ap- 
 pearance of Solomon's Temple. 
 
 The general outline of adjoining buildings, together with its 
 courts, may be seen in cut No. 13, from Pain's Temple of Solomon. 
 
 Cut No. 14 is the 
 ground plan of Solo- 
 mon's Temple, and 
 is duplicated in the 
 temple at Paestum 
 and in the Theseum. 
 ■The dark circles rep- 
 resent Jachin and 
 Boaz standing in 
 the porch. In the 
 next cut will be 
 seen a front view 
 and then a sectional 
 view on the line A-B, 
 showing Jachin and 
 Boaz in elevation. 
 Cut No. 15 is the 
 front view, and in 
 the massive, well-proportioned structure we can see why it stood 
 four hundred and nineteen years. In cut No. 16 is seen the sec- 
 tional view, showing the pillars in the porch, drawn to scale, 
 eighteen cubits high. 
 
 No. 16. Sectional view of Solomon's Temple, 
 showing Jachin and Boaz. 
 
14 
 
 No. 17. Generai view of Temples at Paestum. 
 
 In cut No. 17 Is seen a general view of the ruins at Paestum, a 
 long since abandoned Grecian city. The building at the left is the 
 
 Temple of Neptune, 
 and the other the 
 Temple of Series, 
 dating from the 
 early part of the 
 sixth century B. C, 
 and, therefore, con- 
 temporaneous with 
 Solomon's Temple. 
 Jachin and B o a z 
 stand within the 
 porch, and are archi- 
 tecturally known as 
 "columns in antis." 
 Returning now to 
 cut No. 14, note how 
 accurately the Tem- 
 ple of Neptune cor- 
 responds. Returning to Paestum, cut No. 18 Is a rear view, looking 
 from within. The pillars, including the chapiters, are twenty-nine 
 feet high, or less than half the height assigned to Jachin and Boaz, 
 when we say they were forty cubits, or sixty feet high. 
 
 The Theseum, the 
 other temple t o 
 which the scale 
 drawings apply, is 
 at Athens, and is 
 seen in cut No. 19. 
 It was contempor- 
 aneous with the 
 Temple of Solomon, 
 and, like the temple 
 at Paestum, is re- 
 markably well pre- 
 served. In size it is 
 45x104, with pillars 
 nineteen feet high. 
 Cut No. 20 is a near 
 view of the front. 
 The pillars corre- 
 
 No, 18. Rear view of Temples 
 within 
 
 at Paestum, from 
 
 sponding to Jachin and Boaz are seen within the porch at the middle. 
 Neither do the other temples at Athens furnish the remotest 
 suggestion of such an anomally as a building with its porch higher 
 than the main structure. The world renowned Parthenon is shown 
 in cut No. 21, as it now appears. The portion here shown dates 
 
15 
 
 No. 19. Ruins of the Theseum, Athens. 
 
 450 B. C, but it stands on a foundation containing sections of 
 columns from a temple erected in the prehistoric past. This part 
 of the foundation is seen in cut No. 22. 
 
 The Brectheum, 
 at Athens, is an 
 Ionic structure dat- 
 ing from the fifth 
 century B. C. In 
 cut No. 23 is a 
 view of the north 
 porch, famed for its 
 excellence. Its pil- 
 lars are twenty feet. 
 In cut No. 23a is a 
 view of the Ereo- 
 theum from the 
 south, showing the 
 east and west 
 porches. In cut 236 
 is seen the porch of 
 the Caryatids at the 
 west entrance to the Brectheum, the most famous porch of which 
 there are any remains. Though contemporaneous with the Temple 
 of S'olomon, and odd to the verge of a dream, it yet adheres to the 
 principles of reasonable construction, and its renowned female 
 columns are not reaching over the top of the temple. 
 
 In cut No. 24 is 
 shown a porch from 
 the Temple of Cas- 
 tor and Pollux, at 
 Girgenti. The four 
 pillars shown are 
 all that remain 
 standing of the 
 temple. This tem- 
 ple was 51x111, with 
 pillars twenty - one 
 feet high, and dates 
 from the fifth cen- 
 tury B. C. 
 
