Page:History of Art in Sardinia, Judæa, Syria and Asia Minor Vol 1.djvu/349

Domestic Architecture. 319 side with small stones and polygonal arrangement (Fig. 213). The reason of this anomaly is not far to seek : we know that Nehemiah repaired in great haste the walls of Jotham and Manasseh, and his bad work shows to this day; whilst immediately above it are portions well cared for, which we may suppose were added in time of peace and greater prosperity. 1 The coursed work, therefore, which in these towers is like that of the haram enclosure, should be carried back to the kings of Judah, even though the stones are smaller ; the largest blocks not being more than 1 m. in height, by 2 m. 60 c. in length ; showing here and there drafted and bossed stones. 2 We may conclude that, as in the foundation wall, here also the exposed portions had had much thought lavished upon mÊÊmÈÈm 1 i ■ Fig. 213. — Wall of Ophel, after Warren. them, and that the outer face in the lower portion was alone wrought. Whatever view may be taken with regard to the house at Millo, there is hardly room for doubt that the wall of Ophel contains specimens of the mode of construction in vogue in the reign of Solomon — a mode which obtained in Palestine down to Herod (Fig. 214). The art of hewing the living rock in order to convey water, supply certain needs, or as a means of fortification, was common to all the Semitic races, and was not due to alien influence. In the English cemetery, nearZion Gate, were found extensive excava- tions at the foot of the wall towards the country, evidently made 1 2 Chron. xxvii. 3; xxxiii, a [ ; Neh. iii ; 2 The Recovery, p. 294.