Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/554

 TEMPLE

496

TEMPLE

secrated to the divinity were preferably chosen. It was also customary to select the highest spot in a city, the acropolis, as the general preference at that time was for high, open spaces. Further the kind of divinity had also influence on the choice of the spot: thus Zeus preferred the heights, Mars the market- places, Hercules the gymnasium, others, the fortified castle, the gates of the city, the plain. If the temple could not be erected on an open space dedicated to the divinity, it was customary to surround the temple by an enclosed precinct, whereby it was separated from aU that was profane. Still other buildings were fre- quently inside this enclosure, as the houses of the priests, or the stalls for the sacrificial animals. Ves- sels containing water were placed at the entrance; from these, those entering sprinkled themselves in order to be purified from all guilt, as nothing impure was permitted to enter the precincts.

As a rule a Greek temple faced the east. The point towards which a Roman temple faced varied, accord- ing to the theory of H. Nissen, who investigated a large number of these temples in respect to this matter. He claimed that the position of the front depended upon the altitude of the sun on the feast day of the respective god. Nissen started from the assumption that the Greeks and Romans regarded the gods as the manifestation of the world-pervading spirit, and as such subordinated them to the original symbol of the world-spirit, the sun. Consequently, according to his theory, the temples were so placed that on the day settled by the calendar as the birth- day and feast "day of the god the rays of the rising sun fell along the axis of the temple and thus also on his statue. This theory suffers, however, from the fatal uncertainty as to the date the day of dedica- tion fell on. Moreover, the instances in which of late it has been possible to determine the formerly un- known god occupying a temple of known position, so as to test the correctness of this hypothesis, have proved unfavourable to it [Nissen, "Templum" (Berlin, 1S69) ]. At the same time, however, it remains as a fact that the orientation of the temple was universally customary, just as it was later in the case of the Christian church.

Among the Romans when the building of the tem- ple was completed it was dedicated to the divinity by the pubUc authorities or by a person specially dele- gated for this office, while the priests only pronounced the forraula> without personally completing the sacred act. The dedication adhered permanently to the soil which was released by it from all other rehgious obligations and was withdrawn from profane use. The anniversary of the dedication was celebrated annually by a sacrifice.

.•Vmong the equipments of the temple were a mas- sive altar, sacrificial tables, movable hearths for fire, sacrificial utensils, and other objects, which were dedicated at the same time as the temple. They formed a temple property that could not be sold. However, in times of necessity, especially of war, these treasures were as often melted down as were the costly church utensils of the medieval era and of later periods. The doorkeeper, who permitted visi- tors to enter the temple at stated times, also guarded the treasures.

The massive altar, mentioned above, did not stand in the temple but before it. Either it was built upon a high stone platform, and thus united architecturally with the temple, or it stood in front of the steps or in th(^ portico. There was, as a rule, only one sacrificial table in the temi)le and only one altar in front of it.

The c<'lla of tlie temple contained the most impor- tant object, the statue of the divinity, which stood on a ijedestal against the rear wall opposite the entrance. In (he earliest period it was nia(le of wood or clay, later it was cast from bronze or made of marble. Besides the statue of the god to whom the temple was

dedicated, statues of other gods were at times placed in the temple, partly as ornaments, partly because of their connexion with the principal god.

Taking their use as the basis of classification three kinds of temples may be distinguished: temples for worship, for use in connexion with the agones, or festival games, and for the Mysteries. The temple for worship was small and its cella contained only the statue of the god that was the object of venera- tion; it served rehgious uses exclusively. This tem- ple frequently had connected with it the temple for the festival games which served for the solemn crown- ing of the victor in the national competitive contests, and as the place for keeping the apparatus for the festivals. The temples of the mysteries were used by the initiated for the celebration of the secret cults, and differed from the others, so far as the scanty remains permit a judgment, both in extent and form. Such temples were to be found, for instance, at Eleusis and at Samothracia. As has just been said, the tem- ple contained only the statue of the god; it existed not so much for men as for the gods. It was exclusively the house of the god to whom it was dedicated. StiU the god was pleased when at the national feasts men appeared in his sanctuary with prayers and incense, and thus these days became religious as well as na- tional festivals.

Again, because the objects placed in the temple were more secure, it served as a treasury both for the State and for private persons. From 438 b. c. the pubhc treasure of Athens was kept in the Parthenon. Naturally the temple also contained the votive offer- ings presented to the gods, as statues, lamps, wreaths, rings, and bracelets. A hst of these objects was annuaDy compiled, and once in four years it was engraved in marble; some fragments of such marbles are still in existence. Sometimes, too, the temple contained the mint.

Besides material things men also found security and protection in the temple against threatening dan- ger. Every temple was an d, that is, it was inviolable, and none ventured to drive a malefactor away from the altar unless such a one wished to draw down the wTath of the gods upon himself. All tem- ples did not grant the same protection: only certain temples had the privilege of unconditional security. Still there were ways of making the right of asylum ineffective, as was shown in the case of the Spartan Pausanias. During the reign of Tiberius the great number of asylums in Asia Minor was a subject of complaint.

As to the form and manner of construction of the temple, we must in the first place not imagine that the Greeks and Romans at all times built for their gods those magnificent structures that even to-day all men of taste admire. The earliest sanctuaries of the gods were cave-temples, if grottoes and crypts deserve this name at all. Even in a later age the worship of Mithras was preferably celebrated in grottoes. Related to the natural cave-temples are the artificial rock-temples, of which magnificent examples are still to be found in India. A third form, found especially in Assyria, Mexico, and Peru, may be called tower, or pyramidal temples, because the actual sanctuary is placed on a truncated pyxamid. The fourth, finally, is the classical form of the Greeks and Romans. It is a development of the megaron, or ruler's house, of primitive times, which consisted only of a large hall with a portico. This portico was formed by the projecting side-walls of the haU and was ornamented in front with two columns.

Having thus briefly considered the subject as a whole, we will now examine somewhat more closely the kinds of t(-mple used by various civilized nations. This is all the more necessary in order to guard against identifying the temple of the Greeks with that of other