 Think of it, here 
 are the ruins of 
 grand temples con- 
 temporaneous with 
 
 that of Solomon, and how high are their pillars? At Paestum 
 twenty-nine feet, including the chapiters; of the Theseum, nineteen 
 feet; of Castor and Pollux, twenty-one feet; of the Brectheum, 
 
 No. 20. Near view of the Theseum. Athens. 
 
i6 
 
 twenty feet, while the Parthenon, over one hundred feet wide, has 
 
 pillars but thirty- 
 three feet high. 
 Compare with our 
 second degree work, 
 wherein Jachin and 
 Boaz are said to 
 have been forty 
 cubits, or sixty feet 
 high, in a building 
 only forty-flve feet 
 wide, a height out 
 of proportion, and, 
 indeed, inconsistent 
 with the architec- 
 ture of Solomon's 
 time, or for that 
 matter the architec- 
 , ture of any other 
 
 No. 21. 
 pe.Trs. 
 
 time. 
 
 Rnins of the Parthenon. 
 450 B. C. 
 
 as it DOW ap- 
 
 EOMAN BLILDINC,^ ON HEBREW FOUNDATIONS. 
 
 . As was said previously, there are no remains in the Holy Land 
 dating back far enough to be of service for the purpose in hand. 
 Yet Baalbec and Palmyra are noted for the ruins of temples dating 
 from later Roman 
 times. As nearly all 
 of them stand on 
 Tyrian or Hebrew 
 foundations, they 
 may be of interest 
 in showing that 
 though built upon 
 and in the midst of 
 the ruins of build- 
 ings dating from 
 Hiram and Solomon, 
 no one of them even 
 suggests a porch 
 higher than the 
 temple. In cuts No. 
 25, 26, and 27 is 
 shown views of the 
 ruins of the Temple 
 of Baalbec, which was a magnificent structure 370x440 feet. 
 
 The Temple of the Sun was 130x200 feet, with pillars forty-five 
 feet high (shown in cut No. 28). 
 
 Pj-ehistoric Columns in Parthenon Foun- 
 
17 
 
 Palmyra or Tadmour was built by Solomon. In cuts No. 29 and 
 30 are views of its ruins, but there is no suggestion even here of 
 
 a building with its porch 
 higher than the main struc- 
 ture. 
 
 Tyre, next after Jerusa- 
 lem, is the most interesting 
 spot to Masons, but nothing 
 in point could be secured. 
 However, the tomb of Hiram 
 will interest Masons. Six 
 miles outside the present 
 town is the tomb, shown in 
 cut No. 30, and so far as can 
 be learned it is the real 
 thing, the actual resting 
 place of Hiram King of Tyre. 
 To the right will be noticed 
 a square and compass cut in 
 the rock, but by whom and 
 when are questions that can- 
 not be answered. In the 
 same way the southeast coV'- 
 ner of the original wall of 
 Solomon is of interest (shown 
 in cut No. 32a). At this point the wall stands sixty feet above the 
 ground. In 1862 Captain Warren dug down to the beginning of 
 this wall, which he 
 found eighty feet be- 
 low the surface, and 
 showed that the por- 
 tion below grade was 
 part of the original 
 wall made in pre- 
 paring the temple 
 site. On the under 
 side of the stones 
 were . numerous red 
 marks or signs, 
 which he could not 
 explain. 
 
 The principal 
 buildings now on the 
 temple areas are the 
 Mosque of Omar, 
 known as the Dome of Rock, which Ferguson says dates from the 
 first century of our era, and the Mosque el Aksa, built about five 
 
 No. 23. North Porch Erectheum. Athens. 
 an Ionic structure from the fitth 
 century B. C. 
 
 No. 2.'i«. View of the Erectheum, showing the 
 east and west porches. 
 
ffl 
 
 llftr^^l^^^S^. 
 
 
 B 
 
 
 HH^^ 
 
 "~-r* 
 
 T" r--^i 
 
 
 w-A- 
 
 i^H 
 
 W|l|ii|3*?gir; 
 
 
 *' -i_JiH 
 
 
 ±'- -^ _^ _• 
 
 iSm 
 
 IMM^JStij^ -^ 
 
 
 No. 236. Porch of the Caryatids. 
 
 hundred years later. Though interesting, they are only of nega- 
 tive value to the purpose in hand, for though built on the very site 
 
 of Solomon's Tem- 
 ple and amid its 
 ruins, they give no 
 hint of such a build- 
 ing as is now de- 
 scribed when the 
 second degree is con- 
 ferred. In cut No. 
 33 is shown one of 
 the four porches of 
 The Dome of Rock. 
 This building is an 
 octogon, measuring 
 one hundred and 
 fifty feet in diameter 
 and sixty-six feet on 
 a side. The dome is 
 sixty-five feet in di- 
 ameter and nihety-seven feet high. Here, then, is a building two 
 thousand years old, standing on the very site of Solomon's Temple, 
 and indeed it is be- 
 lieved to contain ma- 
 terial once a part of 
 Solomon's Temple — 
 yet take note that 
 the pillars are pro- 
 portioned to the 
 main building and 
 support the facade. 
 
 In cut No. 34 is 
 shown the rock be- 
 neath the dome. It 
 is the sacred rock, 
 the threshing floor of 
 Oman — the spot 
 upon which Abra- 
 ham was about to 
 sacrifice Isaac. 
 Under the rock is a large cavern, believed to be the sepulchre of the 
 Kings of Israel from David to Hezekiah. 
 
 When the very foundations of buildings are no more, the con- 
 temporaneous coins used as money often remain and afford valuable 
 information. While the Jews coined but little, especially in the earlier 
 times, yet there are some of value to the matter under consideration. 
 In 65 A. D. the Jews revolted against their Roman governors, and A. 
 
 No. 24. Porch from the Temple of Castor and Pollux. 
 at Girgenti. Dates from the flth, century B. C. 
 
19 
 
 No. 25. Ruins of the Temple of Baalbec. 
 
 Eleazer, a Jewish high priest, issued coins upon which is a rep- 
 resentation of .the Temple. See cut No. 35, from Madden's Jewish 
 
 Coinage. Its value 
 to the question in 
 hand is found in the 
 fact that it was the 
 work of a Jewish 
 high priest for the 
 Jews, at a time 
 when the inspira- 
 tion of the Temple 
 was needed, and that 
 the temple so shown 
 is in harmony with 
 the buildings here- 
 tofore described. It 
 will be noticed that 
 this Jewish high 
 priest in preparing a 
 coin that might help 
 Inspire his countrymen to heroic deeds for their liberty, did not 
 show a temple with pillars projecting above it like twentieth century 
 smoke-stacks. 
 
 There are two other views of the Temple, which on account of 
 their growing use in lodge work will be given here. In cut No. 36 
 is shown Solomon's 
 Temple by Rev. T. 
 0. Paine, of Boston, 
 who has written 
 and published a 
 most superbly illus- 
 trated book on the 
 subject, showing the 
 Temple in radically 
 different light from 
 any previous concep- 
 tion of it. You will 
 note that it is wider 
 and wider toward 
 the top. He claims 
 that, as above 
 shown, it c o r r e- 
 sponds with "Holy 
 
 writ" to the very minutest detail. He makes Jachin and Boaz 
 eighteen cubits high, and gives even the weight of the metal in the 
 shafts as thirty tons each. Cut No. 37 shows the Jachin or Boaz as, 
 he says, they are described in the Bible. 
 
 No. 2C. Leaning Column of Temple of Baalbec. 
 
s 
 
 m 
 
 ^ 
 
 m 
 
 i 
 
 ' '*'sii 
 
 m 
 
 n 
 
 !i^ 
 
 No. 
 
 Temple of Jiaalbec. 
 
 20 
 
 James Ferguson, an eminent architect of London, has issued an 
 exhaustive work entitled "The Temples of The Jewg. He submits 
 
 scale drawings of 
 Jachin and Boaz, 
 showing them to 
 have been eighteen 
 cubits high. To 
 Herod's Temple he 
 gives particular at- 
 tention and submits 
 three elaborate 
 drawings of it. One 
 of these drawings is 
 used in slides show- 
 ing "The Holy 
 City," and is given 
 now to make it clear 
 that it is not in- 
 tended to represent 
 the Temple of Solo- 
 mon, though the pillars in its porch are eighteen cubits high, as in 
 Solomon's. It is seen in out No. 38. (See page 26.) Ferguson is re- 
 sponsible for the central building only, and for nothing else shown. 
 Heretofore attention has been directed to such buildings as were 
 in point. However, 
 there is another line 
 of evidence entitled to 
 our highest respect. 
 It is the opinions of 
 Masonic investiga- 
 tors, Bible students, 
 and architects, each 
 of which classes 
 having considered 
 Jachin and B a 5! 
 worthy of very care- 
 ful research and 
 painstaking investi- 
 gation. Naturally 
 that which appeals 
 to us most strongly 
 is the — 
 
 No. 28. Ruins of the Temple of the Sun, Baalbec 
 
 OPINIONS OF M.VSOXIC IXVE.STIGATOE.S. 
 
 Eighteen cubits is the height assigned to Jachin and Boaz in 
 "The Symbols of Masonry," by Jacob Earnst, a Mason of high de- 
 gree, and on pages 266 and 267 he continues as follows: "In our 
 
21 
 
 Xo. 29. Temple of Diocletian, 
 Solomon. 
 
 Palmyra, built Ij.v 
 
 rituals we have heard them referred to as thirty and five cubits in 
 height, with chapiters of five cubits, which conveys the idea that 
 
 they were forty cu- 
 bits in height — a 
 very inconsiderable 
 degree of altitude in 
 proportion to their 
 circumf rence, and 
 not consistent with 
 the rules of architec- 
 ture, and which cer- 
 tainly gives a very 
 erroneous impres- 
 sion." 
 
 Albert G. Mackey, 
 in his " E n c y c 1 0- 
 paedia of Freema- 
 sonry," says that the 
 pillars of Jachin and 
 Boaz are very im- 
 portant symbols. He 
 devotes seven columns to their discussion; shows that they were 
 eighteen cubits high, that they were within the porch and supported 
 the entablature, and adds: "It is evident, from their description in 
 Kings, that the pillars of the porch of King Solomon's Temple 
 were copied from the pillars of Egyptian temples." See pages 583 
 to 587, inclusive. In corroboration of Earnst and Mackey, might 
 be cited a few other 
 Masonic authorities, 
 thus: Jeremiah 
 Howe, page 416; 
 Reynold's Mysteries 
 of Masonry, page 
 3 4 8; Mackenzie's 
 Royal Masonic En-' 
 cyclopaedia, page 
 565; George Kennig, 
 page 561, and, in 
 short, as I verily be- 
 lieve, all others that 
 ever wrote on the 
 subject. 
 
 BIBLE STUDENTS. 
 
 No. 30. Arch of Triumph, Palmyra, built by 
 Solomon. 
 
 Because of the 
 important symbolism and because of the peculiar and possibly some- 
 what obscure statement in Chronicles 111-15, Jachin and Boaz have 
 
22 
 
 been most attractive subjects to Hebrew students and commentators 
 on the Bible, While they differ in many particulars regarding the 
 
 Temple, yet they all, so far 
 as I could examine, are agreed 
 that the true height of Jachin 
 and Boaz was eighteen cubits. 
 Smith's Bible Dictionary 
 (Vol. 1), page 688, puts it as 
 follows: "The front of the 
 porch was supported, after 
 the manner of some Egyptian 
 temples, by two great brazen 
 pillars, Jachin and Boaz, 
 eighteen cubits high, with 
 capitals of five cubits more." 
 In like manner might be cited, 
 confirming eighteen cubits as 
 the true height, the following: 
 Philip Schaff (Vol. IV), page 
 2314; J. T. Bannister's Tem- 
 ples of the Jews, page 107; 
 James Hasting's Bible Dic- 
 tionary, page 308; McClintock 
 725 and 841; William Whiston, 
 
 No. .31.. Hiram's Tomb near Tyre. 
 
 & Strong's work on the Bible, pages 
 
 Joseph B. Lightfoot, T. 0. Paine, and others beyond the limits of my 
 
 time or your patience. 
 
 .■\ECHITECTS. 
 
 No ancient building has been so fruitful a source of discussion 
 among architects as Solomon's Temple, and though their opinions 
 vary widely in many 
 particulars, yet as 
 to the true height 
 of Jachin and Boaz, 
 their views coincide. 
 Eighteen cubits is 
 the height agreed 
 upon, and James 
 Ferguson, before re- 
 ferred to, who has 
 given exhaustive 
 study to the Temple 
 of Solomon, submits 
 a scale drawing 
 showing the height 
 to have been eighteen 
 cubits, and says: 
 "This height, with 
 the other members. 
 
 No. .■32. Southeast Wall of Temple of Solomon 
 
 makes the whole design reasonable and 
 
23 
 
 proper." See his " Temples of the Jews," page 157. E. C. 
 HakewiU, page 55 of his work on the Temple, confirms this 
 view. Also F. H. Lewis, G. E. Street, R. S. Poole, and in fact all 
 without exception, so far as I could learn, who have investigated 
 the subject. 
 
 JOSEPHUS. 
 
 What may be called the direct evidence regarding Solomon's 
 
 Temple is confined 
 to Josephus and the 
 Bible. But on the 
 point under consid- 
 eration both sources 
 are full, complete, 
 and conclusive. In 
 "The Antiquities of 
 the Jews," by Jose- 
 phus, page 251, Book 
 VIII, Chapter III, the 
 most renowned work 
 of Hiram AbifE is 
 thus described: 
 "Moreover this 
 Hiram made two 
 hollow pillars, whose 
 outsides were of 
 
 No. .32a. 
 Area. 
 
 Golden Gate and East Wall of Tempie 
 
 brass; and the thickness of the brass was four fingers breadth, and 
 the height of the pillars was eighteen cubits, and their circumfer- 
 ence twelve cubits ; 
 but there was cast 
 with each of their 
 chapiters lily-work, 
 that stood upon the 
 pillar, and it was 
 elevated five cubits; 
 round about there 
 was net work inter- 
 woven with small 
 palms, made of 
 brass and covered 
 the lily-work. To 
 this was also hung 
 two huhdred pome- 
 granates in two 
 rows. The one of 
 these pillars he set 
 at the entrance of 
 
 the porch on the right hand and called it "Jachin," and the other at 
 the left hand and called it "Boaz." 
 
 Xo. 33. One of four Porches of Dome of Eock 
 on the site of Solomon's Temple. 
 
24 
 
 THE UIULK. 
 
 The Bible, the one all-sufficient witness, has been reserved until the 
 last. The Bible record is in four separate books, and three of them 
 are so clear as not to admit of a doubt. The fourth, when but the 
 
 single verse is read, 
 is not so clear, but 
 in connection with 
 the other verses of 
 the chapter i s 
 equally specific, 
 therefore, for the 
 better understand- 
 ing, the verses in 
 connection will be 
 given: 
 
 II CHKONICLES, III- 
 
 10 TO 15, iNCLtr- 
 
 No. 34. Interior view showiBg tbe Rock. 
 
 'mm 
 
 "10. And in the 
 most holy house he 
 made two cheru- 
 bims of image worlc, and overlaid them with gold. 
 
 "11. And the wings of the cherubims were twenty cubits long, 
 one wing of one cherubim was five cubits, reaching to the wall of 
 the house, and the 
 other was likewise 
 five cubits, reaching 
 to the wing of the 
 other cherubim. 
 
 "12. And one 
 wing of the other 
 cherubim was ilve 
 cubits, reaching to 
 the wall of the 
 house, and the other 
 wing was five cubits 
 also, joining the 
 wing of the other 
 cherubim. 
 
 "13. The wings of 
 these cherubims 
 spread themselves 
 forth twenty cubits, 
 and they stood on 
 their feet and their 
 faces were inward. 
 
 "14. And he made 
 a vail of blue and purple, and crimson and fine linen, and wrought 
 cherubims thereon. 
 
 "15. And he made before the house two pillars of thirty and 
 five cubits high, and the chapitei' that was on the top of each of 
 them was five cubits." 
 
 dha^-.\ Jp.nisnhm. A teti-astjle temple 
 
 No. 35 
 
 From iladden's Jewish Coinage. 
 
25 
 
 Xo. 36, Solomon's Temple, by Rev. T. O. Paine, 
 
 In verse 11, the wings of the cherubim are said to be twenty 
 
 cubits long, meaning the united length of the four wings. Again, 
 
 in verse 13, the 
 wings are given as 
 twenty cubits, but 
 as before, the mean- 
 ing is the united 
 length of the four 
 wings. In the same 
 way the two pillars 
 are given as thirty 
 and five cubits high, 
 meaning, as in the 
 case of the wingSy 
 the united length of 
 the two pillars as 
 they stood in the 
 porch. The language 
 is very precise. No- 
 tice: "Two pillars of 
 
 thirty and five cubits high"^not each, but the two together. A^d 
 
 then following Immediately this: "And the chapiter that was on 
 
 the top of EACH of them was 
 
 five cubits high." Where is 
 
 the warrant here for the 
 
 statement so familiar to us 
 
 all, namely: "They were 
 
 EACH thirty and five cubits 
 
 In height, adorned with 
 
 chapiters of five cubits, or 
 
 forty cubits in all?" 
 
 At the first blush, there 
 
 is a slight discrepancy, for 
 
 if the pillars were each 
 
 eighteen cubits high, then 
 
 would their united length or 
 
 height have been thirty-six 
 
 cubits instead of thirty-five. 
 
 Hebrew scholars and other 
 
 investigators have almost 
 
 uniformly accounted for this 
 
 apparent discrepancy as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 the pillar a one-half cubit, making the united length of the pillars, 
 
 as measured standing in the porch, appear to be thirty-five cubits. 
 
 A few others contend that the pillars were sunk into the base or 
 
 foundation, so that when measured standing in the porch their 
 
 
 1 
 ■ 
 
 q 
 
 'l 
 
 If 
 
 i 
 
 ■ 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 No. 37. Jachin and Boaz, by Paine. 
 At the joint of the chapiter and pillar, the chapiter overlaps 
 
26 
 
 Nrt. 11a. Templi^ of Dekkeh. 
 
 B. (\ 
 
 united height appeared to be thirty-five cubits. It would seem that 
 
 a one-half cubit lap at the top would be too much, and it is, there- 
 fore, probable that both con- 
 tentions are right, except that 
 the lap at the top was only 
 four or five inches, and the 
 sinking into a socket at the 
 base about the same, making 
 nine inches or a one-half 
 cubit. Recent explorations 
 in the Troad carry this com- 
 promise view almost to a de- 
 monstration. The Troad, 
 made immortal by Homer's 
 Iliad, contains the city of 
 Assos, lying a short distance 
 north of Smyrna, Asia Minor. 
 Here in 1881-2 J. T. Clarke, 
 in behalf of the Archaeolog- 
 ical Institute of America, ex- 
 cavated a large tomb, corre- 
 sponding in every detail to 
 the tombs of the kings at 
 Jerusalem, and dating from 
 
 the seventh century B. C. and also a temple contemporaneous with 
 
 that of Solomon. There is still standing there a doric pillar, sunk 
 
 into the foundation 
 
 and held in place by 
 
 lead poured round 
 
 the base, much as 
 
 water mains are now 
 
 joined. (See reports 
 
 of the Archaeological 
 
 Institute of Amer- 
 ica.) Assuming that 
 
 Jachin and B o a z 
 
 were set alike this 
 
 Assos pillar, then is 
 
 the apparent d i s- 
 
 crepancy in the Bible 
 
 fully accounted for 
 
 by a column con- 
 temporaneous with 
 
 the Temple of S'olo- No. .38. From "Holy City." 
 
 mon, and still standing, at Assos. 
 
 However, the height of Jachin and Boaz is given in three other 
 
 books of the Bible, and is not mentioned in any other place than as 
 
27 
 
 here indicated. The statement is so clear that no explanation or 
 outside reference is needed. Hear and weigh this testimony: 
 
 FIEST KINGS, VII-15. 
 
 "For he cast two pillars of brass of eighteen cubits high apiece, 
 and a line of twelve cubits did compass either of them about." 
 
 SECOND KINGS, XXV-17. 
 
 "The height of one pillar was eighteen cubits, and the chapiter 
 upon it was brass." 
 
 JEEEMIAH, LII-21 AND 22. 
 
 "And concerning the pillars, the height of one pillar was 
 eighteen cubits, and a fillet of twelve cubits did compass it, and the 
 thickness thereof was four fingers; it was hollow and a chapiter of 
 brass was upon it; the height of one chapiter was five cubits, with 
 network of pomegranates upon the chapiter round about, all of 
 brass. The second pillar, also, and the pomegranates, were like 
 unto these." 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The foregoing Bible records are so precise, each witness so con- 
 firming the others, that together they must carry conviction to 
 every one that can believe the evidence of recorded history. But 
 even were there no Bible records, the circumstantial evidence 
 adduced is so strong that the main facts would be apparent. For 
 to the men who could construct such a building as Solomon's 
 Temple must be accorded full and accurate knowledge not alone of 
 the best buildings of their time, but of the best building methods 
 as well. Think of it, here is a building thirty feet wide, ninety feet 
 long, and forty-five feet high, and from the drawings alone its 
 several parts are made to size and shape in the mountains and 
 quarries, and, when assembled, they fit with such perfect accuracy 
 and all is so well done that the building stands four hundred and 
 nineteen years, and no doubt would be standing today had it not 
 been wantonly destroyed in war time. At least contemporaneous 
 buildings are still standing, and the Dome of Rock, on the site of 
 Solomon's Temple, has already stood nearly two thousand years. 
 It would, therefore, be reasonable to conclude that the builders of 
 Solomon's Temple had full knowledge of the temples on the Nile, 
 and no building has ever been found there or elsewhere in which 
 the pillars of the porch were higher than the building. Why then 
 charge the builders of Solomon's Temple with such a blunder? 
 
 Again, so well was Solomon's Temple constructed, so excellent 
 architecturally that it was for centuries the type of Grecian archi- 
 tecture, and was many times duplicated in its main architectural 
 features. A few contemporaneous buildings remain to us to this 
 day, as have been shown, at Paestum and other points, and in no 
 case are the pillars of the porch higher than the main building, but 
 in every case are in strict accord with the Bible records of Solomon's 
 Temple, confirming and demonstrating the proposition that Jachin 
 and Boaz were as given, "eighteen cubits high apiece." 
 
28 
 
 THE COMMITTEE BEOOMMENDS. 
 
 Masonic writers uniformly attach great importance to Jachin 
 and Boaz. Even to the uniniated they are the most prominent 
 objects in the lodge-room. That more and better lessons may be 
 taught by truth than by error is a self-evident proposition, vyhether 
 of a symbolic nature or otherwise. It, therefore, follows that when 
 errors are found they should be corrected that truth may prevail. 
 The recent action of the Presbyterians in changing their creed, and 
 the revision of the Holy Bible itself, within the memory of us all, 
 do but illustrate the general principle. Your committee, therefore, 
 recommends that the second degree work be so changed that the 
 height of Jachin and Boaz will be given as eighteen cubits, in ac- 
 cordance with the work now in many jurisdictions, in accordance 
 with all Masonic writers and other investigators, and in particular, 
 and above all, in accordance with the Holy Bible. 
 
 Respectfully and fraternally submitted, 
 
 John W. Baeet, 
 
 Committee. 
 
 P. &. I am deeply indebted to N. R. Parvin, Grand Secretary, 
 for assistance and favors in preparing this article. I desire to 
 acknowledge the most efficient and brotherly assistance of Past 
 Masters C. B. Whelply and Taylor Carpenter, of Crescent Lodge, in 
 operating the lantern. J. W. B. 
 
HS405 .827'" ""'"^^^''V Library 
 "eport of snp/-/,i 
 
 liS/»K!te,,S:!Jfficcurac